News / 'Greenwashing' rife among airlines, says EC as it clamps down on emissions reporting

© Francesco Scatena

The European Commission (EC) has warned airlines over what it claims are rife ‘misleading greenwashing practices’ – but they might not be the only offenders when it comes to ambiguous environmental calculations.  

Yesterday, the commission wrote to 20 airlines, identifying types of potentially misleading practices, including using the term “sustainable aviation fuels” (SAF) without clearly justifying the environmental impact of such fuels, or using the terms “green”, “sustainable” or “responsible” in an implicit way.  

It suggested that “the identified practices can be considered as misleading actions, prohibited under articles 5, 6 and 7 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive”. 

And while the letter’s main aim was to encourage transparency between airlines and their passengers, it highlighted that opaque environmental data was rife throughout the entire aviation industry.  

One of the main areas of contention for the air cargo industry is the distribution of carbon responsibility between passengers and belly hold cargo. The total share of emissions is, in short, calculated by dividing CO2 output by the weight and distance of a flight. 

The United Nations agency ICAO’s 2017 method for calculation assumes the “average freight allocation of an average passenger mass with baggage” is 100kg, plus a 50kg add-on “to account for the on-board equipment and infrastructure associated with passenger use, for example, the weight of seats, toilets, galleys and crew”. 

However, IATA published its own calculation methodology in 2022 which omitted the 50kg add-on, unless “required due to local regulations”. 

Consequently, a larger percentage of emissions on a given passenger flight is shifted to the belly-hold cargo, which greenwashes passenger operations and is particularly harmful to the cargo industry amid upcoming environmental reporting regulations. 

One forwarder said IATA’s change of emissions accounting had initially led to customers asking to use freighters instead, as they looked comparatively better. 

In its letter, the EC identified “presenting consumers with a ‘calculator’ for the CO2 emissions of a specific flight, without providing sufficient scientific proof on whether such calculation is reliable”, as one greenwashing tactic.  

Indeed, one air cargo source told The Loadstar: “IATA’s change was motivated by the fact that if you remove seats from the equation, it can cut emissions for passengers by 15-20%. 

“It’s a bit like the VW emissions scandal,” they added. “IATA wants passenger emissions to look lower, and it’s not just greenwashing at this point, it’s straight up manipulation.” 

In its Recommended Practice CO2 calculation methodology, IATA explained: “Some elements align (with ICAO), and other important elements have been reviewed, updated and improved to reflect recent developments in the industry.  

“For example, the allocation of fuel in relation to operational equipment weight and cabin class has been revised based on airline and aircraft manufacturer information, while guidance on SAF and carbon offsets has been included.” 

IATA’s new methodology is used for its commercial product, IATA CO2 Connect. While the association suggests it could be useful for freight forwarders, among other stakeholders, it also noted that the calculator was powered by its Recommended Practice per Passenger CO2 calculation – ie, was signed off by the passenger side, rather than cargo.