Social justice and equity within and between countries also require a responsive approach. Wealthy and historically polluting countries have signed up to cut emissions faster than poorer ones in recognition of their larger role in causing the climate crisis.But in rich countries, the mass marketing of large, inefficient SUVs has sent people in the wrong direction in a very short time
Industries that are currently being pushed are also pushing richer countries in the wrong, more polluting direction, including fast fashion, environmentally damaging food, holidays abroad, sea tourism extended in the form of cruise ships and a slightly different approach by fossil fuel financiers. , and other goods and services.
push pollution
On its current trajectory, advertising in these industries, fueled by massive advertising campaigns, is driving overconsumption, having outsized impacts and making effective climate action more difficult.
By 2030, emissions from the fashion industry are projected to up nearly 50%.At current growth rates, meat consumption in Europe is projected to not fall, but rise will be reduced by 76% by 2050, but It is estimated A 71% drop is needed by 2030 and an 81% drop by 2050 to meet climate targets.
The global cruise industry is developing rapidly Estimated to be 11% Every year through 2028, some cruise ships may even Higher carbon intensity per passenger than flying.
Greenwashing is also a pervasive problem that needs to be addressed in advertising, and in some ways is even more insidious, as it creates a false sense that climate action is happening and creates a false sense of security that the problem has already been solved.
Taken together, these examples underscore the need for a broader, broader conversation about advertising as a barrier to climate action.
Worse, it heightens the role of advertising in driving demand for polluting products and lifestyles that official advice and climate policy are trying to reduce. In other words, there are far more types of advertising that are destroying our long-term chances of survival than is generally realized.
offset off target
Advertising increasingly promises to offset the effects of purchases.However, offsetting does not reduce emissions and may actually Delaying real emissions cuts makes the problem worse at their source.
A series of surveys of established and highly respected voluntary carbon markets (the main route through which offsets are bought and sold) show that more than 90% of rainforest offsets are completely worthless and result in no actual reduction in emissions.
What’s more, these nature-based offset programs get caught up in the very harm they claim to prevent: Climate-induced droughts and wildfires destroy forests and release “offset” carbon back into the atmosphere, where it stays for many years.
wrong solution
Both the US and the EU have introduced huge subsidy programs to spur green innovation, and some big companies are promoting unproven and unscalable technologies as a way to reduce emissions.
The promotion of hydrogen boilers in the UK as a solution for decarbonized heating is along this path.However, numerous studies have shown that using hydrogen to heat is a bad choice – Less economical, less efficient, more resource intensive, and have a greater environmental impact than heat pumps.
However, hydrogen boilers continue to be promoted by industry and supported by the UK government. What’s more, the vast majority of hydrogen is produced using fossil fuels.
In fact, by the end of 2021, nearly 47% of global hydrogen production will come from natural gas, 27% from coal, 22% from oil, and 4% from electrolysis.according to United Nations Renewable Energy Agency IRENAOnly one percent of global hydrogen production is produced using renewable energy.
Advertisements for hydrogen boilers and other false solutions such as ExxonMobil’s Algae Biofuel and Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), potentially locking in more emissions in the short term, delaying the deployment of truly transformative technologies, and allowing large polluters to maintain market share and social license.
stop preaching harm
The ban on tobacco marketing is a clear historical precedent for regulating the advertising of goods that harm health and impose enormous social costs.
There are growing calls for a “tobacco-style” ban on advertising of high-carbon products, given that the harms of climate breakdown, including to public health, far exceed those of tobacco.
World Health Organization and United Nations Environment Program approved proposal Create a Tobacco Act to end fossil fuel advertising.
Despite some loopholes, the French government banned the advertisement of energy products derived from fossil fuels in 2022, including gasoline products and energy produced by burning coal.
Elsewhere, in the absence of national-level legislation, a range of municipalities and public transport agencies in Australia, the Netherlands and the UK have imposed local restrictions on the advertising and sponsorship of the most polluting products in outdoor advertising, print and online media.
Turning the climate emergency around is proving hard enough, unless the advertising industry offsets any progress by promoting polluting products and lifestyles.
Many are perplexed that nothing seems to be happening given what science is saying in someone’s ear in society about the need for immediate, widespread and rapid change.
But that may be because, in the other ear, high-carb ads are telling us not only to carry on with life as usual, but also to increase our consumption of harmful things. That leaves a big question for regulators to answer: what ads should we stop to improve our chances of survival?
the author
Andrew Simms is co-director of the project Institute for New Meteorology,Co-founder bad ad campaignCoordinator Rapid Transformation AllianceHe is the author of the New Economy and Green Economics and co-author of the original Green New Deal. Continue: t. @AndrewSimms_uk rice. @andrewsimms@indieweb.social
briefing: From fast fashion to luxury cruise lines – which ads should we stop to improve our chances of survival? Published by Badvertising and Adfree Cities, available at: https://www.badverts.org/publications
