‘Carbon neutral’, ‘CO2 neutral’, ‘carbon positive’, ‘carbon neutral certified’. These days it’s difficult to miss these powerful claims on products and services when we’re shopping. The supermarket shelves are no exception: from bananas to pork, blueberries to milk, the variety of foods and beverages proclaiming their supposed ‘carbon neutrality’ is endless. And no wonder; these claims paint a very positive picture in the eyes of consumers. What lies beneath them, however, is little more than greenwashing; confusing rather than clarifying for shoppers the environmental impact of their purchases.
We recently scouted supermarkets together with our member organisations to get a snapshot of how these claims are being used on groceries in different European countries. The result was astounding: these claims are rife. Scientifically inaccurate and misleading for consumers, these claims should not be on the shelves. The results of our market check confirmed the need to call on policymakers to ban carbon neutral claims on all products including food and drink.
Impossible science
Carbon neutrality only makes sense at the planetary level because the balance between carbon emitted and carbon absorbed cannot happen at the scale of a single product. On the other hand, the production of any food or drink will always necessitate carbon emissions. Even carbon-intensive foods such as meat and dairy have proudly proclaimed their supposed carbon neutrality on their packaging.
Unfortunately, instead of undertaking the much-needed work to make real emissions reductions in their supply chains, food companies are too often going for the cheaper, yet increasingly controversial, option: buying carbon credits from often dubious carbon offsetting projects.
Burn now, pay later
Allowing a company to ‘neutralise’ their emissions by theoretically preventing carbon emissions in one part of the world, while continuing to emit a similar amount during their business practice, ignores the reality of the climate emergency. As the IPCC’s recent report on climate change stated: ‘Pathways consistent with 1.5°C and 2°C carbon budgets imply rapid, deep, and in most cases immediate GHG emission reductions in all sectors.’
Moreover, while the effects of carbon emissions from companies’ operations are certain and long-term, the environmental benefits of the nature-based offsetting projects they buy are anything but guaranteed. There is no assurance that forestry projects existing today will exist tomorrow, let alone 20 years from now. Ironically, as the climate crisis starts to bite, such projects are increasingly at risk of being destroyed by droughts or wildfires. This lack of permanence was cited earlier in 2023 in a Swedish court ruling against a dairy company’s misleading use of ‘carbon neutral’ claims on milk products.
Similarly, an analysis earlier in 2023 of the carbon credits certified by the world’s largest certification organisation, Verra, found that 90% of the credits were ‘worthless’.
Leading consumers up the garden path
A survey we conducted in 2019 found most consumers are willing to change their eating habits for the environment but struggle to turn good intentions into good deeds. Food information has a role to play in nudging consumers towards more sustainable choices but it’s essential that any information is meaningful, reliable, and understandable. Carbon neutral claims meet none of these criteria.
Once a carbon neutral claim pops up on a banana or bottle of milk, the harm is done. It’s time to weed such claims out at the root and ban them.
Shoppers have little idea what lies beneath these claims in the supermarket. Many are confused what these claims mean and unaware of the offsetting that often accounts for most, or even all, of a company’s justification for the claim.
German consumer organisation vzbv also found that using green claims on carbon-intensive food products can even obscure consumers’ judgements. For example, without any climate labels, 70% of consumers were able to correctly classify three food products – a vegan burger patty, a pork schnitzel and a beef rump steak – according to their greenhouse gas emissions: the beef the most carbon-intensive, the vegan patty the least. However, as soon as a ‘climate neutral’ claim is placed on the products, confusion ensues, with the percentage of consumers correctly rating the products dropping to just 31%, with over a quarter even believing the beef steak is the most climate-friendly food.
Time for a crack down
Increasingly, policymakers are recognising that carbon neutral claims are a problem. In its recent proposal for regulating green claims, the European Commission acknowledged that climate-related claims are ‘particularly prone to being unclear and ambiguous and to mislead consumers’. However, instead of seeking an outright ban, the Commission is placing its hopes on improving these claims. From a consumer perspective, once a carbon neutral claim pops up on a banana or bottle of milk, the harm is done. It’s time to weed such claims out at the root and ban them.
ENDS
This blog was originally published in the C&I magazine of the Society of Chemical Industry (https://www.soci.org/)