Sailing Towards a Greener Future: The World’s First Zero-Emission Cruise Ship

In a world increasingly conscious of its carbon footprint, one company is making waves. Hurtigruten, a Norwegian cruise line, is charting a course towards a greener future with plans to launch the world’s first zero-emission cruise ship by 2030.

This ambitious project, aptly named “Sea Zero,” is a beacon of innovation in sustainable maritime travel. This world’s most energy-efficient and first zero-emission cruise ship was first floated in March 2022.

Hurtigruten partnered with 12 industry leaders and research institute SINTEF to bring this dream green tech to a reality.

The Power of Renewable Energy

At the heart of this groundbreaking vessel is its power source. Unlike traditional cruise ships that rely on fossil fuels, Hurtigruten’s new ship will be powered by a 60 MWh battery pack.

This battery will be charged in port with clean energy, reflecting Norway’s commitment to renewable power sources. Renewables account for 98% of Norway’s electricity system.

With a range of 300 to 350 nautical miles per charge, the ship will need to recharge seven or eight times during an 11-day round trip.

But that’s just the start of Hurtigruten zero-emission cruise ship’s innovative design.

Solar Sails: Harnessing the Power of the Sun and Wind

In a novel approach to energy efficiency, the ship will feature three retractable sails. But these aren’t your average sails.

They’re covered in solar panels, effectively turning the ship into a floating solar farm. These sails can adjust to catch the most wind and shrink to pass under bridges.

The three autonomous wing rigs will feature 1,500 square meters (16,000 sqft) of solar panels and a combined wind surface of 750 square meters (8,000 sqft). When fully extended, they will reach a height of 50m (164 ft).

This will generate additional energy to top up the batteries while sailing, reducing the need for charging and further decreasing the ship’s carbon footprint.

The battery levels will be displayed on the external side of the ship for monitoring.

Zero-Emission Cruise Ship: A Design for the Future

The ship’s design is also geared towards sustainability. With 270 cabins for 500 guests and 99 crew, its streamlined shape reduces air resistance, further conserving energy.

An interactive mobile app will allow guests to monitor and minimize their personal water and energy consumption, making them active participants in the ship’s sustainability journey.

This focus on individual responsibility reflects a growing recognition that tackling climate change requires collective action.

Hurtigruten’s CEO, Hedda Felin, is clear about the company’s commitment. They aim to deliver a ship that “surpasses all others in terms of energy efficiency and sustainability” within a few years.

The hope is that this initiative will inspire the entire maritime industry to accelerate its sustainability efforts. With the shipping industry accounting for around 3% of global manmade greenhouse gas emissions, according to the International Maritime Organization, the potential impact of such a shift is significant.

Meanwhile, other cruise liners are also exploring designs for eco-friendly sailing vessels. Take for instance, the case of the transatlantic car carrier Oceanbird and other cargo ships with retractable or folding solid sails. But they still rely on fossil fuel engines to run.

Hurtigruten Norway noted that while its design will still have a backup engine for safety reasons, it will run off green fuels like ammonia or biofuel.

Plus, other advanced technologies will also be on-board such as artificial intelligence maneuvering, contra-rotating propellers, and multiple retractable thrusters. Air lubrication, advanced hull coating, and proactive hull cleaning will further enable Sea Zero to sail efficiently and emission-free.

The Road Ahead: Testing and Production

Over the next two years, Hurtigruten will test the proposed technologies before finalizing the design in 2026. Shipyard production will begin in 2027, with the first vessel sailing Norwegian waters in 2030.

The ultimate goal? Transforming its entire fleet into zero-emission vessels.

Right now, only 0.1% of ships worldwide is using zero-emission technology.

Hurtigruten’s commitment to sustainability is not just about reducing its own carbon emissions. It’s also about demonstrating what’s possible and offering a model that other companies can follow.

Hurtigruten is leading one of the largest environmental upgrades in European maritime history. And it’s not the first time the company has revealed its sustainable shipping solution. It launched the world’s first hybrid battery-supported adventure cruise ship 4 years ago.

Two ships have been upgraded to battery-hybrid power, with a third planned for this fall. The remaining 5 vessels are being equipped with technologies that will reduce CO² emissions by 25% and NOx by 80%.

Hurtigruten’s zero-emission cruise ship is a testament to the potential of renewable energy in transforming industries. It’s a bold vision of a future where sustainability is not just an aspiration.

The post Sailing Towards a Greener Future: The World’s First Zero-Emission Cruise Ship appeared first on Carbon Credits.

American Lithium (AMLI)

AMLI Stock Predictions, Articles, and News

The post American Lithium (AMLI) appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Lithium: The White Gold Powering up the EV Revolution

Lithium, a.k.a. the white gold has never been more in demand today – this soft, silvery metal makes electric vehicle (EV) batteries store more energy and live longer. 

Whatever device you’re using right now in reading this article is most likely powered by a lithium-ion battery. And if you are driving an electric car, this battery powers it up as well. 

Demand for battery-grade lithium will grow sharply in coming years as the EV and energy storage sectors continue to rise. Lithium ion batteries are a vital component in transitioning to a low-carbon global economy.

And with EVs representing 10% of total global car sales, battery makers struggle to source more lithium. 

So, how does lithium actually get from the earth to your EV and how does this battery really work? You’ll know in this article. 

We’ll explain how this metal is extracted and how it works to power electric devices and EVs. Plus, you will also learn important facts and figures about the lithium market, and how bullish it can get. 

But let’s get down to the basics first, starting with the metal element itself.

What is Lithium? 

Lithium (Li) is the lightest of all metals, particularly belonging in the group of elements called alkali metals. It’s highly reactive or always wanting to shed electrons. It also has the lowest density, and can store a lot of energy in a small space, making it ideal for making batteries. 

Dubbed as the ‘white gold’ because of its soft, silvery-white look, lithium has been the key metal used in manufacturing rechargeable batteries not just for EVs but for many other devices like laptops and mobile phones. 

EV carmakers prefer lithium-ion batteries as they’re lightweight and can be quickly recharged.   

