Bain & Company and Oxy’s 1PointFive announced a new agreement for direct air capture carbon removal credits. Under the deal, Bain & Company will purchase 9,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) credits over three years. The credits will come from direct air capture (DAC) technology developed by 1PointFive at its large STRATOS facility in Texas.

This deal marks an important step in how companies address climate change by removing carbon dioxide (CO₂) directly from the air. It also highlights the increasing importance of advanced technologies that pull CO₂ from the air and store it permanently.

How DAC Removes CO₂ from the Atmosphere

Direct Air Capture is a type of technology that pulls CO₂ out of the atmosphere. A machine uses fans and chemical processes to separate CO₂ from the air. Once CO₂ is removed, it is compressed and stored so that it will not return to the atmosphere. This process is a form of carbon dioxide removal that targets emissions already in the air, rather than preventing new emissions at the source.

The CO₂ captured by DAC can be stored deep underground in rock formations. This process is called geologic sequestration. It is one of the most secure ways to keep CO₂ out of the atmosphere for long periods of time.

Direct air capture differs from other carbon strategies like energy efficiency, renewable energy, or planting trees. DAC can take out carbon that’s already in the air. The technology focuses on removing existing carbon, unlike other methods that reduce future emissions or naturally capture some carbon. This helps address what scientists call “hard-to-abate” emissions.

Inside the Bain & Company Carbon Removal Agreement

Bain & Company has taken a significant step in its climate strategy through a new agreement with 1PointFive. This is Bain’s first purchase of carbon removal credits from direct air capture technology, which shows its increasing commitment to innovative carbon solutions.

Key points of the agreement include:

• Total Credits: 9,000 metric tons of CO₂ to be removed.
• Timeframe: Delivered over three years.
• First DAC Purchase: Bain’s initial engagement with direct air capture technology for carbon removal.
• Climate Strategy Alignment: Supports Bain’s goal to maintain a net-negative carbon impact each year.
• Emissions Offset Visualization: The 9,000 metric tons of CO₂ are equivalent to the emissions from about 10,000 long-haul round-trip flights for one economy-class passenger.

Sam Israelit, Bain’s Chief Sustainability Officer, said:

“We are proud to partner with 1PointFive and add them to our portfolio of engineered carbon removal technologies. Their track record for developing DAC technology coupled with their deep understanding of what it takes to deliver large-scale infrastructure projects uniquely positions them to be a leader in this emerging segment.”

STRATOS and the Scale-Up of Engineered Carbon Removal

1PointFive is a carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS) company. It is a subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum (Oxy). 1PointFive aims to scale direct air capture tech. This will help remove CO₂ from the atmosphere at commercial levels.

The carbon credits that Bain will purchase are produced by the STRATOS facility. This plant is a large DAC installation in Ector County, Texas. Once fully operational, STRATOS is expected to be one of the largest DAC facilities in the world. It is designed to remove up to 500,000 metric tons of CO₂ per year when fully running.

STRATOS is still in a start-up phase. It hasn’t started full commercial operations yet. However, it’s moving through initial testing and ramp-up activities.

The CO₂ captured at the DAC facility will be stored underground through geologic sequestration. This means the carbon will be injected into deep rock formations where it stays permanently.

• RELATED: Occidental and ADNOC’s $500M Texas DAC Deal Marks a Global Milestone in Carbon Removal

Why Carbon Removal Credits Are Gaining Corporate Attention

Carbon removal credits are becoming more important for businesses. Each credit shows that one metric ton of CO₂ has been removed from the air and stored safely. Companies can buy these credits to offset emissions they cannot reduce through normal operations.

Key reasons why carbon removal credits are important for companies:

• Offset emissions: Helps companies balance emissions they cannot cut directly.
• Supports climate goals: Companies can invest in removal technologies while aiming for net-zero or net-negative targets.
• Long-term impact: Credits help firms create lasting, innovative ways to cut atmospheric carbon. Direct air capture is one such technology that grows in use as firms seek durable solutions.

CDR purchases are growing by 750% from 2022 to 2023, and 2024 volumes are exceeding prior years. Analysts project the CDR market could expand from about $3.4 billion in 2024 to $25 billion by 2029.

