v=spf1 include:send.aweber.com ~all
top of page
Writer's pictureJennifer Carlsson

Debunking Reef-Safe Sunscreen Claims: What Beauty Brands Need to Know


Solara Suncare, Solèr and Project Reef

Why "Reef-Safe" Claims Might Be Missing the Bigger Picture

I recently released Sunscreen Market Overview Report 2024, where I analyse 26 brands launched in 2017 or later. I also cover key concepts important to understand about the sunscreen market and one of them is the concept of sunscreen being “reef-safe”.


The term "reef-safe" has become a powerful marketing tool in the sunscreen industry, aimed at capturing the attention of environmentally conscious consumers. Brands such as Project Reef, Solara Suncare, and Solèr prominently highlight their commitment to being "reef-safe" in their marketing efforts, promising formulations that avoid certain chemicals, notably oxybenzone and octinoxate, which some claim are linked to coral bleaching and harm to marine ecosystems, despite the lack of scientific evidence. While these claims are often made with positive intentions, they can also distract from larger environmental issues, such as the reliance on plastic packaging and other factors that contribute more significantly to environmental damage. The concept of "reef-safe" sunscreen is fraught with complexities and misconceptions that industry professionals should be aware of.



Solèr SPF black packaging

The Reality Behind "Reef-Safe" Labels

While the idea of protecting coral reefs from harmful chemicals is a worthy cause, the term "reef-safe" is currently unregulated. No government or environmental authority provides standardized criteria or testing to verify the environmental safety of sunscreens making this claim. As a result, brands have considerable freedom in how they define and use "reef-safe," often without providing substantial evidence to back up their environmental assertions. This lack of regulatory oversight presents a challenge to consumers and brands alike, with many left unsure of what "reef-safe" truly means in practice.

 

Project Reef soft colored sunscreens

Scientific Scrutiny: More Than Just Chemicals

One of the biggest misconceptions is that avoiding chemical filters like oxybenzone and octinoxate automatically makes a sunscreen environmentally friendly. However, recent studies show that when tested at unrealistically high concentrations—the levels at which chemical filters have been shown to harm coral reefs—mineral filters such as zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are equally harmful. In these controlled tests, neither type of filter is better for marine life when present at such extreme concentrations.

 

However, it’s important to stress that in real-life scenarios, the concentrations of these ingredients in the ocean are not high enough to pose a significant risk to coral reefs. The amount of sunscreen that reaches marine environments under typical usage conditions is far lower than the concentrations tested in laboratories. This means that neither chemical nor mineral sunscreens are likely to cause harm to coral reefs at the levels found in real-world ocean conditions.


Darling Sun's minimalist pastel sunscreen

The Marketing Disconnect: Reef-Safe as a Common Standard

Among the 26 brands featured in the Sunscreen Market Overview Report 2024, only three brands—Ultra Violette, Darling, and Dew It—still use oxybenzone or octinoxate in any of their products. Despite this, Dew It continues to market itself as "reef-safe," illustrating the inconsistency in how this label is applied. The majority of brands have already complied with regulations like the Hawaii Reef Compliant Act 104, which bans these chemicals. This widespread compliance suggests that avoiding oxybenzone and octinoxate doesn’t actually make a sunscreen more "reef-safe" in any meaningful way, as both mineral and chemical sunscreens have been shown to pose similar risks under unrealistic lab conditions.


Even if avoiding these ingredients did make a product safer for coral reefs—which the evidence does not support—it would not be a significant differentiator, as 88% of the brands in the report already meet these basic requirements. The "reef-safe" label is often used more for its marketing value than to signal a genuine environmental advantage. As the report emphasizes, true environmental impact involves much more than just excluding a few specific ingredients. Factors like packaging, production practices, and overall lifecycle sustainability are crucial for brands aiming to make real environmental contributions.