As used in batteries and EVs, lithium comes in two major types – lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide.

Lithium carbonate has a wide range of industrial uses. Apart from manufacturing EV batteries, lithium carbonate is also useful in producing flooring treatments, cement densifiers, adhesives and alloys. The compound is even listed by the World Health Organization as an essential medication for treating bipolar disorder.

Lithium carbonate can also be converted to lithium hydroxide, which is preferred in manufacturing higher-performing and longer-lasting EV batteries. 

Some of the world’s biggest producers of the alkali metal make both types of lithium while smaller ones focus on producing only one type. So how do they extract this metal and make it ready to power your electric car?

How Does Lithium Get from the Earth to EVs?

Right now, there are two major ways to extract lithium from the earth:

Conventional lithium brine extraction: salt-flat brines
Ore mining: lithium rock deposits

In the U.S., the substance is mined from watery, salty brines or so-called ‘salars’. 

So far, there’s only one lithium mine in the country, found in Silver Peak in Nevada shown above. But more refinery plants will pop up soon as the demand for the metal soars.

In fact, Tesla broke ground at the site of its new lithium refinery in Texas, the first-of-its-kind in North America. It will cost the leading EV maker about $1 billion to complete. 

The bulk of today’s commercial lithium production is from suppliers that extract lithium from salars. Most of this mining happens high-up in the Andes, in the Lithium Triangle – where Argentina, Chile, and Bolivia meet. 

Mining lithium from brines is pretty straightforward but is a time consuming process. 

Salty water from underground is pumped to the surface and into a series of evaporation ponds. For a period of up to two years or earlier, the water evaporates and the brine changes composition. This also changes the color of the pools into a brighter blue. 

Then a slurry of lime and sodium carbonate is added to the brine to remove impurities and other unwanted elements. When lithium concentration is high enough, the brine is pumped to a recovery facility for filtration of the metal. 

Once the brine dries up, it leaves behind a white powder that needs more purification. After the powder went through its final chemical transformation, it now becomes a solid metal ready for use in batteries. 

In sum, here are the major steps involved during Li brine extraction:

Brine purification to remove impurities
Chemical treatment to get desirable materials and byproducts
Filtration to get rid of the unwanted solids
Another treatment to precipitate lithium
Washing and drying to turn the element into final material

Another way to produce the white gold is through ore or hard rock mining.

Soft Metal from Hard Rocks

There’s more lithium found in hard rocks than there’s in salty brines. But this process needs heavy equipment to dig out the element and is very noisy. 

Kings Mountain in North Carolina has some of the highest-grade lithium deposits in rocks. It has once supplied most of the world’s lithium. But it stopped when it’s cheaper to get lithium from brines in other parts of the country. 

Among the many ores containing lithium, spodumene is mostly used in commercial production. 

After digging out the ore, it’s crushed and roasted at high temperatures (2012°F or 1100°C). It is then cooled off, milled, and roasted again with sulfuric acid at lower temp – 250°C. This is known as acid leaching wherein hydrogen in the acid is replaced with lithium ions to produce lithium. 

According to Tesla, they’ll be using an innovative acid-free lithium processing in their Texas refinery. The process will use less hazardous reagents and produce usable byproducts such as sand and limestone.

Same with brine-based method, lime is used to remove the unwanted magnesium from spodumene. Then soda ash is also used to produce lithium carbonate from the filtered solution. 

Australia accounts for the bulk of the world’s lithium production from ore. Smaller ore mining operations are found in Brazil, Portugal, Africa, and China. 

Industry estimates also show that additional mines will be online in North America and Finland by 2025. This would bring more supply to the growing market for lithium-ion EV battery production. 

Now, how exactly does a lithium EV battery work in powering devices and cars?

How Does a Lithium EV Battery Actually Work?

An electric battery is a compact sandwich of metal sheets, foils, and films stacked together. By placing lithium within this sandwich, it produces electricity. 

Each battery is a densely packed collection of lithium-ion cells, usually in cylinder or pouch shapes. Each and every cell contains a positive electrode called the cathode and a negative electrode known as anode. 

Cathode often contains metal oxides such as nickel, manganese, with cobalt as a common choice. It is where lithium atoms are found. Anode is commonly made of graphite that allows lithium to be inserted or interjected between it. 

In between the cathode and the anode is a liquid solution called electrolyte. It is the one that enables lithium-ion to move between the two electrodes. In other words, the cell basically works by ping-ponging the lithium ions and electrons back and forth. 

There’s also a porous separator in the middle of the sandwich for safety. It keeps the positive and the negative electrodes from coming into direct contact with each other. 

During the charging cycle, the introduced electric current splits the electrons from the lithium atoms in the cathode. The lithium-ions flow to the anode via the electrolyte and get reunited with their electrons. Meanwhile, the electrons move around the outside circuit going to the anode. 

During the discharge cycle, the process simply reverses. Lithium atoms in the anode split from their electrons again as the ions pass through the electrolyte. All the while, the electrons flow through the outside circuit, powering up the car’s motor or other electronic devices.  

Here’s a quick visual explanation of how this process works.

The process can be repeated countless times, explaining why lithium-ion batteries are great for EVs. While the battery’s charging capacity degrades over time, it can last from 10 to 20 years.

These EV batteries can hold a huge amount of energy in tight spaces like a car floor. The electric car can drive for several hundred miles, about 100 to 300 miles or 300km to 500km. That’s long enough to travel on just one charge cycle.

But one more question persists: is lithium production for batteries sustainable enough to fulfill the dream of the EV revolution? Let’s now take a peek at the market and how bright its future looks. 

What You Need to Know About the Lithium Market

According to market predictions, EVs will make up over 50% of new passenger car sales in the US by 2030. 

One estimate says that the potential growth of the battery market would need 90 more facilities the size of the Tesla Gigafactory over the next decade.

Remarkably, the Nobel Prize winner M. Stanley Wittingham, who laid the foundations for the EV batteries used today, once noted that the critical metal will remain important in the long term. He specifically said that, “it will be lithium for the next 10 to 20 years.”

