By Mehdi HassanWhat counts as greenwashing on a website?
Greenwashing on a website is any environmental claim that's vague, exaggerated, unsupported or misleading about the real benefit of a product, service or company. It includes broad words like "eco-friendly" with no evidence, implying a whole product is green when only one part is, and presenting targets as if they were results.
It's usually not deliberate. Most greenwashing website claims come from enthusiastic copy written quickly, often by people who know the technology is good and assume the reader will too. Regulators and sophisticated buyers judge the words on the page, not the intentions. For the wider picture of how climate companies should present themselves, see our hub on climate tech website design.
What do the FTC Green Guides say about website claims?
The FTC Green Guides explain how the US Federal Trade Commission applies its rules against deceptive advertising to environmental marketing claims, including claims on websites. Their core principle is that claims must be truthful, not misleading and backed by competent and reliable evidence, judged by how a reasonable consumer would understand them.
The guides address specific claim types that show up on climate and sustainability sites: general environmental benefit claims, carbon offsets, renewable energy and renewable materials, recyclable and recycled content, compostable and degradable claims, and certifications and seals. The FTC has been reviewing the guides, so check the current version on the FTC's website rather than relying on summaries, including this one.
- General claims such as "green" or "eco-friendly" are hard to substantiate and should be avoided or clearly qualified.
- Qualifications must be clear, prominent and close to the claim, not in a footnote on another page.
- Partial benefits must say which part of the product or process they apply to.
- Certifications and seals shouldn't imply a broader benefit than the certification actually covers.
- Offsets need reliable evidence and honest disclosure of what they do and don't do.
How do EU green claims rules affect your website?
EU rules affect your website if you market to consumers in the EU, and they are stricter than US guidance in several areas. The EU's directive on empowering consumers for the green transition, Directive (EU) 2024/825, restricts generic environmental claims that can't be backed by recognized excellent environmental performance, and limits claims that a product is climate neutral on the basis of offsetting.
A separate proposal for a Green Claims Directive, which would have added detailed substantiation and verification requirements, has had an uncertain path through the EU legislative process. Check its current status with counsel. The text of the adopted directive is on EUR-Lex. In practice, if your site serves EU consumers, write as if every environmental claim will need independent evidence, and treat offset-based neutrality claims as the riskiest copy on the page.
B2B sites and consumer rules
Many climate startups sell to businesses, not consumers, and assume consumer protection rules don't apply. That's not a safe assumption. Websites are public, and regulators and courts may look at how a claim reads to anyone who sees it. Business buyers also increasingly ask vendors to substantiate environmental claims during procurement, because those claims flow into their own sustainability reporting.
The practical answer is the same either way: write claims that you could defend to a regulator, an auditor and a skeptical procurement team. Your counsel can advise on exactly which rules apply to your audience and markets.
How do you write sustainability claims copy that holds up?
Write sustainability claims copy that holds up by answering five questions inside each claim: what is reduced or improved, by how much, compared with what baseline, within what boundary, and how it's verified. If a sentence can't answer them, it's either a value statement that should be labelled as such or a claim that needs more evidence.
List every claim
Go through every page, image caption, meta description and PDF and highlight each environmental statement, including implied ones in headlines and imagery.
Classify each one
Mark it as measured result, modelled estimate, target or value statement. Each category needs different wording.
Attach the evidence
For each measured or modelled claim, note the source: lifecycle assessment, third-party verification, test report or methodology document.
Rewrite to be specific
Replace generic terms with the specific benefit, baseline and boundary. Move qualifications next to the claim.
Publish the method
Create a methodology or impact page that explains how figures are calculated, and link to it from claims.
Review and date
Have counsel review the final copy, and record the review date so claims get rechecked when evidence or rules change.
What do safer rewrites of risky claims look like?
Safer rewrites replace broad adjectives with specific, qualified statements and point to evidence. The examples below are illustrative copy patterns, not approved legal language, and the bracketed parts are placeholders for your own verified figures and methods.
Risky claim | Why it's risky | Safer pattern |
|---|---|---|
"Eco-friendly batteries" | Generic, no measurable benefit | "Batteries made without [material], with [verified benefit] per [unit] (see methodology)" |
"Carbon neutral shipping" | Usually relies on offsets; scrutinized in the EU | "We measure shipping emissions and fund [named project type]; this doesn't reduce our own emissions" |
"Zero emissions" | Rarely true across the full lifecycle | "Zero tailpipe emissions in operation; lifecycle emissions are [figure] (see LCA)" |
"Sustainable materials" | Undefined term | "[Percent from your evidence] recycled content, certified by [named scheme]" |
"Saves the planet" | Unmeasurable exaggeration | Remove, or replace with a specific, sourced benefit |
"Removes CO2 permanently" | Permanence needs a defined timescale and verification | "Stores CO2 in [medium], verified by [named verifier] (see method)" |
Imagery can make claims too. A green leaf on a fossil-fuel product or a forest behind a software dashboard can imply a benefit the copy doesn't state. Our guide to climate tech branding explains how to build a visual identity that doesn't lean on these signals.
Who should write and review green claims on a website?
Green claims should be drafted by someone who writes clearly, checked by the people who own the evidence, and reviewed by counsel. Copy, science and legal each catch different problems, and skipping any one of them is how vague claims slip through.
A practical workflow is to have a copywriter draft from interviews with your science or engineering lead, have that lead confirm every figure and boundary, then send the final draft to counsel. Our guide on who should write your website copy covers the trade-offs of each option. The same review discipline applies to other regulated claims, such as health and wellness claims, covered in our guide to health claims website compliance.
When we write climate websites, we start with the words and flag every environmental claim for your team and counsel to confirm. We won't publish claims you can't support.
How should you maintain greenwashing website claims over time?
Maintain claims by treating them as content with an owner and an expiry date. Evidence changes, products change and rules change, so a claim that was accurate at launch can become misleading a year later.
Keep a simple claims register: the claim, the page it appears on, the evidence behind it, the owner and the last review date. Review it at least when you update your lifecycle assessment, change suppliers or products, or enter a new market. Make sure your CMS makes it easy to find every instance of a claim, including in FAQ answers, which AI assistants often quote; our guide to FAQ sections that earn citations explains why that block deserves the same care.
