Qantas, whose global carbon emissions are equivalent to 4% of Australia’s total annual emissions, has been referred to Australia’s consumer watchdog for potential greenwashing.
The official complaint to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) was prepared by research and advocacy organisation Climate Integrity and filed by the Environmental Defenders Office. It cites that greenwashing is illegal under Australian law and requests an investigation into Qantas’ marketing materials. The complaint focuses on its ‘fly carbon neutral’ product, promotion of ‘sustainable aviation fuels’ and the credibility of the company’s net zero transition, highlighting its lack of clear targets and credible transition strategies.
“Consumers and shareholders are increasingly conscious of their climate impact, and deserve the right to make informed decisions,” said Climate Integrity Director, Claire Snyder. “Qantas is a trusted household name in Australia, and it should not mislead customers and shareholders into thinking Qantas products and services are more sustainable than they really are.”
The complaint follows a landmark greenwashing decision against KLM Royal Dutch Airlines in March that found common aviation industry claims relating to ‘sustainable aviation fuels’, ‘offsetting’ and ‘net zero by 2050’ to be misleading. This precedent-setting decision sparked a sweeping regulatory response with the European Commission and EU national consumer protection authorities launching action against 20 airlines for misleading greenwashing practices.
“The ACCC needs to step in to protect consumers and investors as regulators have done in Europe,” said Snyder.
The expert analysis in the complaint outlines how Qantas’ marketing materials may breach consumer protection law by misrepresenting the significant adverse environmental impact of the company, which in 2024 reported that it emitted 17.6 million tonnes of CO2 globally.
“A Qantas customer choosing the ‘fly carbon neutral’ option for their flight might think that the climate impacts of their trip have been compensated for or significantly reduced,” said Snyder. “But this is not supported by science, and therefore distorts customers’ perception of the sustainability of flying.”
Derik Broekhoff, a senior scientist at the Stockholm Environment Institute and author of an expert report underpinning the KLM case says that ‘carbon neutral’ is not the same as ‘zero emissions’. “Using carbon credits cannot turn an unsustainable flight into a sustainable one, and consumers still need to be mindful of their travel choices,” said Broekhoff. “It is not accurate for airlines to claim that purchasing carbon credits will compensate for fossil fuel emissions if those emissions are outside Paris-aligned decarbonisation trajectories.”
Climate Integrity outlines that Qantas and others in the aviation industry are intentionally using misleading sustainability language and imagery to protect the social licence of aviation to grow. They argue that alternative fuels or ‘sustainable aviation fuels’ are greenwash by name and that relying on their potential future scale-up cannot come at the expense of solutions that are ready to go now – such as demand management.
“The science is irrefutable: the burning of fossil fuels is the single largest driver of climate change and Qantas has a long-term reliance on fossil fuels,” said Snyder. “Greenwashing at this scale creates a false sense of progress and undermines the urgent action necessary to reach zero emissions by 2050.”
Snyder concludes “Australia’s national carrier must stop greenwashing, commit to a science-aligned transition, and be transparent with its customers and investors about the challenges it faces in reaching net zero. Qantas has made a commitment to do its fair share to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and it needs to follow through.”
For Editorial Inquiries Contact:
Editor Matt Driskill at matt.driskill@asianaviation.com
For Advertising Inquiries Contact:
Head of Sales Kay Rolland at kay.rolland@asianaviation.com
