In recent years, the real estate, construction, and industrial sectors have experienced rapid development of tools for calculating greenhouse gas emissions. LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) calculators, applications for calculating operational emissions of buildings, and tools for reporting the carbon footprint have become common support for developers, manufacturing companies, and institutional investors. At first glance, they allow for quick determination of emissions in the life cycle of a building, product, or process.

Development of emission calculation tools

The first generations of emission calculators were created in response to companies’ needs for ESG reporting and compliance with regulations such as CSRD, EPBD, or the EU Taxonomy. They enabled aggregation of data from various sources and generation of basic reports on operational carbon, embodied carbon, and the total carbon footprint of investments. In many cases, these tools also supported simulations of emission reduction scenarios, planning of building renovations, and assessment of climate risk in real estate portfolios.

Emission calculators have become an operational standard in ESG reporting, especially in projects funded with public funds or bank loans with so-called green conditions. They can quickly convert input data, such as energy consumption, type of materials, or transport distance, into CO₂ emission values, allowing companies to create preliminary environmental reports.

Problem of data inconsistency

Despite significant technological development, a fundamental problem remains unresolved. Data used in calculators is often inconsistent, unverified, and dispersed across different systems. Developers use project documentation, manufacturers provide Environmental Product Declarations (EPD), auditing companies generate energy reports, and BIM models contain information on material and energy use.

The lack of a unified evidence infrastructure means that different tools calculate the same values slightly differently, leading to discrepancies in reports. In practice, this means that banks and financial institutions cannot be certain about the accuracy of the data, and companies reporting ESG face regulatory and financial risk.

Lack of an audit trail

Another significant issue is the lack of an auditable data trail. Emission calculators generate a final result but do not systematically document the data sources, methodology versions, or verification process.

In the case of control or verification by an investor, auditor, or regulatory body, the absence of an evidence trail creates the risk of reports being questioned. Especially in the context of EU regulations on life cycle carbon building or EU taxonomy buildings, any ambiguity in the data can lead to sanctions, rejection of ESG reports, or loss of financing.

Risks for banks and investors

The lack of validation of environmental data and an audit trail poses a direct risk to the financial sector. Banks providing investment loans and funds investing in real estate must be confident that reported emissions are reliable, compliant with applicable standards (e.g., GHG Protocol, ISO 14040, EN 15804), and allow methodological verification.

The risks include:

1. Greenwashing – misclassifying investments as compliant with sustainable finance principles.
2. Regulatory risk – improper ESG reporting can lead to sanctions under CSRD, SFDR, or EPBD.
3. Portfolio risk – improperly verified data affects the Green Asset Ratio (GAR) of a bank or investment fund, potentially resulting in report corrections and loss of credibility with investors.

Validation infrastructure as a new market layer

The response to these challenges is the creation of an environmental data validation infrastructure, which forms a new layer above traditional emission calculators. Such systems do not replace calculators but integrate their functions with an auditable database, providing:

• Verification of data completeness – the system automatically checks that all required information has been provided.
• Methodological compliance control – calculations are consistent with applicable ISO, EN standards and GHG protocols.
• Anomaly detection – deviations from expected values are automatically flagged and require correction.
• Versioning of calculations – every change in data or methodology is archived, creating a complete audit trail.
• Integration with ESG reporting and financing – the system enables the generation of reports acceptable to banks and financial institutions.

With such a validation infrastructure, companies gain confidence that their environmental data is consistent, auditable, and accepted by financial institutions. Investors and banks, in turn, can base lending decisions on verified and standards-compliant data, minimizing regulatory and reputational risks.

Model of evidence systems

In practice, the evidence infrastructure functions as an integration layer between data sources and reporting and financing systems. It consists of several modules:

1. Data validation module – checks completeness, compliance, and consistency of information from project documentation, EPDs, LCA analyses, and BIM models.
2. Versioning module – archives every change in data and methodology, creating an auditable evidence trail.
3. Integration module with banks and funds – allows export of reports in the format required by financial institutions.
4. Reporting module – generates ESG reports compliant with CSRD, EPBD, and EU Taxonomy regulations, which can be verified by external auditors.

This model allows companies to manage environmental data in an automated, consistent, and auditable way. It also creates a new market category – an environmental data evidence infrastructure – which is becoming the standard for financial institutions, developers, and large construction companies.

Although emission calculators are an important tool supporting ESG reporting and emission reduction planning, they do not provide full regulatory certainty or data auditability. Lack of consistency, absence of an evidence trail, and risks for banks make emission calculation tools alone insufficient.

Validation infrastructure, such as that offered by Green Tech Data, creates a new market layer enabling verification, versioning, and auditing of environmental data. Thanks to it, companies can safely report emissions, and investors and banks can base financial decisions on reliable data, minimizing regulatory and reputational risks.