Indeed, the lithium market is rapidly changing. The price of a lithium battery accounts for 40% of an EV’s production costs. No wonder why EV makers like Tesla, Ford and BYD are on the hunt for better, cost-efficient options. 

According to S&P Global, US imports of lithium-ion batteries in the first quarter of 2023 soared by almost 66% from the previous year, reaching a staggering 235,386 metric tons.

What further makes investors bullish on lithium is these four things.

Top 4 Factors Powering Up Lithium Demand 

#1. The drive to reach net zero or carbon-free energy

The International Energy Agency (IEA), composed mostly of rich nations, pledges to be net zero by 2050. Net zero means balancing out the amount of carbon emitted with the same amount of carbon removed or reduced. 

In their bid to reduce carbon emissions, some countries ban the sale of new fossil fuel-powered vehicles. They are formally called ICE – internal combustion engine vehicles. 

For instance, South Korea and Norway will start the earliest ban in 2025. Other countries like the UK, Japan, India, and the Netherlands will do it from 2030. Others like Canada and China will enforce the banning of ICE one more decade later in 2040. 

Interestingly, the U.S. aims that EVs will account for more than 20% of its new vehicle sales by 2030. 

#2. Automakers’ pledge to stop ICE vehicle production

In response to governments banning plans, carmakers are starting to phase out ICE car sales by 2040. These include giant automakers like GM, Mercedes, Ford, BYD, among others. 

To achieve this goal, car companies need to spend a whopping $510+ billion on making EVs and their batteries. By the end of this decade, about ⅓ of that amount will go to making EV batteries and buying their components. 

What’s even more notable is that the German automaker, Volkswagen, commits over $110 billion on EV and battery (about half of the total European car manufacturers pledge). That’s obviously because of the European carmaker’s goal of selling millions of EVs over the next decade. 

#3. EV incentives are out 

To further attract EV buyers, rich nations are giving out more incentives. For instance, EV owners may be exempted to certain taxes and can even earn energy rebates for going green.

Hence, even during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic, EV sales are still going up, which also fuels up lithium demand. Countries with electric vehicle policies in place are the ones with high EV sales that broke records. These nations are China, the UK, US, Germany, Norway, France, and New Zealand.

#4. Governments provide sector stimulus

This is particularly the case in the US when Biden’s administration signed the Inflation Reduction Act. The $1 trillion historical law will support sectors and initiatives that promote a low-carbon economy. Under the Act, electric car makers can be eligible for a tax credit in making EVs, building new facilities, and making EV batteries. 

The law also offers up to $22 billion in loans grants for new and existing EV facilities. It also covers the public transit and government fleet, providing $3+ billion to buy zero-emission vehicles (ZEV). All these numbers mean more raw materials are needed which, of course, particularly include lithium. 

China Takes the Lead 

According to BloombergNEF, global lithium cell production capacity will rise to reach more than 1,760 GWh in 2025. And China still dominates the market with 63% share, followed by Europe (15%) and the US (9%). 

Global Lithium Cell Production, 2020 vs. 2025

China also produces most of the world’s anodes and cathodes which are vital for making lithium-ion batteries. And through 2030, the IEA forecasts that most of the world’s EV battery production capacity will still be from China.

Moreover, Chinese companies make up over half of the EV battery market. The Chinese Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Ltd. (CATL), in particular, is the world’s largest lithium-ion battery manufacturer. They supply lithium-ion batteries to leading EV manufacturers such as Tesla, BMW, Peugeot, Volkswagen, among others. 

According to data from Bloomberg, represented by the Visual Capitalist, here are the top ten EV battery manufacturers in 2022.

While government support is soaring in the US, Europe, and South Korea, China will likely remain the leader in the EV lithium-ion battery’s market. 

Lithium Price: What Comes Next?

To date, the biggest lithium company Albemarle sees demand for the white gold to outrun supply, rising to almost 4 million metric tons in 2030 up from about 2 million metric tons in 2025. The mining giant revealed plans to invest $1.3 billion in a lithium processing facility in South Carolina last March. 

The company’s Silver Peak site in Nevada is currently the only one operating a lithium mine in the US. It supplies around 6,000 tons a year of lithium carbonate, accounting for only 1% of global lithium carbonate supply. 

The US Geological Survey reported that the US has 750,000 tonnes of recoverable lithium in 2021. This will rise as new lithium reserves are discovered and established.

As seen in the chart below, global lithium production grew by 21% in 2022 compared to 2021, exceeding the highest level in 2018. The soft metal’s price surged 1,078% from 2020, before reaching a record high last year. 

Per Tesla and SpaceX CEO, Elon Musk, the average price of lithium per tonne was at a staggering $78,032/tonne in 2022. But now that price has pulled back, it appears the market will outweigh fear of oversupply. 

Yet, as the bulk of today’s lithium production is located in places experiencing high water stress, concerns over supply remain. But if what Musk said is true that there’s no shortage of lithium because it’s found almost everywhere, the biggest challenge would be how to extract and refine it.

If that is all fixed, then it may not be a problem to meet the soaring demand for EV lithium-ion battery.

The post Lithium: The White Gold Powering up the EV Revolution appeared first on Carbon Credits.

EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) Faces Significant Opposition

The World Trade Organization (WTO) recently held the 15th trade policy review meeting for the European Union (EU), particularly addressing its Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) regulation. 

The bloc received over 1,600 pre-written questions from 41 delegations and responded to over 1,300 of them before the meeting started.

At the meeting, WTO members conducted a comprehensive review and assessment of the EU’s trade and investment policy trends and their impact since 2020.

Among the issues raised, the EU’s CBAM attracted great interest from various members, especially opposition from China.

What is The EU’s CBAM?

In a bid to level the playing field for European industries and encourage global carbon emission cuts, the EU recently enforced Carbon Bounder Adjustment Mechanism. It’s a key element of the EU Green Deal, one of the region’s latest policy proposals on carbon pricing.

The EU Council agreed to consider CBAM in March last year. But it was finalized and enacted in May 2023. 