Durable engineered CDR credits, including DAC, alone may generate over $14 billion by 2035. By 2030, annual demand for durable CDR credits could reach up to 100 million tonnes of CO₂ because of corporate climate targets and emerging policies.

By buying removal credits, companies can manage their carbon footprint while investing in climate technologies that have a real, measurable effect on the atmosphere.

What This Means for Bain & Company’s Climate Goals

For Bain & Company, this agreement aligns with its established climate commitments: net zero across value chains by 2050. Bain has pledged to maintain a net-negative carbon footprint annually.

To achieve this, it aims to reduce emissions and invest in credible carbon removal solutions. The 9,000 metric tons of direct air capture credits will help offset Bain’s leftover operational emissions. These emissions are what remain after all possible reductions.

The company has invested in high-integrity carbon removal credits before. They have supported over 1.1 million metric tons of removal credits from different technologies in the last five years. This indicates Bain’s long-term engagement with carbon removal beyond this new agreement.

By adding DAC-enabled credits from STRATOS, Bain aligns its portfolio with advanced engineered removal methods. These methods are often seen as more durable and reliable in the long run than some natural removal methods.

A Signal for the Carbon Removal Market

The market for carbon removal and carbon credits has grown rapidly. Companies from many industries are purchasing removal credits as part of climate strategies.

In 2023 and 2025, 1PointFive made deals with big companies to buy carbon removal credits. These include deals with major firms such as Amazon and JPMorgan Chase for 250,000 and 50,000 metric tons of CDR credits, respectively. These deals show the rising global interest in DAC-enabled carbon removal.

Carbon removal credits also play a role in voluntary carbon markets. These markets allow companies to buy credits to offset emissions beyond regulatory requirements. As more firms commit to climate goals, demand for high-quality removal credits grows. 

The Future of Direct Air Capture and Carbon Removal Credits

The agreement between 1PointFive and Bain & Company reflects a broader trend in climate action. More businesses are using tech-driven carbon removal in their climate plans. As DAC projects like STRATOS scale up, removal credits may become more widely available and standardized.

As companies build portfolios of carbon removal credits, technologies like DAC may play a larger role in global efforts to limit climate change. Experts believe that removing CO₂ from the atmosphere will be necessary alongside rapid emission cuts to meet climate goals. 

A boom in DAC credit agreements like the 1PointFive and Bain & Company’s deal may reflect this emerging reality. As the world faces the challenge of reducing atmospheric CO₂ levels, partnerships like this show how the private sector can contribute to climate mitigation through innovative technology and long-term strategies.

• READ MORE: Google, Meta, and Others Invest $41M in Carbon Removal Credits

The post Bain & Company Inks First Direct Air Capture Carbon Removal Deal With Oxy’s 1PointFive appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Alphabet, parent company of Google, has overtaken Apple to become the world’s second‑most valuable company. Alphabet’s market value reached about $3.9 trillion, while Apple’s was around $3.85 trillion.

This shift highlights Alphabet’s rapid growth in AI and technology and invites a look at how these two tech giants compare in their efforts on sustainability and climate goals.

Alphabet Ascends, Passing Apple in the Tech Race

Alphabet has surpassed Apple in market value, with nearly $3.9 trillion, while Apple’s was about $3.85 trillion. Nvidia remains the most valuable company, at over $4.5 trillion.

This is the first time Alphabet has held the number‑two spot since 2019. The change shows how fast values can shift among the largest tech companies.

Alphabet’s rise reflects strong investor confidence in its broad technology portfolio. The company has made large strides in AI with tools like its Gemini model and investments in custom hardware.

Apple, by contrast, has seen slower adoption of some AI innovations in its devices, which has affected investor sentiment. The companies’ stocks also show contrasting movements, with Google’s jumping and Apple’s tumbling. 

Market Shake-Up: Why Numbers Matter

Market capitalization is a measure of a company’s value. It equals the total value of all the company’s shares. Being ranked second in market value means Alphabet is now larger than Apple by this measure. This does not necessarily mean Apple is weaker as a company. It simply reflects how investors value each company’s growth prospects today.

