Aqua Pura TV ad banned for misleading recycling and eco-friendly claims

Just how much care do you need to take when making “absolute” environmental advertising claims?

The key takeaway

The ASA is taking a firm stance on environmental claims and businesses should be extremely careful when making absolute claims. Ensuring that all claims can be fully substantiated is essential.

The background 

A TV ad for Aqua Pura, seen in August 2021, featured people drinking from bottles of Aqua Pura whilst enjoying time outdoors in nature. A voice-over said, “In Cumbria there’s more to water. From clouds up high, downhill and fell and mountainside. Flowing deep for years. Nature purifies on its journey to finding you. Bottle it up, guzzle it down, bathe the hills and quench the towns. For this is aqua. Nothing purer, it’s nature friendly we assure you. Crush it down, take it back, we’ll make plenty more with that. So take a sip of Cumbria. Go out, go far, go live. Aqua Pura. Hydration for the nation”.
The ad ended with two bottles of Aqua Pura on a rock with a backdrop of a lake and rolling green hills, alongside the Aqua Pura logo and text that said, “Hydration for the Nation” and “100% recycled & recyclable bottle with eco-friendly cap*”. The asterisk linked to text on screen that said “*relates to 500ml bottles only”.

The development

Once the ad aired, three complainants challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated: (1) “100% recycled … bottle”; (2) “100% … recyclable bottle”; (3) ”eco-friendly cap”, and (4) “it’s nature friendly”.

Claims 1, 3 and 4

On claims 1, 3 and 4 the ASA upheld the complaints. The ASA considered that the ad ended with on-screen text that stated “100% recycled & recyclable bottle with eco-friendly cap*” alongside two bottles, including the cap and label, of Aqua Pura water. The ASA believed that consumers would understand the first part of the claim, “100% recycled & recyclable bottle”, to mean that all components of the bottle, ie the bottle, cap and label, had been made using 100% recycled materials and could all be recycled. 

The ASA noted that the ad only included shots of 500 ml bottles of Aqua Pura, and that the qualifying text “*relates to 500ml bottles only” was included at the end, which was linked by asterisk to the claim “100% recycled & recyclable bottle with eco-friendly cap*”. The ASA considered that consumers would understand that qualifying text to mean that only 500ml bottles of Aqua Pura were 100% recycled and recyclable, and came with the “eco-friendly” cap.

The BCAP Code requires that the basis of environmental claims must be clear. It requires that absolute claims must be supported by a high level of substantiation, but that claims such as “friendlier” could be justified if the advertised product or service provided a total environmental benefit over that of the advertiser’s previous product or service or competitor products or services and the basis of the comparison was clear. It also said that claims must be based on the full life cycle of the advertised product unless the ad stated otherwise.

The ASA considered viewers would understand the claim “eco-friendly cap” to mean the cap was not harmful to the environment in any way, throughout the full life cycle of the product. For the same reason as referenced for claim 1, the ASA considered it was clear that the claim related only to the caps on Aqua Pura 500ml bottles.

The ASA considered the claim “eco-friendly cap” was an absolute claim. The ASA therefore expected to see evidence that demonstrated the cap was not harmful to the environment at any point during its full life cycle. However, the ASA had not seen such evidence.

The ad featured scenes of people drinking from bottles of Aqua Pura water whilst enjoying time outdoors in nature. At the same time a voice-over described the journey through nature that Aqua Pura water made and said, “… it’s nature friendly we assure you”. The ASA considered this was also an absolute claim. The ASA therefore expected to see evidence that demonstrated that the Aqua Pura brand and full life cycle of the products had a positive impact on the environment.

The ASA acknowledged that the plastic used in the bottles was made from 100% recycled PET, all components of the bottles were recyclable, and the bottles had an attached cap which reduced its chance of being littered. However:

• the ASA understood that not all parts of the bottles were made from recycled plastic - the cap and label were made from “new” plastic. Therefore, the ASA considered that they would therefore have a negative impact on the environment
• the ASA did not see evidence that demonstrated the Aqua Pura brand had a positive impact on the environment, and
• the ASA also had not seen evidence for the full life cycle of the products, and because parts of the products were made from a material that was inherently harmful to the environment, the ASA considered the claim “nature friendly” overstated the environmental benefit of the brand and products and was therefore misleading.

It followed that the ad breached BCAP Code rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.9 (Substantiation) and 9.2, 9.3, 9.4 and 9.5 (Environmental claims).

Claim 2

The ASA understood from the recycling certification report and additional documentation that Aqua Pura 500 ml still and sparkling water bottles along with their cap and label were processed into the clear plastic stream during the recyclability testing. During the recycling process, the cap and label were separated from the bottle and sent for further recycling. The bottles would be sent to a processor to be made into PET flakes or pellets. The ASA therefore understood all the components of the bottle were recyclable. Because viewers would understand the claim to mean that all components of the bottle were recyclable, and the ASA had seen evidence that was the case, the ASA concluded the claim “100% … recyclable bottle” was substantiated and was not misleading.

Why is this important?

This ruling is a reminder just how forensically careful brands need to be in making environmental or sustainable claims. 

Any practical tips?

When making absolute claims or claims which could be considered absolute, it is essential to triple check that every word can be fully substantiated. There is no point in chancing it. After all, the aim is to win consumers’ trust on environmental claims and the publicity of an adverse ruling may well make a dent in consumer confidence which is hard to mend.