Nick Keppel-Palmer’s Post

Last month I shared Apple's very engaging video on its #ESG commitments and #carbonneutral claims. This week the Financial Times reports that Apple is being accused of greenwashing over its carbon-neutral product claims. Last month, Apple claimed to have launched its “first-ever carbon neutral products” by buying carbon credits. However, climate campaigners have been questioning carbon neutrality, claiming them as scientifically inaccurate and misleading consumers. The EU is reportedly planning to ban “neutrality” claims that are based on the purchase of #carboncredits by 2026. https://lnkd.in/etvz4YRq 

🌿🔍 Environmental Scrutiny on Apple's Carbon Neutrality Claims 🌍📱 Apple's assertion of carbon neutrality for its latest devices is raising eyebrows among European environmental and consumer groups. #brussels is proposing to ban the term #CarbonNeutral in corporate marketing, citing it as potentially "misleading". The tech giant's emphasis on environmental friendliness in its recent product launch, branding some Apple Watch models as its "first-ever carbon neutral products", is met with scepticism due to the use of credits to offset emissions. This move is drawing criticism in the wake of the EU's crackdown on #greenwashing. Monique Goyens, Director-General of BEUC - The European Consumer Organisation, argues that "carbon neutral claims are scientifically inaccurate and mislead consumers". As the debate ensues, companies face the challenge of aligning environmentally sound practices with marketing claims. Apple defends its position, asserting it as a testament to one of the boldest climate commitments in the industry. While the US giant demonstrates progress in recycling and emission reduction, competitors like Samsung Electronics face scrutiny for omitting key emission details in their net-zero targets. #CarbonNeutrality #GreenMarketing #EnvironmentalIntegrity #ClimateCommitments #SustainableTech #ClimateDebate #SustainableBusiness #GreenTech #EnvironmentalEthics #CarbonOffsetting #CorporateResponsibility #EcoFriendlyInnovation #ClimateActionNow #EmissionReduction #GreenEconomy #RenewableFuture #CarbonFootprint #CleanEnergyTransition #NetZeroGoals

This is an interesting piece in the Financial Times which demonstrates the difficulties organisations can face when trying to tout the green credentials of their products. It addresses Apple's use of carbon credits and the problems that can arise when businesses try to apply a 'carbon neutral' label to their goods. These issues can be exacerbated where a particular market has a bespoke regulatory framework governing eco-friendly claims. Allegations of #greenwashing can swiftly follow in these circumstances. Conversely, rival Samsung has decided to exclude emission details from its 2050 net zero target. Might this be an example of #greenhushing?

Either one could follow the Apple way: report emissions from manufacturing to sales, try to decarbonise as much as possible, and then purchase high quality carbon offsets for residual emissions. This may come with some noise and but in the longer term as systems and processes evolve, it would significantly benefit climate, community, and biodiversity. or you could follow the Samsung way, simply not report your emissions and save the hassle. What’s your take? #Sustainability #ClimateAction #BusinessEthics #CarbonMarkets

Apple’s commitment to sustainability faces scrutiny. Carbon-neutral claims are good marketing messages but are they true? Holding businesses accountable for their environmental promises is warranted. Use of #carboncredits to offset one’s own #carbonemissions is commendable, but does not mean you are carbon neutral as this Ars Technica article outlines. Contact LACONIC to help with your accurate and auditable carbon credit disclosures. https://lnkd.in/eynMezG3 #sustainability #carboncredits #carbonneutral #environmentalintelligence #SADAR

