ASA Ruling on Shell UK Ltd (following a complaint by Adfree Cities)

This ruling concerned a poster, a TV ad, and a YouTube ad for Shell. The poster was seen in Bristol in June 2022. It featured in large text “BRISTOL is READY for Cleaner Energy” and included Shell’s logo. The TV and YouTube ads, also seen in June 2022, depicted some of Shell’s business activities in 2022 and focused on more environmentally friendly energy products. Adfree Cities challenged whether the ads were misleading. By ruling of June 7, 2023, the Advertising Standards Authority (“ASA”) upheld that complaint. Consumers were increasingly concerned about the environmental impact of activities related to higher-carbon products and services, and would be interested in seeking out businesses, including oil and gas companies, that were making meaningful progress towards transitioning away from higher-carbon products and services. However, they were unlikely to be aware of the details of this in relation to specific companies, and ads were therefore likely to mislead consumers if they misrepresented the contribution that lower-carbon initiatives played, or would play in the near future, as part of the overall balance of a company's activities. In the absence of qualifying information, the cumulative effect of the ads was to give the impression that low-carbon energy products comprised a significant proportion of the energy products Shell invested in and sold in the UK in 2022, or were likely to do so in the near future. Shell said they were taking steps towards net zero and promoting sustainable energy. However, according to Shell’s 2021 Sustainability Report, its operations gave rise to greenhouse gas emissions in 2021 that were estimated as equivalent to 1,375 million tonnes of carbon dioxide. Large-scale oil and gas investment and extraction comprised the vast majority of the company’s business model in 2022 and would continue to do so in the near future. Because the ads gave the overall impression that a significant proportion of Shell’s business comprised lower-carbon energy products, further information about the proportion of Shell’s overall business model that comprised lower-carbon energy products was material information that should have been included. Because the ads did not include such information, they omitted material information and were likely to mislead. The ASA ruled that the ads must not appear again in the form complained of. The ASA told Shell to ensure their future ads featuring environmental claims did not mislead by exaggerating or, omitting material information about, the proportion of their business activities that were comprised of lower carbon activities. A related complaint, concerning the use by UK households of renewable electricity from Shell, was not upheld.