Blame: Greenwashing: Swiss companies to protect consumers

class=”sc-29f61514-0 fQbOYE”>

“Laundering and unfounded allegations of climate friendliness”: filed a complaint with the State Secretariat of Economic Affairs (Seco) against eight companies for consumer protection, unfair competition or green laundering. The Blame: “You’re misleading consumers,” says Sara Stalder, director of consumer protection.

Among the companies are beverage maker Coca-Cola Switzerland, Swisscom and the Zurich Zoo, as “Tages-Anzeiger” wrote. For example, companies consider mobile phone subscriptions “climate neutral”, heating fuel “CO₂-neutral” or children’s porridge or even “climate positive”. Such statements about their CO₂-Reduction and -emissions incomprehensible, criticizes consumer protection.

Ad notification cannot be verified

In addition, consumer protection has filed a complaint with the Swiss Trade Fairs Commission for unfair advertising against travel company Elite Flights, baby food maker Hipp, and energy supplier Kübler.

More about consumer protection

Colors that disrupt the competition?

How does the cheese lobby food attack the traffic light?

Shock at Coop for Finn B.

Buying with a credit card charged twice – what to do?

“It is misleading”

But hello Yallo!? Not a “lifetime discount”

Consumer protection bases the complaint on five grounds: the advertising statement cannot be proved in some cases because, for example, information about CO₂-Company as well as CO emissions₂-Discounts were missing or missing, says the article. And also: “Many compensation projects don’t change much in actual CO₂– Condensation in the atmosphere » says in the rationale for consumer protection.

Research supports consumer protection

A recent study that has not yet been independently reviewed by ETH Zurich, Cambridge University, and Harvard University supports this criticism. For the first time, all existing studies of voluntary CO₂Benedict Probst of ETH Zurich, lead author of the study, stated that compensation was evaluated and summarized.

Thus, it was concluded that approximately 88 percent of existing voluntary compensation projects do not actually contribute to emissions reductions. Climate protection certificates cannot deliver what they promise.

Seco will investigate the allegations

Faced with consumer protection complaints, some companies in “Tages-Anzeiger” pointed out that they have their own CO.₂– Reductions take precedence over offset with CO₂-Certificates. Others think that the term “climate neutral” should be questioned.

A consumer protection complaint does not mean that the company is actually engaging in unfair competition. Seco will now review the allegations. (oco)

Source :Blick

Tim

I’m Tim David and I work as an author for 24 Instant News, covering the Market section. With a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism, my mission is to provide accurate, timely and insightful news coverage that helps our readers stay informed about the latest trends in the market. My writing style is focused on making complex economic topics easy to understand for everyone.