Market positions can change over time. A company’s value can rise or fall with earnings, technology breakthroughs, and market trends. In this case, Alphabet’s strong performance in AI and advertising helped it move ahead of Apple in the rankings. But how do the two compare in terms of their sustainability and net-zero efforts? 

Green Ambitions: Big Tech’s Climate Playbook

Beyond market value, both Alphabet and Apple have made public commitments to sustainability. These commitments focus on reducing carbon emissions, using renewable energy, and supporting environmental efforts.

Both big tech companies say they are working to lower their impact on the planet. However, their approaches and progress differ in some ways. Let’s take a closer look at how each company tackles its carbon footprint. 

• RELATED: Big Tech’s Clean Energy Rush to Power the AI Era, With Nuclear Boosting Growth

Apple’s Measurable March to Net-Zero

Apple has set detailed, long‑term goals for reducing its environmental impact. The company aims to become carbon neutral across its entire business, manufacturing supply chain, and product life cycle by 2030. This goal means that Apple plans for its products and operations to have net‑zero greenhouse gas emissions by that year.

The tech giant has already made significant progress toward this goal. It has reduced its global greenhouse gas emissions by more than 60% compared with its 2015 baseline. This reduction reflects energy efficiency, cleaner electricity use, and other improvements in how products are made and shipped.

Apple’s 2030 strategy prioritizes reducing emissions by 75% before using carbon removal projects for the remainder. The company’s global supply chain now has 17.8 gigawatts of renewable electricity in operation.

The renewable energy procured by Apple suppliers helped avoid about 21.8 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions in 2024. In addition to clean energy, many of Apple’s semiconductor and display suppliers have pledged to reduce potent fluorinated greenhouse gases by at least 90 percent by 2030.

Apple also uses more recycled and renewable materials in its products. For example, a recent MacBook Air contains over 55% recycled materials, the highest percentage in any Apple device. Suppliers participating in Apple’s Zero Waste program redirected around 600,000 metric tons of waste from landfills in 2024.

In addition, Apple and its suppliers have saved more than 90 billion gallons of fresh water since launching their Supplier Clean Water Program in 2013. In 2024 alone, they saved 14 billion gallons through reuse and conservation efforts.

All of these efforts support Apple’s 2030 carbon neutrality goal, and they include reducing emissions and investing in cleaner materials, water conservation, and waste reduction.

• SEE MORE: Apple Stock (AAPL) Goes Green: 14,000-Acre California Forest Deal Advances Carbon Neutral Strategy

Alphabet’s Broad-Stroke Climate Push

Alphabet has also made public climate commitments. The company has a goal to reach net‑zero emissions across its operations and value chain by 2030. This goal includes supporting 24/7 carbon‑free energy where feasible. Alphabet reports emissions and tracks progress in its annual Environmental Report.

Alphabet has worked to use more renewable energy and improve energy efficiency at its offices and data centers. It has also taken steps to reduce emissions from transportation and offer tools to help customers measure and cut emissions.

The company reported a 12 % reduction in data center energy emissions in 2024, even though total energy demand has risen due to AI and data center growth. It also procured over 8 GW of clean energy in 2024, the most in any year.

Alphabet replenished about 4.5 billion gallons of water and outlined products that helped others reduce an estimated 26 million metric tons of emissions.

However, Alphabet’s overall emissions have increased in recent years because of rapid AI growth and higher electricity use. Reported ambition‑based emissions rose 11 % in one year and are about 51 % higher than in 2019, driven in part by the energy needs of AI infrastructure.

READ MORE:

• Alphabet, Google’s Parent, Bets $4.75B on Clean Power for AI Data Center Demand
• Google’s $20B Deal with Intersect Power and TPG Rise: How Can It Transform Data Centers?

Apple vs Alphabet: Who Leads on Green?

Both Apple and Alphabet are among the world’s largest technology companies. Both have made public commitments to tackle climate change, use renewable energy, and pursue emission reductions.