Its goal aligns with the broader target to lower greenhouse gas emissions by 55% by 2030. 

The policy is designed to function in parallel with the EU’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). It will gradually replace the free allocation of EU ETS carbon allowances.

Specifically, CBAM involves applying a carbon price to imports of certain goods to the EU. This price is proportionate to the goods’ “embodied emissions”, referring to the emissions generated during their production.

Under the CBAM, EU importers must buy CBAM certificates in relation to the goods’ embodied emissions. By doing so, it prevents carbon leakage by companies relocating their production outside the EU to evade climate regulation costs.

And just like the current EU allowance, each CBAM certificate equals one tonne of emissions. Essentially, the number of CBAM certificates must be equal to the total embodied emissions of the imported goods.

The carbon border regulation covers certain products in some of the most carbon-intensive sectors, including:

Iron
Steel
Cement
Fertilizers
Aluminum
Electricity
Hydrogen

Eventually, all EU ETS-covered products and emissions from international transportation will fall under the CBAM scope by 2030.

Indeed, the carbon price policy has good intentions. 

But the plan is expected to face significant international backlash, particularly from countries heavily reliant on fossil fuels. To predict which nations are most likely to oppose the CBAM, researchers have developed the CBAM Opposition Index.

CBAM Opposition Index

The Opposition Index is based on these five major factors:

Trade with the EU: High volume of trade with the EU, like the case of China, may lead to CBAM opposition because of the potential cost increases.
Carbon Intensity: Heavy reliance on fossil fuels may lead to opposition as CBAM may reduce competitiveness.
World Trade Organization Disputes: The history of initiating disputes in the WTO may result in CBAM challenges. CBAM must be compatible with WTO rules.
Domestic Public Opinion on Climate Change: If public opinion downplays climate change, governments may oppose measures like the CBAM.
Capacity for Innovation: Countries with strong innovation capacities may be less likely to oppose CBAM due to the potential for less carbon-intensive production.

Overall, the higher a country’s score on these indexes, the greater its potential opposition to the CBAM. The analysis indicates that the following countries are most likely to oppose CBAM:

Iran 100
Ukraine 99
USA 96
United Arab Emirates 94
Egypt 89
China 88
India 86
Kazakhstan 86
Russia 82
Belarus 82

The authors plotted the likelihood of opposing CBAM by country in the map.

CBAM Opposition Index on World Map

They also show the results in the chart below.

CBAM Opposition Index, with all dimensions

China’s Opposition on CBAM

China, in particular, expressed opposition over the carbon pricing measure, believing CBAM departs from international agreed trading principles and rules. The second-largest economy has a bilateral trade volume with the EU worth $847.3 billion in 2022.

China thinks that the CBAM fails to align with the principles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Paris Agreement, and WTO rules. 

China argues that this mechanism will discriminate against imported products and limit market access, especially from developing WTO member nations.

The Chinese nation also pointed to the recent research report of the Africa Climate Foundation. The findings said that CBAM will cause losses of $25 billion to African countries each year. 

In another analysis, it will affect $8 billion worth of Indian exports, particularly the steel and aluminum sector.

However, the world’s largest single trading entity has continued to maintain low tariffs despite the rise of global protectionism. EU’s GDP accounts for about 50% of the world’s. 

The bloc also believes that promoting the green transformation of global society is an urgent challenge. It seeks to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 under the European Green Deal.

With that, CBAM will operate starting October this year with simplified reporting obligations focused on data collection. Its full enforcement will start in January 2026, including financial obligations for importers to buy CBAM certificates. 

The CBAM will be gradually phased in parallel to the phasing out of EU ETS-free allowances over a nine-year period, from 2026 to 2034.

Undoubtedly, the mechanism is one of the ambitious steps by the EU toward fostering a green global economy. Yet, the future of CBAM lies in its acceptance by the global community, especially by major trading partners like China.

The post EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) Faces Significant Opposition appeared first on Carbon Credits.

What Makes Forest Project a High-Quality Carbon Removal?

Many organizations are now turning to carbon removal projects to help achieve their net zero targets but these projects vary a lot, making it hard to know their real impact. A carbon credit company, Pachama, believes that reforestation projects are some of the most proven, high-value carbon removal solutions as long as they meet certain markers.

Pachama’s AI-Powered Removal

Pachama is focusing on saving and expanding forests across the world. The platform uses remote sensing and artificial intelligence (AI) to capture carbon and verify carbon credits. Its AI provides more accurate data that are credible and transparent.

Moreover, Pachama’s technology gives more assurance to buyers of carbon removal credits in reaching their net zero goals. For four years, Pachama has been working with over 150 forest projects around the globe. 

And among its large carbon credit buyers include Salesforce, Microsoft, Airbnb, Netflix, and Shopify.

The company’s latest $55 million Series B funding round brings its total funds to $79 million to date. The funds help speed up Pachama’s platform in bringing integrity and transparency to carbon credit markets.

A Battle Over Which Carbon Removal Works

While it’s very clear that the world needs carbon dioxide removal (CDR) solutions to reach net zero by 2050, not all solutions that remove the harmful gas are viable and beneficial. 

The nascent technological carbon removal industry has been growing rapidly as large companies support them to scale up. Governments are also funding CO2 removal startups. In fact, billions of dollars is sum have been invested in the industry by the US, the UK, and other governments.

But that trend may seem to end so soon. 

Recently, the UN slams technological or engineered removals while favoring natural ways of capturing carbon. The panel said that carbon removals using machines are “unproven” and “risky”.

The high-profile group is tasked to set up the global carbon market. If their decision becomes final, then engineered methods of removing CO2 may be doomed.

Globally, CDR captures 2 billion tonnes of CO2 a year. And over 99.9% of that is done through conventional ways like restoring and expanding carbon-hungry forests. 

Estimates suggest that natural solutions can account for 30% of climate change mitigation efforts by 2030. Plus, forests are home to 80% of all terrestrial biodiversity, while 25% of the world’s population relies on forests for a living. 

But nature-based carbon removal doesn’t come clean as well. It has some big issues to deal with – lack of high-quality supply. 