Don’t let greenwashing get in the way of a flashy story. This was clearly the view of Apple, with their “Mother Nature” video that went viral a couple of months back. Among their bold claims, they said that they had produced their first carbon-neutral product. However, those claims were found to be dubious at best when put under even a small amount of scrutiny: - NewClimate Institute said that the claim that all of their manufacturing only used clean energy was “highly contentious.” - Other research has found “systemic flaws” in the carbon offsets that Apple used to make its carbon-neutral claims. - You can find the whole dismantling of Apple's claims in this FT article: https://lnkd.in/drkAxjxZ Apple clearly is doing a great job of making their products more sustainable, but faking it till you make it doesn't really work for climate change: - It can mislead people into thinking everything is going to be okay, Apple has everything under control - It breeds complacency, leading to misallocation of resources that should be going toward fighting climate change - A loss of trust, meaning real policies won’t get the support they need - And, of course, the environmental harm and climate inaction we can not afford What does this tell us? Good storytelling is critical for people to care about climate change. But the storytelling has to come from a place of truth, transparency, and accountability. Backed up by audited data from companies like my company Good.Lab Spraying the green sheen across your products and services will never work in the long run for your company or the climate.

Apple Faces European Scrutiny Over ‘Carbon Neutral’ Claims In a world increasingly focused on environmental responsibility and corporate accountability, tech giant Apple finds itself in the hot seat as European environmental and consumer groups cast a discerning eye on its recent ‘carbon neutral’ claims. The controversy surrounding these assertions has ignited a broader debate on green marketing practices and the authenticity of sustainability commitments within the technology industry. Let’s together take a closer look and delve deeper into the details of this contentious issue. #environment #accountability #sustainability

Apple talked a big game about the enviromental impact of their upcoming products in their latest keynote. Througout the presentation, the attorney in me's stomach turned more than the consumer in me (who enjoys Apple products) was excited about the new announcements. The EU Parliment and Council agreed just last month that "claims based on emissions offsetting schemes that a product has neutral, reduced or positive impact on the environment" shall be banned from 2026. Generic enviromental claims, such as "carbon neutral" is of course also banned as misleading "without proof of recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the claim". Any progress is good and we should of course watch how much we scold companies for trying (for whatever reason), but the message is clear: greenwashing bad. It will be interested to see how and to what extend the regulation will be enforced. You can read more about the EU's announcement of the upcoming regulation here: https://lnkd.in/gjn28crY #greenwashing #marketinglaw

How can Life Cycle Assessment grow your business and improve environmental outcomes? The largest companies in the world (and regulators) are now expecting sustainability data from suppliers. The graphic below is from the Product Environmental Report for the Apple Watch Series 9. The little green box below the line - the one that says -8.1kg? That is money that leaders like Apple have to spend on quality offsets to achieve product carbon neutrality. Money that doesn't have to be spent when they find more sustainable suppliers. The takeaway? Demonstrating a sustainability advantage provides additional direct value to YOUR enterprise customers. #LCA is the framework to communicate it. Full Apple EPR here: https://lnkd.in/eVugEFFT Learn about LCA with us here: https://lnkd.in/gi4Q8Vtp #netzero #carbonfootprint

The people who make the most noise, speak with the most passion and bring the most entrenched views on a subject tend to be those at the far ends of the ideology spectrum. I'm at the greener end of the range, but I'm no purist. And the purists frequently do my head in. I've seen too much commentary this week explaining how Apple are greenwashing by going loud with their climate action. Yes, more stuff is more stuff and not equivalent to a carbon offset - should they stop selling stuff to be green? Yes, 'Carbon Neutral' is language that can mislead, but it isn't going anywhere, so shouldn't we tolerate it being used by those who have taken substantive action? To me, it is daft to expect perfection in something as complex as the green transformation. You just can't do everything all at once. Should everyone just shut up until they have? Should we let the actual greenwashers own all marketing communications on climate action? Absolutely not. For the business community, the transition is a team sport. We have to inspire each other, learn from each other, collaborate with each other. That doesn't happen if we're all forced to shut up because of a fear of being called out on the things we haven't got to yet. I am thrilled that Apple has made this move. As one of the most admired and emulated brands in the world, with very deep pockets and a track record of transformation through innovation, this is a big shift. The whataboutism that I want to be most visible is this one.... What about the other players in consumer electronics? #ClimateAction #Sustainability, #NetZeroBusiness