Apple lawsuit highlights the perils of making carbon neutral claims

Apple faces a class action lawsuit over greenwashing that accuses the company of making “false and misleading” statements about the environmental sustainability of three smartwatches launched in September 2023 as the company’s first carbon neutral products. 

The legal challenge, filed Feb. 26 in the U.S. District Court in Northern California, seeks compensation for the price premium that consumers paid to buy these products, including Apple Watch Series 9, Apple Watch SE (2nd generation) and Apple Watch Ultra.

Apple markets those products, along with newer Apple Watch models, as carbon neutral. The complaint, filed by lawyers representing seven purchasers of the watches who say they paid a premium for the carbon neutrality claim, underscores both consumers’ interest in companies that are leaders in emissions reductions and the dangers of including carbon neutrality claims in marketing campaigns.

“From a social media perspective, companies like Apple need to be careful what they say publicly in marketing their efforts — but their consumers certainly want to know that they’re implementing concerted efforts to make a difference in climate and with their technology,” said Marissa Rosen, founder and principal at communications consultancy Climate Social. 

The math behind Apple’s carbon neutral claim

Roughly 75 percent of the emissions reductions behind Apple’s claim about its watches come from changes to its production, such as its use of renewable electricity, processes that incorporate recycled materials for at least 30 percent of the components, fiber-based packaging and changes to shipping methods that avoid air transport. The rest of the claim, however, is made possible through carbon offset purchases.

The class action suit alleges that the credits Apple buys from two nature-based projects, the Chyulu Hills forest protection scheme in Kenya and a reforestation initiative in China, are worthless because they “fail to provide genuine, additional carbon reductions.” 

Although the latter project is verified by Verra, the certification body suspended the issue of new credits in November pending an investigation, the complaint notes. 

“Third-party certification does not eliminate a marketer’s obligation to ensure that it has substantiation for all claims reasonably communicated by the certification,” according to the plaintiffs. “Apple, which guarantees that the projects it invests in produce ‘high-quality carbon credits,’ should have independently verified that these projects meet the fundamental requirement of additionality.”

Apple’s push to make all products carbon neutral

Apple, based in Cupertino, California, declined to comment on the litigation but stands behind its claim. 

“We are proud of our carbon neutral products, which are the result of industry-leading innovation in clean energy and low-carbon design,” Apple said in a statement. “We’ve drastically cut emissions for Apple Watch by over 75 percent, and we are investing significantly in nature-based projects to remove hundreds of thousands of metric tons of carbon from the air. That innovation and progress is important to us and to the planet, which is why we detail our work prominently and transparently for our users.”

Apple has committed to making all its products carbon neutral by 2030. Aside from the watches, it also makes this claim for the Mac Mini, introduced in October. More than 50 percent of the materials in that product come from recycled content and all of the components were manufactured by suppliers that have committed to using clean energy for their processes.

How to protect against greenwashing

Lawsuits over corporate environmental claims are becoming more common, said lawyer Daniel Cherrin, founder and president of North Coast Strategies, which specializes in reputation management. In early February, for example, the maker of Gore-Tex was sued by consumers over calling its company “environmentally sound” even though it still uses PFAs.  

Many U.S.-centric class action suits related to greenwashing are eventually dismissed, as was the case with a similar complaint faced by apparel maker Lululemon that was thrown out Feb. 18.   

Cherrin offers this advice for corporations:

• Don’t use vague terms such as “carbon neutral” unless verified under a respected, independent framework
• Ensure claims are backed by specific data
• Assess risk exposure and prepare for scrutiny
• Advocate for global standards

“Lead with transparency, not perfection,” Cherrin said. “Sustainability is a journey. Companies should showcase their investments in green solutions, technological improvements and decarbonization efforts — without overpromising.”