For instance, several reforestation projects in the U.S. were questioned for their quality. Also, some projects in Brazil’s Amazon were claimed to be not delivering the real carbon reductions they promise. Thus, the corresponding carbon credits they generate are also questionable.

What Makes Pachama Reforestation High-Quality?

This is where Pachama’s technology comes in to address the quality issue. The company believes that a few key characteristics make nature-based solutions better than engineered ones. 

For one, nature is a lot more scalable because it’s faster and easier to plant trees than build giant machines. Also, nature-based removals are more cost-effective. 

High-quality forest projects often cost less than their engineered counterparts. For example, carbon removal credits from direct air capture range from $250-$600 while Pachama suggests $50-$82 for high-quality reforestation projects.

Not to mention their beyond-carbon benefits such as promoting biodiversity and helping local communities. So reforestation is a crucial climate solution, but it’s not as simple as planting trees. It needs to have these four key features to be a quality project.

#1. Trees

Reforestation projects must be composed of native species as non-native plants may not be suitable for the local terrain. In this case, a forest project may be subject to destruction. That’s why Pachama accepts only a project if more than 60% of the trees are native species and none of them are invasive.  

It’s also crucial that the project offers a diverse selection of species, over 5 species, as natural forests have. Gabe Chapin, Project Implementation Lead at Pachama noted that:

“From a carbon perspective, species diversity dramatically increases the resilience of a forest over time. Monocultures can be easily wiped out by insects and diseases, whereas diverse forests can absorb the loss of a single species and regenerate to fill the gaps left.” 

#2. Place

Trees must be planted in the right terrain. That means the reforestation project must be additional. If it’s naturally occurring in the area and its surroundings, it may not be additional.

Pachama assesses additionality through baseline and regional suitability checks. The company will pass on a project if reforestation similar in nature to the planned project activities is observed within a buffer region – 20 km area around the project. 

#3. Reason

People often exploit financial incentives and the carbon credit market is no exception. For instance, project developers that have collected carbon credits from restoring forests may cut down trees for lumber at the end of the crediting period.  

But Pachama has a way of assure that the projects they support are not like that through forest cover checks. They look at the tree cover 10 years before the project start date and ensure that there wasn’t any intentional logging or clearing happening prior to the project. 

The images below show which project qualifies for Pachama – Project B. 

In Project A, the forest cover 10 years before the start date is more than 10% of the project area. But by the start of the project, it’s below 10%, showing there’s deforestation on the eastern part. In Project B, the forest cover is less than 5% and there hasn’t been any forest cover loss in the past 10 years.

#4. People

Finally, one big factor that can determine whether a nature-based carbon removal project lives or dies is the community involved. A fully engaged local community is critical in protecting and monitoring a reforestation project. 

Pachama checks levels of community involvement by various means. These include checking if there are indigenous people impacted by the project, and performing Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). Then the team conducts a literature review (local news, project documents, interviews, etc.) to gauge the project’s engagement with the local communities. 

The post What Makes Forest Project a High-Quality Carbon Removal? appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Carbon Neutrality vs. Net Zero (What’s the Difference?)

Carbon neutrality vs. net zero – are they one and the same? No, they’re not, but both are popular climate pledges made by organizations around the world. 

A new wave of climate commitments from different companies across various sectors is surfacing. This prompts the need to differentiate and clarify what it means to be carbon neutral or net zero. 

These terms are often used interchangeably – using one to really mean the other. So knowing and understanding the major differences between carbon neutral and net zero is crucial in making correct climate pledges

If you’re wanting to know how to achieve carbon neutrality for your business or non-profit, what steps to make or measures to use to get there, this article will guide you out. 

Carbon Neutrality vs. Net Zero: The Key Differences

Before we spell out their differences, let’s first cite their similarities. Net zero and carbon neutrality are a form of climate commitment made by business companies and government organizations.

Each is a noble pledge with the same goal: to balance out the release of harmful gasses into the atmosphere.

What makes them different is the type of gas they target and the scope they cover. 

Carbon neutrality specifically focuses on neutralizing an entity’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Being carbon neutral means your business operations’ emissions are compensated through CO2 reduction or removal initiatives. 

On the other hand, net zero solutions tackle all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, not just CO2. 

Other potent GHG include methane, nitrous oxide, fluorinated gas emissions, among others. But they’re all expressed in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent or CO2e as the common measurement unit in carbon accounting.    

More importantly, achieving carbon neutrality is much easier than reaching net zero. That’s because you can opt to compensate or offset for your carbon footprint without actually reducing CO2 emissions but funding CO2 reduction or removal projects. 

The amount of CO2 the project avoids or removes must be equivalent to the same amount your business operations pollutes. In other words, if your company emits about 80 tonnes of CO2 annually, you have to pay for the same amount of carbon offsets.   

While you can do that to achieve carbon neutrality, it’s not the case with meeting net zero emissions. 

The scope of net zero is much broader and it’s harder to achieve. You need to account for all of the GHGs your company emits. 

The Science Based Targets initiative’s (SBTi) corporate Net Zero Standard formally set the definition of net zero and provided guidelines for companies how to achieve it. Under this standard, carbon offsetting to compensate for GHG emissions should be the last resort. 

Polluters must first reduce their emissions meaningfully through various means. These can include improving energy efficiency of operations or processes, using renewables, electrification, and more. 

In short, net zero goes beyond carbon neutrality; it’s a race calling for more drastic solutions to reduce GHG emissions. To know more about net zero, this full article explains what net zero is all about

Net zero is a movement in addressing global warming while carbon neutrality is a narrower climate solution.

Yet, that doesn’t mean being carbon neutral is less important. In fact, it’s a good starting point for businesses to manage their carbon footprint and help in the fight against climate change. 

So, what does achieving carbon neutrality mean for your company? 

Being carbon neutral doesn’t necessarily mean your operations will result in zero emissions. But it does mean that you choose to join the race to net zero, run your company with a lighter CO2 footprint, and be sustainable. 

Let’s get down to the details.

