2023-06-30 11:32:00
“Flying is not sustainable.” This dry observation is on the KLM site. Anyone who takes the trouble to click on the keyword ‘sustainability’ will read that sentence first. Honestly, there’s not a dollop of greenwashing involved. Then you can read what KLM is doing. KLM is currently adding 1 percent sustainable fuel, or SAF, to flights from Amsterdam. The traveler can also do something himself, namely contribute to the planting of trees. Not a panacea, KLM admits. ‘Of course, reforestation does not make our flights greener.’
The information exudes a completely different atmosphere than the roaring ‘Fly Responsibly’ campaign, Fly Responsible. KLM pretended that a ticket would give access to a climate-free flight. The campaign has been stopped, the company announced in April at the lawsuit Fossielvrij NL filed once morest the company for greenwashing. No longer necessary, that case, KLM’s lawyers said there. But Fossielvrij NL nevertheless perseveres to prevent KLM from portraying things as more sustainable than they are in other ways. A year ago, the archyde news Code Committee ruled that the term ’emission-free flying’, which KLM advertised at the time, was misleading.
Many green claims are not true
Pressure from outside on greenwashing therefore seems to help. That pressure is now being increased further by the European umbrella organization of consumer organizations BEUC. BEUC submitted a complaint to the European Commission last week on behalf of 23 members, including the Dutch Consumers’ Association. It is regarding misleading, climate-oriented advertisements of seventeen European airlines, including those of KLM. According to a legal analysis commissioned by BEUC, many green claims violate fair competition rules.
Because there’s no point in it. “Flying is not sustainable and will not be in the near future,” the complaint reads. The aviation industry needs to stop giving that impression, it’s ‘simply not true’. The objections go beyond tackling green talk. Consumers have been tempted to pay extra for their flight under the guise of zero-emission flying. Planting trees would ‘compensate’ or ‘neutralize’ the journey.
By ticking a box and donating a few euros extra, the climate would be all right. According to the BEUC, this means that travelers have been cheated out of their pockets under false pretenses. They should be able to get that allowance back, believes BEUC. That will be something if the complaint is upheld, will customers indeed ask for their money back?
Earn some money first
Stop it, with those climate claims, says the BEUC. Shift consumer demand to more sustainable ways to travel, such as by train. That really reduces emissions. So fly less. But that’s taboo. Airline directors are able to claim with dry eyes that flying more is actually better for the climate and the environment. Fly more, earn more money and then buy cleaner aircraft that make less noise and emit less, argues KLM CEO Marjan Rintel. “Growth is essential to finance the environmental goals that we have set ourselves and that are imposed on us by governments,” the easyJet foreman also said in the AD earlier this month.
It is a reasoning that is ubiquitous in the polluting industry. First earn a lot of money with oil and gas and then we can ‘be part of the energy transition’, fossil companies communicate. Companies that cause disproportionate damage to the atmosphere and nature will not easily want to cut their own flesh. This applies to all kinds of producers, from steel, fertilizer, chemicals to the meat sector. This means that too little of the rapid reduction of greenhouse gases, which climate scientists consider necessary, is being achieved. Unless the government enforces it with standards and competitive pricing.
1688269767
#truth #green #talk #aviation
