As the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) takes full effect across the EU, Scope 3 emissions have become a central focus in sustainability reporting. For large and listed companies, the requirement to disclose value chain emissions marks a significant step up in climate accountability.

Unlike Scope 1 and 2 emissions—relating to direct operations and purchased energy—Scope 3 encompasses all other indirect emissions across an organisation’s value chain. These include transport, procurement, subcontractors, materials, and waste. It’s where the majority of emissions typically occur—and where the biggest challenges lie.

As sustainability regulations tighten across Europe, the pressure on companies to back up their climate claims has never been greater. Under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), organisations must disclose detailed, verifiable emissions data—including Scope 1, 2, and 3—with the same rigour as financial reporting.

Public infrastructure projects across Europe are entering a new phase—one defined not by voluntary ESG commitments but by legally enforceable carbon reporting requirements. At the centre of this shift is Scope 3 emissions: the indirect emissions generated by supply chains, transport, subcontractors, and material usage.

With the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) now in force and enforcement mechanisms ramping up across EU member states and the UK, organisations relying on estimates or static spreadsheets are on a collision course with regulation.

Fluctuating Waste Figures Raise Red Flags

The Numbers Don’t Add Up 

2012: Ireland generated approximately 9 million tonnes of C&D waste.

2021: The country reported 9 million tonnes of C&D waste again.
2022: This number dropped to 8.3 million tonnes, with soil and stones making up 85% of this waste.

In today’s rapidly evolving sustainability landscape, companies in the construction sector are under increasing pressure to report on their environmental impact. But how much of that reporting is real—and how much is just greenwashing?

The Greenwashing Trap in Construction

The industry has historically relied on vague data sets, estimates, and generalised assumptions to meet sustainability reporting requirements. But as legislation tightens, the practice of overstating environmental credentials without real, verifiable data is becoming a high-risk strategy.

Are Your Reports Built on Guesswork?

Some of the most common greenwashing tactics in the construction sector include:

• Over-reliance on industry averages rather than project-specific emissions tracking.

• Self-certifying sustainability claims without third-party audits.

• Estimating material recycling rates instead of real-time monitoring.

• Lack of transparency in supply chain sustainability practices.

• Avoiding long-term accountability by highlighting minor eco-friendly changes while ignoring core environmental issues.