The First Steps in Achieving Carbon Neutrality 

Carbon neutrality vs. net zero is not always a case of comparison. Because reaching net zero may also involve the use of carbon offsets, as is the case in achieving carbon neutrality. 

But before we dwell on this element of neutralizing your emissions, you must first know the basic steps involved. 

Calculating Your Carbon Emissions 

The first step to being carbon neutral is getting how much CO2 your company emits. That would serve as a baseline. This process is also known as carbon accounting or GHG emissions accounting. 

Public traded companies, especially the big ones, are required to disclose their carbon emissions and report them properly. 

The gold standard in accounting for corporate carbon emissions is the Greenhouse Gas Protocol or GHG Protocol. It’s an international framework that puts numbers on a company’s business activity. 

This means you should identify activities that your firm does that release CO2. The more complex the structure of your company, the more difficult it is to identify the sources of emissions. But most often, doing it involves quantifying emissions based on three scopes – Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3.  

The following diagram shows the common emissions sources under each scope. 

The most common method used to calculate carbon emissions is to apply emission factors to activity data from your company. It means getting the quantity of resource use through receipts, invoices, or bills associated with the activities. 

For instance, calculate the amount of electricity, fuels, goods, and services you paid for. The table below shows common polluting activities and sources of information to turn the data into carbon emissions.

To know more about carbon accounting, here’s a detailed guide for that. While for quantifying CO2-polluting activities, here’s a comprehensive guide to refer to.

Once you have established your CO2 footprint baseline, you can now move on to the next step – laying out a plan on how to neutralize emissions. There are many means to that.

As mentioned earlier, you can opt to shift to renewable energy sources to reduce CO2 emissions. Or you may improve the efficiency of your business processes. 

And if you want to provide potential income to others, you can help fund environmental projects through carbon offset credits. 

Examples of leading companies that have an SBTi-approved carbon neutral pledge are: Apple by 2030, Delta Airlines by 2030, and BP by 2050. 

Though the specific levers or measures these companies adopt vary, one common denominator they share is the use of carbon offsets in achieving their climate targets. 

So, how can you achieve your own carbon neutrality targets through carbon offsets?

How To Achieve Carbon Neutrality 

Using carbon offsets or generally known as carbon credits applies to reaching both carbon neutrality and net zero goals. These credits are traded on carbon markets, each credit representing a tonne of carbon reduced or removed. 

Carbon offsets are traded on voluntary carbon markets that serve an important role in supporting corporate emission reductions efforts. Though the SBTi strongly recommends that polluters should limit reliance on offsetting programs as one of their climate actions, not all emissions can be eliminated immediately or through direct reduction measures. 

This is where carbon markets become part of the solution for unabated carbon emissions. These markets are particularly vital for compensating emissions that companies can’t eliminate even after performing substantial reduction initiatives internally. 

The Role of Carbon Offsets in Achieving Carbon Neutrality (and Net Zero)

The goal of carbon offsetting is to neutralize hard-to-abate emissions by removing CO2 from the atmosphere. The idea behind the concept is that a unit of CO2 released by your entity’s activities can be offset by sequestering an equal amount of carbon from somewhere else.  

Ever since offsetting was launched in carbon markets, more and more corporations are supporting offset projects with high hopes that these initiatives help them abate their footprint. And indeed their big investments continue to propel the market to grow immensely in recent years.

As seen in the chart from Katusa Research, offsets issued reached about 300 million in 2021. And as global efforts to shift to sustainable practices to hit net zero intensify, demand for carbon offset credits will also grow.

Based on industry estimates, annual global demand can go up to 2.0 gigatons of CO2 by 2030 and 13 GtCO2 by 2050. That also means the market size can be between $30 billion and $50 billion by the end the decade, depending on various factors.

Carbon offsetting involves different efforts or initiatives pursuing climate actions. Broadly speaking, there are over a hundred projects that can offset emissions. 

Some are into protecting ecosystems like afforestation of new, or reforestation of degraded land. Others include developing or deploying clean energy technologies or renewables. 

Carbon offset projects vary widely when it comes to cost. But the offset credits they generate serve the same purpose: to neutralize an entity’s carbon footprint. 

Both companies and individuals can use carbon offset programs to look for the right offset project to invest in. These programs offer different carbon offset projects that you can select to support. 

So, how do you know which is the best carbon offset program that can compensate for your business’ carbon footprint? That depends on a couple of things such as the type of project you want to support, the quality of the offset, and so on.

But one important criterion to consider is third-party verification which is crucial to validate that the offsetting project is actually reducing the emissions you need to neutralize. And of course, it pays to select projects that follow high social and environmental integrity standards.

Only after retiring the offsets that your company can claim their environmental impacts. Retirement means removing the credits from the market. They shouldn’t be traded anymore as they must count only once towards carbon neutrality or net zero claims.

If you want to learn more about how carbon offsetting works as well as what are the top programs to consider, go over this complete guide.

In summary, here are the key steps you should keep in mind: 

Understand your organization’s carbon footprint
Calculate current carbon footprint to set a baseline 
Define targets and goals for offsetting and reductions
Verify offsets of emissions
Establish a consistent monitoring, verification, and reporting system

Why Having a Carbon Neutrality Goal is Crucial?

Creating a carbon neutral or net zero goal is a great way to fight climate change on a collective level. 

When a popular brand takes a stance against carbon pollution, it inspires other brands or companies to follow suit. 

Not to mention that it also attracts large investors and celebrities like the case of this first carbon neutral food company. 

Neutral Foods was able to attract the likes of Bill Gates and plenty of celebs such as Mark Cuban, LeBron James, John Legend, among others. The company tracks carbon emissions from dairy farms they’re sourcing milk and buys carbon offset credits to neutralize their footprint. They work with farmers to help them cut their own emissions at the source.

Moreover, pledging carbon net neutrality, more so net zero, is a way to practice responsible carbon accounting regularly. This, in turn, enhances climate action awareness and sustainable responsibility at the corporate level or among company leaders. 

Taking steps for being accountable for carbon emissions is a good starting point for companies to strengthen their sustainable policies. 

