Four major shopping brands have 'misleading' green delivery adverts banned in crackdown
Grind Coffee, ProCook, SportsShoes.com and Who Gives a Crap have had adverts banned after a watchdog ruled their carbon neutral and carbon positive delivery claims were misleading.
Four major online shopping brands have been ordered to stop using adverts promising environmentally friendly deliveries after a watchdog ruled they were misleading customers.
Coffee brand Grind, sports retailer SportsShoes.com, kitchenware chain ProCook and toilet paper company Who Gives a Crap have all fallen foul of advertising rules over claims their deliveries were either "carbon neutral" or "carbon positive".
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) found the adverts failed to properly explain that their environmental promises depended on carbon offsetting schemes rather than necessarily cutting the pollution produced by deliveries.
The rulings are part of a wider crackdown on so-called greenwashing, where businesses risk giving shoppers an exaggerated impression of how environmentally friendly their products or services really are.
What did the four brands claim?
The banned adverts appeared across a range of shopping categories, from coffee subscriptions to running shoes and kitchen equipment.
Grind promoted its subscription coffee service with the promise: "Coffee From The Grind Roastery, Delivered To Your Door Each Month. Carbon Positive Delivery."
SportsShoes.com advertised more than 12,000 products alongside a claim of "Carbon Neutral Deliveries", while ProCook offered next-day delivery carrying the same environmental promise.
Who Gives a Crap, which sells recycled toilet paper, used the words "carbon neutral shipping" in an advert about the company's history.
The ASA ruled that important information about how the claims were achieved had been left out.
The problem was not simply the use of carbon offsetting itself, but the failure to explain its role clearly enough for shoppers to understand what they were being promised.
What does 'carbon neutral delivery' actually mean?
The distinction comes down to what happens to the emissions generated when a product is delivered.
A company can reduce emissions directly, for example by using electric delivery vehicles or cutting unnecessary journeys.
Alternatively, it can calculate emissions associated with deliveries and fund projects intended to compensate for them, a process known as carbon offsetting.
But paying for offsets does not mean the delivery vehicle itself has produced no pollution.
Advertising rules require retailers to explain whether their environmental claims are based on genuinely reducing emissions, offsetting them or a combination of both.
The ASA has previously warned that consumers may understand phrases such as "carbon neutral" to mean emissions have actually been cut, even when the claim depends on offsetting schemes.
Grind Coffee responds to ruling
Grind defended its environmental programme, insisting it had funded carbon removal linked to more than one million orders.
Ted Robinson, the company's chief of staff, said Grind had been offsetting carbon from deliveries since May 2020 through Shopify Planet and its predecessor, Shopify Offset.
The schemes estimate emissions using shipment weights and distances before funding carbon removal.
He said the company had previously described this as "carbon positive delivery", but had since switched to the term "carbon neutral delivery" because the original wording was confusing.
Robinson stressed the ASA had challenged the way the claim was explained in the advert, rather than finding Grind had failed to substantiate it.
The company said it had updated its website to explain more clearly what it means by carbon neutral delivery.
Warning to retailers over green promises
The latest decisions follow earlier ASA rulings involving major brands including clothing retailer Charles Tyrwhitt and brewer BrewDog, whose carbon-related advertising claims were also found to lack sufficiently clear explanations.
The Competition and Markets Authority's Green Claims Code requires businesses to ensure environmental claims are truthful, clear and supported by evidence.
That includes being upfront about whether a claim applies to an entire product or just one element, such as its packaging or delivery.
Justine Grimley, investigations manager at the ASA, said: "Carbon neutral or net zero claims can mislead if it’s not clear what they actually mean or how they’ve been achieved."
She added that businesses relying on carbon offsetting must explain this so customers do not mistakenly believe products or deliveries generate little or no emissions.
The regulator said it would continue taking action against misleading environmental claims, with retailers expected to give shoppers the information needed to make informed decisions.