A key difference is how detailed and measurable some goals are. Apple has published numerical progress toward several targets, such as its 60 % emission reduction and 17.8 GW of renewable energy in its supply chain. Its 2030 goal is backed by specific steps in product design, materials use, and energy sourcing.

Alphabet, while also committing to net‑zero by 2030, emphasizes broader goals across its operations and value chain. It reports efforts in energy efficiency and green electricity, but has seen rising emissions in recent years, and its public metrics focus more on aspirational goals than on absolute emissions reductions.

Independent research into the environmental impact of big tech suggests that large technology firms together contribute a measurable share of global greenhouse gas emissions. Their data centers and supply chains use large amounts of energy, making renewable energy and efficiency improvements key to future progress.

Why Green Strategy Shapes Tech Giants: Big Tech, Bigger Responsibility

Large tech companies have significant environmental footprints. Their products are used by billions of people, their data centers run around the clock, and their supply chains stretch across many countries. Because of this, their choices on energy use, materials sourcing, and emissions can influence broader trends in corporate sustainability.

Investors, customers, and regulators are increasingly focused on these issues. Companies with clear and transparent climate strategies may attract investors who value long‑term environmental performance.

Workers and consumers may prefer companies that show real progress toward sustainability. These factors can affect a company’s reputation and market value over time.

Alphabet’s rise past Apple in market value marks a major shift in the tech industry. While it now ranks second in global market capitalization behind Nvidia, both Alphabet and Apple remain leading technology players.

As large tech companies grow in size and influence, their climate and sustainability strategies will continue to shape industry standards and affect investor and consumer expectations. Achieving ambitious environmental targets remains complex, but both Alphabet and Apple have signaled a long‑term commitment to reducing their impact on the planet.

• FURTHER READING: Top 4 Clean Tech Companies to Watch in 2026

The post Alphabet (Google) Surpasses Apple in Value: But How About Their Climate Ambitions and Progress? appeared first on Carbon Credits.

The United States announced it would leave several major international climate agreements and scientific organizations. This includes pulling out of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), reducing involvement with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and ending participation in dozens of other international groups. This is one of the biggest changes in U.S. climate diplomacy in recent years.

The decision has drawn strong reactions from governments, scientists, and environmental groups worldwide. Leaders and experts are discussing how this decision will impact global climate cooperation, scientific research, and long-term climate action.

What Was Announced: The Scope of the U.S. Withdrawal

On January 7, 2026, the Trump administration released a memo. It ordered the country to pull out of 66 international organizations. This includes key climate bodies like the UNFCCC and the IPCC.

The UNFCCC is a treaty adopted in 1992 to help countries work together on climate change. Almost every country in the world is part of it. The treaty supports frameworks such as the Paris Agreement.

The IPCC is not a treaty but a UN scientific group that reviews climate research. Countries participate by sending scientists, attending meetings, and helping fund their work. U.S. withdrawal means Washington will no longer take a full part in these activities. The memo reads:

“I (Pres. Trump) have considered the Secretary of State’s report and, after deliberating with my Cabinet, have determined that it is contrary to the interests of the United States to remain a member of, participate in, or otherwise provide support to the organizations listed in section 2 of this memorandum.”

The White House said these organizations “no longer serve American interests.” Officials said the move is part of a plan to focus on national priorities over international agreements. 

Treaties, Science, and Authority: Legal and Procedural Questions

The UNFCCC became effective in 1994 after ratification by countries, including the United States. Under its rules, a country can leave, but the process can take time and may face legal challenges.

The U.S. has already left the Paris Agreement twice in the past decade. Under Executive Order 14162, President Trump’s administration started the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, effective in January 2026.

Because the Paris Agreement is part of the UNFCCC, leaving the UNFCCC also ends U.S. obligations under the Paris Agreement framework.

• READ MORE: Donald Trump Exits Paris Agreement, Again: What It Means for the U.S. and the World?

Some legal experts note that the U.S. Constitution sets rules for international agreements. Critics of the withdrawal say the president may not have full authority to leave a treaty without Congress. This could lead to court cases.