If you want a better explanation of the science than I can give, then I really recommend watching this video from cosmetic chemist Michelle Wong


Ultra Violette's colorful sunscreen products

A Need for Greater Transparency and Consumer Education

The lack of regulatory standards combined with the evolving scientific understanding of sunscreen’s environmental impact calls for greater transparency from brands. While consumers are drawn to eco-conscious products, they may not have all the information needed to make truly sustainable choices. Beauty brands must not only substantiate their "reef-safe" claims with robust evidence but also educate consumers about the broader environmental implications of their products, from formulation to packaging.

 

For instance, while 54% of the brands in the report claim to be eco-friendly, 79% of their products still use all-plastic packaging—a material that also poses threats to marine ecosystems. This disconnect between claims and actual practices highlights the importance of a more holistic approach to sustainability, rather than focusing narrowly on specific ingredients.


Sunslayer's plastic free sunscreen

The Irony of "Reef-Safe" Sunscreens in Plastic Packaging

While many sunscreen brands market themselves as "reef-safe" by avoiding certain While many sunscreen brands market themselves as "reef-safe" by avoiding certain chemical filters, there's an irony in the fact that 79% of the products from the brands in the Sunscreen Market Overview Report 2024 are packaged in all-plastic containers. Plastic has a far more significant and proven negative impact on the environment, particularly on marine ecosystems, than the chemicals these brands claim to avoid. The reliance on plastic packaging by brands touting their "reef-safe" credentials highlights a major disconnect between marketing claims and the broader environmental reality.

 

The widespread use of plastic packaging—much of which ends up in the ocean—poses a far greater threat to marine life, including coral reefs. While Sunslayer stands out as the only brand in the report offering completely plastic-free packaging, the beauty industry as a whole has been slow to adopt more holistic sustainability measures. Another brand worth mention is recently launched Le Rub, all their products packaging is plastic free except for the caps (I recently wrote a whole blog post about Le Rub).

 

If brands truly want to make a positive environmental impact, focusing on packaging, waste reduction, and overall lifecycle sustainability is crucial. Ingredient-based claims like "reef-safe" may appeal to eco-conscious consumers, but they fall short of addressing the bigger environmental challenges that sunscreen brands face.


Le Rub sunscreen and after sun lotion

Conclusion: Moving Beyond "Reef-Safe" to True Sustainability

The "reef-safe" label has become a popular marketing tool, but as this post highlights, it often oversimplifies the broader environmental challenges associated with sunscreens. While some brands market themselves as environmentally conscious by avoiding certain chemical filters, these claims can distract from more significant issues, such as the reliance on plastic packaging and the overall sustainability of a product's lifecycle.

 

The evidence shows that neither chemical nor mineral sunscreens pose a significant risk to coral reefs at real-world concentrations. However, the continued use of plastic packaging presents a far greater and well-documented environmental threat, especially to marine ecosystems. For brands aiming to make a genuine positive impact, addressing packaging, production processes, and overall sustainability must be part of the conversation.

 

Ultimately, if beauty brands truly want to live up to their environmental claims, they need to move beyond ingredient-based marketing and take a more comprehensive approach to sustainability. Transparency, consumer education, and a commitment to reducing waste and environmental impact are essential steps for brands that wish to make meaningful contributions to preserving our planet.

 

For a deeper dive into these issues and other critical topics shaping the sunscreen industry, check out the Sunscreen Market Overview Report 2024. This report features 26 sunscreen brands founded in 2017 or later and covers essential concepts that every beauty industry professional should understand about the sunscreen market. Gain a comprehensive understanding of trends, challenges, and the future of sun protection with this invaluable resource.



Thank you for reading! //Jennifer Carlsson

Comments


Jennifer - Profile Picture Square.jpg
Jennifer Carlsson
The Beauty Brand Expert

I'm Jennifer Carlsson, a 32 year old strategy consultant, competitive market researcher, data analyst and designer from Stockholm, Sweden. I know more about more beauty brands than anyone else and I'm an expert in what it takes for beauty brands to succeed.
Subscribe to my newsletter!
 
 

Want to get updated when I post new blog posts, release new reports and take part in exclusive offers? Join my email list!

 

Thanks for subscribing!

bottom of page