Most importantly, offsetting CO2 emissions is one option for companies or sectors that can’t fully decarbonize their operations. 

Ideally, your carbon neutrality goals must be flexible enough to consider new technology that can promote climate actions. They must be measurable, attainable, and sustainable within the timeframe set. This can be validated by getting a carbon neutral certification. 

If possible, going beyond carbon net neutral is even more desirable. That means your company is operating not just at a neutral but climate positive footprint. This goes beyond the carbon neutrality vs. net zero debate.

Being a climate positive entity means removing additional CO2 emissions outside of your firm’s value chain. In other words, you’re championing climate actions that eliminate more carbon than your company operations emit. 

Achieve Carbon Neutrality for Sustainability

The takeaway? Carbon neutrality vs. net zero is similar in a sense that they both tackle the climate crisis, prompting actions that reduce harmful emissions. But they’re not the same in a way that they target different emissions and their scope varies.

To be carbon neutral means balancing out carbon dioxide emissions of your company’s or organization’s operations. To hit net zero emissions requires more massive climate efforts that may involve both reducing and offsetting emissions.

Either way, achieving any of these climate goals often calls for getting through large amounts of emissions data, brainstorming reports with stakeholders, and making some changes in your entire operations. 

Achieving carbon neutrality, in particular, is a good way to chart your climate action and sustainability plan. 

The first step to that is calculating your company’s current carbon emissions. From there, you can build out an effective plan of action geared toward reducing your CO2 footprint. Plus, you can also slash your other greenhouse gas emissions in the process.

The post Carbon Neutrality vs. Net Zero (What’s the Difference?) appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Xpansiv’s Key Carbon Market Achievements for 1st Qtr of 2023

For the first quarter of 2023, Xpansiv achieved significant results, particularly on its carbon market performance. Here are the key achievements.

First up, the dominant carbon credit exchange managed to maintain a staggering share of the global voluntary carbon market (VCM) above 85%

Plus, over 50% of carbon volumes were traded on its suite of CBL Global Emissions Offset or GEO standardized contracts. 

As seen below, Xpansiv’s CME Futures contracts performance keeps on growing, both for its GEO and N-GEO contracts.

The exchange also demonstrated the diversity of its product portfolio, including REC (renewable energy credit), fuel, and water market transactions. 

Overall, among its diverse market volumes, carbon credit exchange (9 million tonnes) and TX services (9.7 million tonnes, including exchange-traded and over-the-counter volumes) are slow while RECs remain steady. 

When it comes to power and registry results for the first three months, a slight drop in carbon credit issuances (almost 57 million tonnes) was compensated by the growth in REC offsets (72 million MWh) issued as shown by the chart. 

Another milestone that Xpansiv reached is the formation of a spin-out of its tech platform called XHub. It comprises digital monitoring, reporting, and verification capabilities of the leading exchange. 

This move led to the creation of Xpansiv’s new subsidiary, Fiutur Information Exchange Inc. The exchange will hold an equity interest in this new company. 

The company had also launched multiple carbon credit products across the globe. These include ACCUs in Australia, International REC (I-RECs) products, and CBL-enabled trading of EcoRegistry offsets.

Lastly, Xpansiv launched the first exchange-traded California Low Carbon Fuel Standard spot contract, further expanding the company’s already expansive network. 

The post Xpansiv’s Key Carbon Market Achievements for 1st Qtr of 2023 appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Which Deserves a Carbon Credit – Nature or Technology?

The United Nations (UN) has drafted a document that will define a new global carbon market for years to come, which seems to favor nature-based solutions over technological or engineered carbon removals.

The UN panel casts doubt on the promise of using machines to remove CO2 and tackle the climate crisis. This is sending shock waves through the rising carbon dioxide removal (CDR) industry, which scientists said is critical to reduce global warming. 

The high-profile group shots a simple yet baffling question: nature vs. technology – which deserves a carbon credit?

Carbon Removals Don’t Serve Paris’ Article 6.4?

The Biden administration has started pumping billions of dollars into carbon removal solutions to help establish the CDR industry in the U.S. Large companies across sectors have also been betting their money in this emerging industry. The likes of Apple, Microsoft, Stripe, and even JPMorgan have invested hundreds of millions in carbon removal credits. 

But the UN panel appears to prefer the natural ways of capturing CO2. The group is questioning the technical and economic viability of startups seeking to remove carbon that’s already in the atmosphere. In their note, the panel wrote:

“Engineering-based removal activities are technologically and economically unproven, especially at scale, and pose unknown environmental and social risks. These activities do not contribute to sustainable development, are not suitable for implementation in the developing countries and do not contribute to reducing the global mitigation costs.”

In short, they believe that CDR solutions are not serving any of the goals of the Article 6.4 provision. 

A Global Carbon Trading System

The Paris Agreement on climate change contains a specific provision calling for the creation of an international carbon trading program. It’s officially referred to as Article 6.4.

The mechanism sets the international carbon trading system wherein companies can offset their emissions by funding a project that reduces or removes CO2. They can then trade the carbon offsets the project generates in voluntary carbon markets and claim their environmental impact. 

The market for carbon offset credits is currently valued at around $2 billion. By 2050, it can grow to about $160 billion to over $600 billion annually. In another market analysis, operating on carbon removal alone will bring the market to $1 trillion by 2037.

The UN group is tasked with setting up the worldwide carbon trading system. So, the position it takes on which approach in capturing CO2 is best can significantly affect the CDR industry’s fate.

Carbon Credits from the Trees or Giant Fans?

Basically, there are two ways to remove carbon from the air and the oceans. One is through carbon-hungry trees and sea grasses. The other is to use carbon removal technologies such as direct air capture (DAC) that employs giant fans in sucking the CO2.

Both natural and technological climate solutions can be effective ways to mitigate the worst effects of global warming. 

But the UN experts find nature-based carbon market solutions such as reforestation more beneficial despite studies showing some projects failing to deliver their carbon reduction promises. Questions on their durability and quality abound. 