The Roles of the UNFCCC and IPCC

The UNFCCC helps countries work together to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. Countries report greenhouse gas emissions each year. They also meet yearly at the Conference of the Parties (COP) to set climate goals.

The Paris Agreement sets targets to limit global warming. It aims to keep the temperature rise “well below 2°C” above pre-industrial levels and to try to limit it to 1.5°C.

The IPCC produces reports that summarize global climate research. Governments and international organizations use these reports to make policy decisions.

Without formal participation, the U.S. government won’t negotiate climate rules as a full member. It also won’t help shape scientific reports.

Global Response and Reactions

Many governments and climate leaders reacted quickly.

The UN climate chief called the decision a “colossal own goal” that could hurt U.S. economic opportunities and climate preparedness. Further, Jake Schmidt of the Natural Resources Defense Council said in an interview:

“It’s critical the United States is a participant in and is actively trying to reduce climate change — it’s the world’s largest economy, the world’s biggest historical emitter.”

European Union officials said the move is “regrettable” and emphasized that they will continue international climate work, per the European Commissioner for Climate Action Wopke Hoekstra. Meanwhile, Vice-President Teresa Ribera stated:

“The White House does not care about the environment, health, or human suffering.”

Environmental and science groups warned that leaving climate institutions could hurt global cooperation. It may also cut funding for poorer countries.

Critics also note that the U.S. is one of the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters. It is, in fact, the second-biggest emitter in 2024. It produced over 11% of global CO2 emissions, as shown below.

What This Means for Global Climate Action

The U.S. has played an important role in global climate work. As a major economy and emitter, it has helped set global goals, reporting rules, and funding for developing countries.

With the U.S. withdrawing, climate negotiations will continue but without American influence in formal treaty processes. Other countries, like the EU and China, are expected to take leading roles.

For science, the IPCC will continue producing reports, but U.S. government scientists may be less involved. Private researchers and universities can still take part independently.

• RELATED: U.S. EPA’s $2.4 Billion Deregulation Plan: How Ending Greenhouse Gas Reporting Could Affect America’s Climate Future

Money and Markets: Climate Finance at a Crossroads

International climate finance helps countries reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. Funds such as the Green Climate Fund and the Global Environment Facility receive some money from rich countries, like the U.S.

Leaving these bodies could make funding less predictable, at least temporarily. This may affect projects in developing countries, such as clean energy development and climate resilience programs.

In 2024, the United States gave about $11 billion each year in international public climate finance under the former Biden administration. This funding helped developing countries reduce emissions and adapt to climate impacts. It made up around 8% of global climate finance that year. This figure shows a big jump from past years. It grew from about $1.5 billion in 2021 to over $9.5 billion in 2023. By 2024, it reached $11 billion.

However, recent policy changes canceled the U.S. International Climate Finance Plan. The U.S. contributed to both bilateral and multilateral programs. It also pledged $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund. However, future payments may be uncertain due to recent policy changes.

Market analysts also note that climate policies, standards, and carbon markets guide clean energy investments. Without the U.S., these frameworks might change. This could impact global energy markets and corporate strategies.

What Happens Next?

Withdrawal from treaties like the UNFCCC takes time and may face legal challenges in U.S. courts or Congress. Some experts expect court cases over whether the president can leave treaties ratified by the Senate alone.

Meanwhile, countries will continue climate talks and prepare for future COP meetings. U.S. states, cities, and private businesses may also increase climate cooperation outside the treaty system. However, the U.S. government’s role in guiding global science and policy through the IPCC and UNFCCC will be smaller during the withdrawal.

Trump’s decision to leave the UNFCCC, reduce engagement with the IPCC, and exit other international bodies is a major change in global climate policy. Even though the U.S. remains a major economy and emitter, its role in shaping global climate agreements and scientific reports has been greatly reduced.

The full effects of these moves will unfold over the coming years as climate negotiations continue and countries adjust to a new international landscape.

• READ MORE: U.S. to Cancel $13 Billion in Green Energy Funds: Implications for Climate Policy and Industry

The post What Happens Next as Trump Withdraws U.S. From Major Global Climate Agreements? appeared first on Carbon Credits.