Last year we ran a leaflet campaign to members of one of our partners, Sustrans.  As a result of this campaign the ASA received a complaint and this month we were surprised and disappointed to hear that the ASA was upholding the complaint.

Our leaflet outlined what Good Energy does and in particular it made reference to the work we have been doing to lay out our vision for the UK to be 100% renewable.

We believe that 100% renewable Britain is possible. We are not alone in this belief: work by other organisations, both in the UK and overseas (European Climate Foundation, The Centre for Alternative Technology, PWC), demonstrates a pathway to a 100% renewable future.  The governments of Scotland and Germany have stated their intention to become 100% renewable using similar analysis and work in Denmark and Australia also shows how a renewable energy future could be achieved.

Our research was based on the UK government pathways tool and we published it on 22 October last year on our blog. Our analysis is based on shifting our energy use from imported fossil fuels to using locally available, renewable resources. The UK has a fantastic opportunity to innovate in this area, with a wealth of local energy resources, our engineering pedigree and a strong culture of independence at our disposal. We believe that creating an understanding in people’s minds about the source of the energy they use will help to deliver the change in attitude needed to support the growth of renewables in the UK.

The leaflet stated Good Energy’s aim “to change the way energy is made and used in the UK so we can build a renewable energy future”, and went on to explain as follows:

"This means producing and using energy locally; making it a visible part of the local community; and reconnecting people with the source of their energy. When people know more about where their energy comes from, they value it more and use it less ... "

A reasonable aspiration you might think, but it obviously upset somebody!  In response to the complaint, the ASA said “We considered ... the overall impression of the ad, in particular the text [quoted above], was such that it was likely to be interpreted as suggesting Good Energy supplied 100% renewable energy directly to consumers.”  The ASA did however note, by way of consolation, that “the ad did not state that Good Energy supplied 100% renewable energy directly to consumers.”

This opinion came as something of a surprise and a huge disappointment.  Good Energy, like all utility companies, supplies its customers via the National Grid. Unlike the others, for every unit of electricity Good Energy customers use during the course of a year we supply the National Grid with an equivalent unit from a 100% renewable source. This is independently certified by the Green Energy Tariff Certification Scheme. In more than 10 years of supplying renewable electricity in this way we have not had a single incidence of a customer claiming to have been misled by us into believing that we would provide a direct physical connection between their home and a renewable energy source.  What is more, whilst the ruling refers to  ‘supply arrangements’ it has been filed under ‘environmental claims’ which would appear somewhat odd.

Martin Edwards, a Board Director of Good Energy and co-founder of the first commercial wind farm in the UK, commented, “This ruling is absurd. You would have to be a crossword fanatic to infer from this ad that we claim to supply consumers directly from a turbine through a wire into their home.  It is damaging, since it has been worded in a way that casts doubt on our claim to supply 100% renewable power, as I am sure the complainant intended.”

We are concerned that the ruling will restrict the way we, and others, can talk about a vision for 100% renewable, low-carbon, Britain. In an industry dominated by dubious environmental claims and with a history of misleading consumers we endeavour to be scrupulous in ensuring that everything we do is supported by fact and we try to explain things clearly despite the complexities of the energy industry.

Our real worry is the prospect of the ASA being used as a tool by the anti-renewables lobby to muddy the waters and make the work of organisations in the renewables sector more difficult.  It may only take a few minutes to submit a complaint but valuable time and resource is required to deal with it and if the complaint is upheld, in a culture where certain parts of the media are actively looking for the chance to put a negative spin on any renewables story, it makes the challenge of bringing about change harder still.

So, we are very disappointed and concerned by the decision by the Advertising Standards Authority to uphold this single complaint, and we think they made a mistake.

However, we could be wrong!

We would really appreciate your opinion of the ASA ruling and whether you think it is justified.  We will do our utmost to make sure that our publicity is ultra clear in the future.  However, if you think the ruling is unjustified we would love to hear from you. You can post your comment on this blog. It won’t take much to outnumber a single complainant! Related article: Adjudication on Good Energy: was the Advertising Standards Authority overzealous?