On the other hand, the price of carbon credits generated by engineered removals isn’t cheap. For instance, DAC is still expensive and can remove only a few thousand tons of CO2 a year. In particular, carbon removal startup Charm Industrial sells its carbon removal credit at around $600/metric ton

If the group considers natural solutions the true way to remove carbon from the air, it can potentially stop a growing sector of the very market it serves.

So, which solution is worthy of a carbon credit certificate?

The carbon removal industry offers a sensible answer, and it’s not one that’s better than the other. 

A Criteria-Based Approach

The UN-backed IPCC believes that CDR is necessary to achieve the Paris climate goals as shown below. CDR includes bioenergy combined with CCUS (BECCS), natural climate solutions (NCS), and direct air carbon capture with storage (DACCS).

Achieving the Paris Goal with Carbon Removal

But the panel broadly defines the concept of carbon removal as “anthropogenic activities removing CO2 from the atmosphere and durably storing it in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products.” This definition doesn’t clearly differentiate natural from engineered CO2 removal solutions.

Over 100 supporters of the carbon removal industry call for the UN intergovernmental group to opt for a “method-neutral, criteria-based approach” to the issue. 

Ben Rubin from the Carbon Business Council, a nonprofit representing the carbon removal companies that signed a letter responding to the UN’s draft, asserted that each CDR approach is a combination of nature and engineering. He further said that:

“The lines just start blurring so quickly. Which is why I think having a criteria-based approach has the most clarity rather than artificially saying that one thing is nature and one thing is technological. The [CDR] sector is advancing quickly, and there are a number of approaches ready for eligibility under Article 6.4 now, with more expected to reach that stage of maturity in coming years.”

Rubin cited enhanced rock weathering (ERW) and biochar carbon removals that employ both natural and engineered ways to capture CO2. He also invited the UN to connect with CDR projects worldwide where they contribute to local and regional economic development. 

The UN carbon removal group hasn’t set a deadline for establishing the CO2 emissions trading system but will likely make its final decision at the COP28 climate talks by the end of November in Dubai. While there’s no formal framework in place yet, the note seems to point what direction the final decision may take. 

The post Which Deserves a Carbon Credit – Nature or Technology? appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Brazil’s Bill Will Allow Loggers to Earn $24M from Carbon Credits

Brazil’s Congress passed a bill that will make carbon credits available to private companies with forest concessions, serving a first step in regulating the voluntary carbon market in the country.

The new policy is expected to boost revenue by 43% while generating around $24 million per year from carbon credits.

Brazil’s New Carbon Credit Bill

Though Brazil is home to the largest tropical forest in the world, the country is lagging behind others like Cambodia in generating forest carbon credits. The Amazon country has 20 certified REDD+ projects ongoing but only 2 of them in public forests. 

Forest concessions are leasing programs that lease areas of public forest to the private companies. This is to encourage economic activities such as logging that generate income while still keeping the forest standing.

Under the current legislation, only credits from reforestation projects are permitted in forest concession agreements. Allowing the generation of carbon credits in forest concessions may change this scenario.

The new federal law will enable the development of carbon credit projects and other environmental services through forest concession agreements. It prompts the generation of credits resulting from avoided carbon emissions through conservation of natural forests, the so-called REDD+ credits.

In 2006, Brazil’s Public Forest Management Law (Lei de Gestão de Florestas Públicas – LGFP) set up forest concessions and created the Brazilian Forest Service (Serviço Florestal Brasileiro – SFB). 

SFB manages forest concessions at the federal level. It is responsible for selecting the forest areas that can be awarded for concession and for monitoring the contracts. Some states, mainly in the Amazon, also have their own concession policies covering state public forests. 

Among the more than 229 million hectares of federal public forests in Brazil, over 5 million hectares are available for concession in 2022. Currently, only a little over 1 million hectares are under federal concession, all of which are in the Amazon.

Boosting Appeal and Revenue 

The limited success of the forest leasing program in Brazil suggests a little interest from private investors. But the new bill can help boost the appeal of forest concessions by creating more revenue streams. 

According to Jacqueline Ferreira, a manager at Instituto Escolhas, a nonprofit organization that’s party to the bill consultations, the policy will bolster other economic activities involving forestry concessions. 

The environmental nonprofit did a study on the potential for REDD+ carbon credits generation in the Amazon. Their analysis includes 37 forest areas that can be leased in the region. They estimated that the leasing program can generate a total of $24 million each year from carbon credit sales.

Here’s their results as to which state and federal forests have the potential to produce carbon credits. 

Source: Instituto Escolhas website

The study also shows that carbon credits can increase Rondônia’s revenue from sustainable timber management in forest concessions by 43%

Noting this finding, Ferreira said that they use “very conservative math, based on carbon credit prices below the market level.” She added that more rules are necessary to explain how carbon credit generation can happen. But she said that at least 1 year is needed for the first leases to be issued with carbon credits. 

The Biggest Stumbling Block

The bill comes as carbon credits from Amazon REDD+ projects have to deal with doubts due to land ownership issues. 

For instance, the Jari Pará REDD+ Project in Brazil’s Amazon rainforest has come under scrutiny for selling carbon credits from publicly-owned land without state authorization. 

Brazil’s voluntary carbon credit market remains unregulated and the introduced bill may help fix that. 

But another nonprofit working on Amazon’s sustainability pointed out that a broader regulation is needed to address issues on the quality of carbon credit projects in the region. 

Other experts on the matter said that the bill should make Brazil’s forest leasing programs become profitable. But one big hurdle to that is the strong competition from illegal logging rampant in the Amazon rainforest. 

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva must sign or veto the bill within 15 days. Lula’s reign focuses on reversing the impacts of deforestation that his predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, created. 

Last week, Lula revealed that the United Nations selected Brazil to host COP30, the global climate meeting, in the Amazonian city of Belém do Pará in 2025. COP is the yearly UN Climate Change Conference wherein nations discuss and agree on measures to deal with the climate. This year’s COP28 will be in Dubai.

The post Brazil’s Bill Will Allow Loggers to Earn $24M from Carbon Credits appeared first on Carbon Credits.