At a time when many marketers are polishing their “green” credentials, an advertisement that appeared recently in British newspapers seemed to go sharply against the grain. “Let’s not worry about climate change,” it urged, quoting a supposed aviation industry executive named Sir Montgomery Cecil, from a group calling itself Spurt.

“We in the aviation industry have had enough of hearing about the environment,” the ad said. “But those environmentalists just won’t shut up about aviation and climate change. It’s time we took a stand for decent hard-working shareholders and told the lentil mob to ‘can it.’ ”

As you have probably guessed, the ad was a spoof and neither Spurt nor Sir Montgomery Cecil exists. It directed readers to a Web site that revealed the sponsors to be the environmental organizations Greenpeace and AirportWatch, along with a British advocacy group called Enoughsenough.

The ad reflects the emergence of a new target in the pursuit of green consumers. While oil companies and other industries have long had to contend with the concerns of environmental groups, and have responded with advertising promoting earth-friendly initiatives, the public attack on the airlines is a more recent development.

Eco-campaigners say air travel is one of the fastest-growing producers of emissions linked to global warming. But flying has been somewhat sheltered from their ire until recently — perhaps because of its popularity with consumers, businesspeople and environmental activists alike. “On one level we don’t want to think about travel being part of the problem,” said Joshua Blackburn, creative director at Provokateur, the London-based agency that produced the ad. “It’s all well and good if it’s only the politicians that have to think about it.”

With Al Gore’s film “An Inconvenient Truth” focusing attention on climate change, some politicians see an opening to start a public discussion on the environmental impact of flying. In Britain, for instance, the Conservative Party leader David Cameron recently said he favored a tax on short-haul flights as a way to curb the growth of emissions. Now environmental groups and some alternative transportation providers are jumping on the bandwagon.

Eurostar, which runs the high-speed train service linking London to Paris and Brussels via the Channel Tunnel, has started running ads in travel trade publications asserting that a journey produces only one-tenth the carbon dioxide emissions of a comparable flight. Some of the ads include a drawing of an airplane in the form of a burning cigarette.

Eurostar intends to broaden the campaign this week by sponsoring a supplement to The Spectator, the British current affairs magazine, said Greg Nugent, Eurostar’s marketing manager in Britain. The campaign will be extended to other media in the coming months, he added. “The amount of chatter on this issue is incredible,” Mr. Nugent said. “The travel industry as a whole seems to be on the defensive, rather than being proactive.”

Airlines have typically avoided discussion of the environment in their advertising, focusing on things like ticket prices or the experience of flying. But as criticism from environmentalists rises, industry officials say they are considering a change of course, to point out their own efforts to cut emissions, through the use of newer, more fuel-efficient planes, for example.

“We’re debating how we can raise awareness of the issue,” said John Hanlon, secretary general of the European Low Fares Airline Association, which represents discount airlines. He said that advertising was one option. Some airlines have taken steps to show publicly that they are aware of environmental concerns. British Airways, for instance, has started a program under which travelers, when booking their tickets, can pay a surcharge to “offset” some of the carbon emissions caused by their flight; British Airways donates the money to sustainable energy programs.

Perhaps the highest-profile public relations initiative by the industry was a recent announcement by Sir Richard Branson, the British entrepreneur who controls the Virgin Group, that he would invest up to $3 billion in profits from Virgin airline and rail companies in alternative energy projects. The announcement generated headlines around the world, in what even environmental campaigners acknowledged was a public relations coup for Mr. Branson, giving Virgin a first-mover advantage.

The Spurt advertisement, which followed several weeks later, has caused some consumers and aviation officials to cry foul. The Advertising Standards Authority, which monitors the content of British advertising, said it was investigating complaints that the ad was misleading because it did not identify the actual sponsors, except on the Web site. Mr. Blackburn of the ad agency acknowledged that the approach pushed the environmental groups into an ethical gray area. As they await a ruling from the advertising regulator, the airlines’ foes are plotting their next step. “Sir Monty may retire, or he may have a life,” said Jeff Gazzard, a spokesman for AirportWatch. “Maybe he will be converted to the green cause.”
(Por Eric Pfanner, The N.Y. Times, 29/10/2006)