A more dubious shade of green

Thanks to biomass, heat and power generating plants can transform themselves from being polluters into manufacturers of environmentally-friendly energy. At least that is the theory. But what is actually happening in practice? The article revealed that instead of burning biomass, a number of heat and power generating plants have been exploiting legal loopholes by adding pure wood to their furnaces. This is practiced by 55 heat and power generating plants, where 80 pct of the burnt biomass is actually clean wood.
It would be interesting to know how the recipients of such 'green' energy feel about this. Increasingly often these include developers striving to obtain so-called green certificates. Unfortunately it is difficult to tell what they think, as they seem to be keeping rather tight-lipped on the issue. I have yet to hear any reaction to the revelations published in "Przekrój". This is actually rather a convenient attitude to take. Green solutions are being introduced more and more extensively by large operators. And if they have already bought this 'clean' energy - with the certification confirming this - then why bother worrying about where it really comes from? It is more convenient not to say anything.
Unfortunately, most of the people I talked to from our sector were unaware that the so-called green energy produced in Poland has turned out not to be so green after all. However, I admit that some do know that not every energy supplier plays fair and that burning clean wood is not the only way to produce 'green energy' (the client pays a much higher price for clean energy, so it is more profitable to produce it). One enterprising individual was recently caught after having the brainwave of using traditional electricity to power wind turbines. In this and other dubious ways, 'creative entrepreneurs' can use traditional electricity to create ecological energy and make a profit, as they receive far more than they spend on powering the turbines.
It seems that wherever there is significant demand (in this case stimulated by environmental legislation), there are also schemes to satisfy it in ways that are not entirely legal. But how should developers focusing on so-called green construction behave? Should they act like policemen? I put this question to representatives of Skanska - a developer which strongly emphasises its environmental credentials. Skanska admits that it is not easy to buy green energy in Poland, so in order to avoid being caught out the company audits its energy suppliers. This somewhat resembles a game of cops and robbers. But is it effective? We have to believe it is - what more can we do? Buy a heat and power generating plant?
Skanska has actually concluded that this is not such a bad idea. The company has gone on record as saying that it has been exploring the possibility of buying a wind farm for the last few months. "Once we have done this we can ensure that the energy powering our buildings really will be green," Skanska tells us. Of course, somebody might claim that what this is really all about is cost optimisation. So what? I cannot see anything wrong with that. If developers want to be green, there should at least be something in it for the environment. They should check where 'green' energy comes from, push for a change in the regulations, and put pressure on suppliers to prove they are not selling a harmful product. Otherwise, ecological certificates will just become meaningless pieces of paper only fit for converting into biomass.