Climate Greenwashing: Are Companies Really Funding Sustainability?
By Lucas Ribeiro Cunha (CFC-GS/UFPA) In recent decades, the climate crisis has moved beyond being a topic exclusive to environmentalists and scientists to take center stage in corporate strategies, financial reports, and even on supermarket shelves. As consumers’ environmental awareness has grown and capital markets have exerted pressure for ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) criteria, companies have begun investing in communicating their supposed “sustainability.” The problem is that, in most cases, this messaging does not reflect reality—a phenomenon known as greenwashing. 1. WHAT IS GREENWASHING? The term emerged in 1986, coined by American environmentalist Jay Westerveld to criticize the practice of hotels that asked guests to reuse towels “to save the planet” while expanding their facilities in an unsustainable manner. Since then, the concept has expanded and today describes any practice whereby an organization conveys a false, misleading, or unsubstantiated environmental image or statement with the aim of gaining commercial or reputational advantages. Greenwashing can manifest in various ways: from the use of green packaging and vague language to sophisticated claims about carbon neutrality and goals that lack concrete implementation plans. In all cases, the effect is the same: that is, the consumer or investor is led to believe they are supporting a company genuinely committed to sustainability, when in fact they are financing a venture that violates environmental standards. 2. THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM The scale of greenwashing is significant; a report produced by Market Analysis Brasil with support from the Akatu Institute analyzed more than 2,000 products available on the Brazilian market and identified 3,045 environmental claims. The results were alarming, as 85% of these claims were superficial, false, or misleading. In this regard, some recent examples clearly illustrate how greenwashing operates in practice. Shell is perhaps the most emblematic case among fossil fuel companies. The company systematically promotes an image of commitment to the energy transition, but data from 2023 show that it emitted approximately 1.6 gigatons of CO₂ equivalent, remaining among the largest emitters in the global energy sector. For its part, FIFA faced international backlash after claiming that the 2022 World Cup in Qatar would be “carbon neutral.” However, Carbon Market Watch published a report demonstrating that the organization had dramatically underestimated the tournament’s emissions, and in 2023, the Swiss Fairness Commission acknowledged that the claims were false, that the claims were false, making it one of the few organizations in the world to officially recognize the greenwashing of a major sporting event. Brazil is not immune to this problem, and the national context adds a specific layer to it: the connection between greenwashing and the carbon credit market, a sector the country is attempting to structure through Law No. 15,042/2024, which establishes the Brazilian Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading System. In June 2024, the Federal Police launched Operation Greenwashing—on World Environment Day—dismantling a criminal organization that was selling approximately R$ 180 million in fraudulent carbon credits backed by illegally occupied public lands. The operation executed 76 search and seizure warrants and resulted in 5 pretrial detentions across multiple states. In December 2025, the Brazilian Institute for Consumer Protection (IDEC) filed a lawsuit against GOL for alleged deceptive practices in its carbon offset programs, questioning the origin of the credits used and the actual effectiveness of the environmental actions disclosed to the public. These incidents reveal that greenwashing in Brazil is not merely a matter of deceptive marketing: in its most serious cases, it involves environmental, criminal, and financial fraud. 3. PROTECTION TIPS AND FINAL CONSIDERATIONS Identifying greenwashing is not easy, but there are criteria that help both ordinary consumers and institutional investors distinguish genuine commitment from environmental rhetoric. For consumers, the starting point is to be skeptical of vague claims. Terms such as “green,” “ecological,” “sustainable,” or “environmentally friendly,” without any reference to recognized certifications or verifiable metrics, should raise a red flag. For investors, the challenge is greater, but it is also advisable to pay attention to international environmental quality standards, which can, in principle, offer greater assurance. Similarly, an analysis of internal climate governance—the existence of sustainability committees, performance targets linked to executive compensation, and independent external audits—is a relevant indicator of genuine commitment. In light of this, climate greenwashing is more than just a corporate communications problem; it constitutes a structural threat to the integrity of climate finance markets and the effectiveness of public decarbonization policies. When companies appropriate the language of sustainability without aligning it with their actual practices, they divert resources, mislead consumers, distort competition, and slow down the energy transition that the planet urgently needs. The good news is that better-informed consumers, more demanding investors, and more active regulators are gradually creating an environment that is less tolerant of empty green rhetoric. The question is not whether companies should communicate their progress on sustainability, but whether that communication reflects real change or is merely a public relations strategy. For the climate, this distinction is, quite literally, vital. You can read more articles about climate finance on our blog and access financing data on our tracker. Check it out! REFERENCES BRASIL. Polícia Federal. Operação Greenwashing: nota informativa. Disponível em: https://www.gov.br/pf/pt-br/assuntos/noticias/2024/06/pf-deflagra-operacao-greenwashing-para-investigar-venda-irregular-de-creditos-de-carbono. Acesso em: 03 jun. 2026. MAIR, Gavin. Qatar 2022 FIFA World Cup: carbon neutrality claim is greenwashing. Carbon Market Watch. Disponível em: https://carbonmarketwatch.org/2024/12/20/fifas-foul-irresponsible-farcical-and-absurd-approach-to-the-climate/. Acesso em: 03 jun. 2026. PAULO, Paulo Paiva. Idec aciona Gol na Justiça por suposta propaganda enganosa de programa que prometia compensar a poluição de voos. Disponível em: https://g1.globo.com/meio-ambiente/noticia/2025/12/07/acao-idec-gol-suposto-greenwashing.ghtml. Acesso em: 06 jun. 2026. REDAÇÃO A ECONOMIA B. Greenwashing no Brasil 2024. Disponível em: https://www.aeconomiab.com/greenwashing-no-brasil. Acesso em: 01 jun. 2026. ROSE, Amelia. Exemplos de greenwashing em 2025: as 10 principais empresas de greenwashing enganando os consumidores. LytHouse. Disponível em: https://www.lythouse.com/blog/top-10-greenwashing-companies-examples. Acesso em: 08 jun. 2026.
