'Greenwashing' raises red flags at COP27

Private companies were forewarned by the UN Secretary-General to stop using greenwashing techniques and change their ways within a year.

It can give the misleading impression that a business or its products are environmentally aware or friendly.
It is an attempt to profit from the rising demand for environmentally sound items.
The phrase first appeared in the 1960s when one of the most overt instances of greenwashing was created by the hotel sector.
Some businesses have been charged with greenwashing in an effort to profit from the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing movement.
It gives a false picture of the progress being made on the climate change front, so pushing the globe towards disaster and rewarding entities for irresponsible behaviour.
Genuinely green products or businesses support their statements with facts and specifics.

A new shower curtain is packaged in plastic and is marked ‘Biodegradable’.
It’s unclear whether the shower curtain or the package can be recycled.
If any portion of the packaging or its contents, except from minor components, cannot be recycled, the label is false in either scenario.
‘50% more recycled content than previously’ is written on a room rug.
In actuality, the manufacturer upped the recycled content from 2% to 3%. Despite being technically accurate, the message gives the impression that the rug contains a lot of recycled fibre.

Trading carbon is a legal activity. In reality, it is endorsed by the government.
Carbon credits are given to nations or businesses that cut emissions above their quota; these credits can then be purchased for money by organizations who require them to meet their objectives.
A carbon market already existed under the Kyoto Protocol, and one is being established under the Paris Agreement.
Since they were first conceived, carbon markets’ reach has multiplied. There are also unregulated carbon markets.
Such transactions, particularly in informal, bilateral or voluntary marketplaces, have been identified for lack of integrity and duplicate counting. The credits are frequently certified by unofficial third-party firms and sold to others.