Is Your Business Water Supplier Guilty Of Greenwashing?

There are multiple reasons for a business to consider switching water supplier and it doesn’t have to be because it is a new year’s resolution to look around for a better deal, even if now would be the time for that.

Price is a factor, of course, but you may also want to consider environmental issues. After all, pollution incidents have been a huge political issue in recent years and water companies have come under increasing pressure over them.

The election of a new government last year provided the impetus for new legislation and regulation to tighten up on the issue, with boards and shareholders being  banned from collecting bonuses as punishment for poor environmental records and other failings. 

Over £4 million in bonuses was blocked in the first year of Ofwat using this new power.

Such measures may be welcomed by some, but questions remain about how far water companies can get away with poor environmental records and practices. 

In particular, can some avoid the kind of reputational damage that could lose them business customers through greenwashing?

What Is Greenwashing?

Greenwashing is the notorious practice by which some companies have sought to exaggerate their environmental credentials and conceal their shortcomings by making misleading statements and inflated claims about products or company policies.

Many companies have been criticised by green campaigners for doing this and the latest revelations suggest that UK water companies are particularly guilty. 

They have not merely indulged in PR exercises to look better than they are, but have been prolific issuers of ‘green bonds’ to make money while continuing to fall short on pollution.

This was the conclusion of research by environmental group Unearthed, part of Greenpeace. It found that water companies accounted for 19 per cent of green bonds issued in the UK since 2017, worth £10.5 billion. 

The figure rises to 22 per cent if bonds issued to fund the Thames ‘Super Sewer’ in London are taken into account.

Such bonds are linked to projects designed to offer environmental benefits. In the case of water firms, this means schemes to reduce waste, improve sewerage works, increase water conservation and protect rivers. 

This also enables companies to borrow more cheaply. The idea is that this acts as an incentive for investment in environmental improvements.

However, the performance of some of the water companies involved in issuing green bonds leaves a lot to be desired. 

The biggest issuer among the water companies has been Anglian Water at £3.5 billion, with Thames second with £3.1 billion, making them the third and sixth largest issuers of green bonds across all industries since 2017.

How Have The Water Companies Failed?

Thames has been one of the most frequently sanctioned companies for environmental failings and Anglian has too. These failings include:

•       Thames was hit with a £104.5 million penalty, the largest ever levied, in May 2025, over wastewater operations rule breaches
•       Thames had to return nearly £50 million to its customers after missing key performance targets in 2022
•       Anglian Water was fined £62.8 million for wastewater rule breaches in September 2025
•       Other companies fined for wastewater rule breaches in 2025 include South West Water (£24 million), Yorkshire Water (£40 million) and Northumbrian Water (£15.7 million)

In view of such failings, the green bonds do not appear to have brought the benefits they should, nor justified the PR boost companies issuing them have gained.

Chief executive of clean water campaign group River Action, James Wallace, commented: “This is corporate greenwash on steroids. UK water companies are raising billions through green bonds while failing to deliver the environmental improvements these funds are supposed to support.”

He added: “True green finance should deliver real benefits for the environment and public health, not mask ongoing pollution.”

How Can Firms Punish Greenwashing Water Suppliers?

Some might at least argue that the bonds to fund the Thames Super Sewer will bring benefits, as it vastly increases the capacity of the sewers that were built in Victorian times for a metropolis of four million people, not the nine million now living in London. 

This should prevent overflows of raw sewage into the Thames in wet weather.

However, such benefits may be offset against a wider narrative of failure and neglect, one in which companies appear to have found ways of raising money that will ultimately fill the pockets of shareholders and executives, without delivering even the legal minimum standards for water treatment and infrastructure development.

Nobody can be sure whether the year ahead will see significant improvements in the records of water companies, but the track record to date of some of them may be enough to warrant change.

With our easy switching service, we can make it simple for you to do this and make it clear what you think about greenwashing.