c
 Spanked for 



 Advertising
Kind of sad from a company often touting its green side:

Britain¶s advertising watchdog criticized a newspaper ad by Royal Dutch Shell that portrays the outline of an oil
refinery with flowers sprouting from its chimneys, saying that two of its environmental claims were likely to
mislead readers.

The Advertising Standards Authority, which issued the ruling Tuesday, only has the authority to remove ads
from Britain¶s media, which the oil producer has already done«.

Groups such as Friends of the Earth filed the U.K. complaint against the ad, created by the J. Walter Thompson
agency, which were headlined ³Don¶t Throw Anything Away. There is No Away.´

It showed the outline of an oil refinery, which had chimneys producing flowers. Part of the ad read: ³We use
our waste CO2 to grow flowers, and our waste sulfur to make super-strong concrete. Real energy solutions for
the real world.´

The U.K. complaint said the image of refinery chimneys emitting flowers misrepresented the environmental
impact of Shell¶s refineries.

The complaint alleged the ads implied that Shell used all of its waste CO2, or carbon dioxide, to grow flowers,
whereas the group believed ÷


÷



÷ 


 ÷÷
÷
, and the waste
sulfur claim implied all Shell¶s waste sulfur was used to make concrete.

Doh!

More on the ruling below ² if only our FTC had this kind of backbone, we wouldn¶t see so many ads touting
how green Chevy is when it is working so hard to fight tougher fuel economy standards at the national and state
level:

The oil company said it has developed a new method of using waste sulfur produced during the refining process
as a binder in concrete production, instead of cement. Shell said 8 tons of sulphur-strengthened concrete had
been produced so far, but production was expected to grow considerably in the next 10 years«.

³In the absence of qualification, most readers were likely to interpret the claim µWe use our waste CO2 to grow
flowers,¶ especially in the context of the image and the headline claim µDon¶t throw anything away there is no
away,¶ to mean that Shell used all, or at least the majority, of their waste CO2 to grow flowers, whereas the
actual amount was a very small proportion, when compared to the global activities of Shell,´ the ruling said.

Regarding the waste sulfur claim, the authority said ³readers were likely to interpret the claim µWe use « our
waste sulfur to make super-strong concrete¶ to mean that Shell used all, or at least the majority, of their waste
sulfur to make super-strong concrete.´

¦

 says:

³if only our FTC had this kind of backbone´

I look forward to the first time the scant but sufficient body of regulations and legislation that protects the
American public from the scourge of false advertising is used to haul a greenwasher through the court of public
opinion. My guess is that if this could be done in a high profile way, one case would be enough to put an end to
this repulsive, damaging practice.

One candidate would be Vail Resorts, which despite the precedent set by Auden Schendler and
Aspen/Snowmass, has refused appeals to represent their forays into the REC market responsibly. The proof that
they are misleading people can be seen in the testimonials they posted on their own website of confused patrons
congratulating them for purchasing 100% wind power.

There is no small amount of irony here, the ski world is the victim and the perpetrator of climate crimes.
Megatons of coal burned to make snow, etc.

Even if no real lawsuit were to be filed, it would make for a great episode of Boston Legal. Alan Shore comes
down with a case of word salad when confronted with the no nonsense snow bunnies from Vail¶s public
relations department and Denny Crane has to win the case all by himself, which would not be hard to do.



eBook on 
 

: ÷ 

÷
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31483843/Not-One-Drop

Big Oil¶s  




http://bigoil101.insanejournal.com