11 Times Companies Were Caught Lying and Cheating About Their Environmental Impact

It is almost mandatory for companies today to make statements about their environmental performance. Some companies report what they are actually doing, and others just make fake claims and promises. 

These promises are often little more than greenwashing, a deceptive practice where companies exaggerate or outright lie about their environmental efforts to appear more eco-friendly. From distorting numbers to engaging in outright fraud, here are 11 times companies were caught lying and cheating about their environmental impact. Take a tour through the eco-scandals that reveal just how low some corporations will go to maintain their green image.

1. FIFA (Qatar 2022) Carbon Footprint

The 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar was advertised as the first “carbon-neutral” World Cup. However, many environmental experts and watchdogs have debunked this claim, arguing that the carbon offset measures promised by FIFA were insufficient and misleading. 

The construction of new stadiums and infrastructure significantly contributed to greenhouse gas emissions, far outweighing the offsets claimed. Also, only one-way flights were taken into consideration during the study, halving the real value of emissions generated indirectly by the event.

2. Samsung Electronics’ Renewable Energy

Samsung Electronics has faced criticism for overstating its use of renewable energy. While the company has made public commitments to renewable energy use, reports suggest that only a small fraction of its energy consumption actually comes from renewable sources. 

Critics argue that Samsung’s claims create a misleading impression of the company’s true environmental impact.

3. Volkswagen’s Diesel Engines

In one of the most infamous cases of corporate environmental deception, Volkswagen was found to have installed software in its diesel engines that manipulated emissions tests. 

This “Dieselgate” scandal revealed that millions of cars worldwide emitted far higher levels of pollutants than advertised, causing significant environmental damage and public health risks.

4. H&M T-Shirts’ Water Use

H&M has been accused of greenwashing by promoting their Conscious Collection, which claims to use less water and be more sustainable. Investigations have shown that the actual water savings are minimal, and the production practices for these items are not significantly different from those of their regular lines. 

This misleading marketing capitalizes on consumers’ desire for sustainable fashion, without delivering genuine environmental benefits.

5. Starbucks’ “Recyclable” Plastic Lid 

In an attempt to reduce plastic waste, Starbucks introduced a sippy lid for its beverages, replacing plastic straws. However, it was soon discovered that the new lids contained more plastic than the previous straw-lid combination. 

This move was criticized as a form of greenwashing, as it created the appearance of reducing plastic use while actually increasing it.

6. Burger King’s “Low-Methane” Burgers

Burger King launched a campaign for “low-methane” burgers, claiming that changes in their cows’ diets reduced methane emissions. 

However, experts have pointed out that the reduction in emissions was marginal and that the campaign exaggerated the environmental benefits. Critics argue that this was a marketing tactic to distract from the broader environmental impacts of the beef industry.

7. ExxonMobil

ExxonMobil has long been accused of greenwashing, promoting its investments in renewable energy and low-carbon technologies while continuing to be one of the world’s largest producers of fossil fuels. 

Despite their advertisements showcasing their commitment to a sustainable future, ExxonMobil’s actual investments in renewables are minimal compared to their ongoing expansion of oil and gas operations.

8. Keurig’s “Recyclable Pods”

Keurig faced backlash over claims that its coffee pods were recyclable. While technically true, the pods were not easily recyclable in most municipal systems due to their small size and the need to separate different materials. 

As a result, many of the pods still ended up in landfills, making the recyclable claim misleading for consumers who were trying to make environmentally friendly choices.

9. Shell’s “Renewable Energy”

Shell's advertisements claimed that a significant number of homes in the UK were powered by 100% renewable electricity from Shell Energy. 

However, the electricity actually came from the National Grid, which includes a mix of energy sources, not all renewable. The small print clarification on the advertisements was not enough to mitigate the misleading impression given to consumers.

10. HSBC

HSBC has promoted its green finance initiatives while simultaneously being a major financier of fossil fuels. 

Despite advertisements highlighting their support for sustainable projects, HSBC remains one of the top banks financing the fossil fuel industry, including thermal coal mining. This duality has led to accusations of greenwashing, as the bank’s significant contributions to carbon-heavy industries contradict its public environmental stance.

11. Zara

Zara introduced a limited-edition line of “sustainable clothing” made from polyester derived from captured carbon emissions. While this initiative received some praise, critics argue that Zara’s overall business model, which promotes overproduction and overconsumption, undermines these efforts. 

The fast fashion industry, by its nature, is fundamentally unsustainable, and Zara’s limited sustainable lines do little to address the broader environmental impact of its operations.

These examples highlight the widespread issue of greenwashing, where companies exaggerate or fabricate their environmental efforts to appeal to eco-conscious consumers. It’s essential for consumers to critically assess corporate sustainability claims and support genuine efforts to reduce environmental impact.