Dear Leo Alexander Thank you for getting your climate warning to level 2! We have reached out to Arla and asked for a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Adam We Don't Have Time

@Leo_Alexander an important post, @Arla is a Danish registered company and thus subject to the new Green Claims Guidance in Denmark. I have not read the small text on the Swedish product but have their similar Danish product, and at @Enablesus we have done a review of some of Arla's cooperate sustainability reporting. In Denmark the Arla Øko (organic yoghurt and milk) on-product communication is "CO2e Neutral compensated with climate credits" then the small text on the product explains it is a life cycle assessment of the product, credits come from afforestation and forest management projects, they use RECs to cover renewable electric used in factory production. There is also a link to a more detailed explanation, the LCA and compensation report, and a 3rd-party assurance of this. This fits within the Green Claims Guidance, is transparent, and thus not misleading or greenwashing. It is textbook to what is expected! Why Arla does not do this in Sweden I do not know? Of course there is always the opinion argument of what climate credits should be allowed or not. Some say that the word "Neutral" should now only be used if climate credits are from verified carbon sequestration / afforestation, and not compensation such a forest management / REDD+ / REC (unless their is a direct PPA with the RE power producer), and others argue the term can be use for both. That being said, my professional opinion is that after the recent SBTi Net-Zero Standard (Oct. 2021), only companies as a whole should be able to claim commitments to Net-Zero and only if they follow (register / report their commitment) the SBTi Net-Zero Standard. Products and services should no longer be able to use or claim "Net-Zero". The best approach now for Arla would be to follow the transparent approach they have for Arla Øko and use the phrase: CO2e compensated with climate credits or CO2e offset with climate credits (in English we may use carbon credits).

OMG- it never ends!

I agree the labeling is misleading but It’s also important to recognize that IPCC in it’s latest report says that the biggest threat is methane from fossil fuels. Swedish cows are out gazing during summer and they mainly eat grass and other crops grown on the farm. The biodiversity in the pasture on an average Swedish organic diary farm is very high.

We should not equate climate compensation programs to permanent climate-focused solutions since this can just transform into a cost of doing business. As of 2015, dairy industry alone was responsible for about 3.4% of world's CO2 emissions (more than both aviation and shipping). It must be held accountable, for real.

That's bad...

They are only doing it for eco-label too. It is not a serious approach

I agree, this is confusing. I support offsetting but there must be transparency. Arla’s ”net-zero footprint” messaging is the opposite of transparency in this respect.