Recycling helps recover valuable materials, cut waste, and support clean energy. With stricter sustainability rules, governments are pushing for greener solutions. EV companies are also focusing on battery recycling. This helps lower supply chain emissions and cut their carbon footprint.

Thus, battery recycling has become essential for a greener future. We have studied the Lithium-ion battery recycling report by the Chemical Abstracts Service aka CAS (a division of the American Chemical Society) and Deloitte. It provides insights into key growth drivers, emissions impact, and the current and future outlook of the market. Let’s dive in!

What’s Driving the EV Battery Recycling Market?

EV batteries have valuable metals, such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel. However, getting rid of them is difficult and this is where recycling comes in use. Thus, the rising need for these energy metals is the key driver for the EV battery recycling market.

This approach reduces waste, conserves resources, and supports a more sustainable supply chain. As demand for EVs grows, so does the need for efficient battery recycling to lessen reliance on mining.

Notably, strict environmental rules are also driving manufacturers to adopt greener practices. Advancements in recycling technology are helping recover more metal. This makes the process cheaper and better for businesses. On a global scale, many countries are promoting a circular economy.

                        Supply and demand gap for critical minerals

Asia-Pacific Leads in Battery Recycling

In 2023, Asia-Pacific led the battery recycling market. High EV adoption in China, Japan, and South Korea increased demand for recycling. The region produces many end-of-life batteries as a major EV and battery manufacturer.

Strong government support, incentives, and environmental awareness are driving growth. Investments in recycling technology and infrastructure further strengthen the region’s lead. This is evident from more patents than research papers.

Geographical distribution of publications in the field of lithium-ion battery (LIB) recycling

The Top Player: Brunp Recycling Technology

China’s Brunp Recycling Technology, a subsidiary of CATL, is a top player in battery recycling. The company focuses on four major areas of battery material development:

• Ultra-High Nickel: Increases nickel content while reducing cobalt to boost battery capacity.

• High Voltage: Raises the charging voltage limit while maintaining safety and performance.

• Intelligent Management: Uses digital tools and smart systems for efficient operations.

• Emerging Materials: Develop new materials for various applications, continuously improving energy density.

These advancements help improve battery performance, efficiency, and sustainability. Notably, Japan’s Sumitomo Metal Mining follows as another key company in this field.

• READ MORE: Top 5 Lithium Producers Powering the Battery Market in 2025 

Global Regulations Powering Battery Recycling

Governments are tightening laws to improve battery recycling. Policies like Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) require manufacturers to handle waste management. EPR makes producers responsible for collecting and recycling their lithium-ion batteries. This encourages sustainable manufacturing and proper disposal.

New rules in the EU, U.S., and Asia are shaping the industry:

China’s Leadership

China introduced key recycling laws as early as 2016. In 2018, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) set strict rules for battery handling, recycling traceability, and technical standards. The 2020 Solid Waste Pollution Law stopped waste imports and boosted recycling. Also, the Circular Economy Development Plan (2021-2025) prioritizes battery reuse. In 2024, MIIT suggested new standards for recycling waste batteries. They are now being reviewed.

EU Regulations

In 2023, the EU launched New Battery Regulations. These rules address the whole lifecycle of batteries, from design to end-of-life. By 2027, manufacturers must recover 50% of lithium from old batteries and 80% by 2031. Companies need to track their batteries’ carbon footprint and meet recycling content targets by 2025. Additionally, by 2027, a digital battery passport will improve transparency and traceability.

U.S. Policies

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates lithium-ion battery (LIB) recycling under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). In 2023, the U.S. issued federal guidelines clarifying how hazardous waste laws apply to LIBs. The EPA plans to introduce a dedicated LIB recycling policy by mid-2025.

India and South Korea are working on policies to support LIB recycling.

Making EVs Greener: Decarbonizing the Battery Supply Chains

The report has highlighted the most critical information on EVs. EVs have no tailpipe emissions. However, making their batteries does create a lot of carbon emissions.

• Lithium-ion battery production accounts for 40-60% of an EV’s total emissions. 

Top automakers are now focusing on sustainable sourcing and recycling. As EV demand rises, battery recycling will be crucial for cutting carbon footprints and securing raw materials. And this is why regulators and investors are also pushing for cleaner supply chains.

Slashing Emissions and Saving Resources

Recycling lithium-ion batteries is much better for the environment than mining new metals. A study from Stanford University, published in Nature Communications, found that recycling creates less than half the emissions of traditional mining. It also uses only one-fourth of the water and energy.

The benefits are even bigger when recycling scrap from manufacturing. Scrap-based recycling created just 19% of the emissions, used 12% of the water, and needed only 11% of the energy compared to mining. Using less energy also means fewer air pollutants. So, battery recycling is a cleaner and smarter choice.

• The study concluded that recycling reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 58–81% and cuts water use by 72–88%.

The CAS report also published a 2023 study by Fraunhofer IWKS that evaluated the life-cycle environmental impact of three major battery recycling methods- Pyrometallurgy, Hydrometallurgy, and Direct recycling. The two significant deductions are:

• Recycling 1 kg of lithium batteries can reduce carbon emissions by 2.7 to 4.6 kg CO₂ equivalent.
• Direct recycling is the most effective method for the environment.

      Life-cycle environmental impacts of different recycling routes of LIBs

Making Battery Recycling Profitable

Battery recycling has three phases: high-cost investment, break-even, and strong profits. Initially, recyclers invest heavily to set up facilities and meet regulations.

They can start making money by cutting costs, recovering valuable metals, and reducing waste. Costs depend on transport, labor, battery design, and recycling methods. Recyclers can stay profitable by automating tasks, lowering transport costs, and using advanced technology.

Batteries with valuable metals like cobalt and copper, such as NMC and NCA, offer quick returns. In contrast, LFP batteries provide better long-term benefits when reused before recycling.

Choosing the right recycling method—pyrometallurgy, hydrometallurgy, or direct recycling—can boost efficiency. Studies show recycling offers environmental benefits worth $3 to $11 per kWh. However, this also depends on carbon pricing and market trends.

                              Net recycling profit comparison

Subsequently, recyclers should focus on improving their processes. They also need to form partnerships to strengthen their business.

The Future of Battery Recycling: Turning Challenges into Opportunities

Battery recycling faces hurdles like high costs, complex processes, and inefficient collection. Various battery designs and hazardous materials add further challenges. New technology, digital tools, and teamwork in the industry are making recycling cheaper and easier.

Polaris Market Research reports the EV battery recycling market was $8.89 billion in 2023. It is set to grow from $11.09 billion in 2024 to $65.71 billion by 2032, with a 24.9% annual growth rate.

Digital Tools Improve Efficiency

Traditional recycling relies on slow, expensive, and unsafe manual processes. Digital tools are transforming this by tracking materials, automating sorting, and improving disassembly. These innovations enhance efficiency and help companies comply with strict regulations, reducing legal risks.

For example, digital twins optimize processes, blockchain ensures traceability and cloud platforms enable real-time tracking. Umicore uses AI and cloud solutions. CATL, on the other hand, uses blockchain to track materials.

Similarly, companies like Redwood Materials, BYD, and Toyota use AI to predict optimal recycling timelines.

The Power of Industry Collaboration

The disrupted supply chain remains a major challenge. In China, only 25% of retired EV batteries go through formal recycling channels. Companies are making batteries easier to recycle. They are also working together in the supply chain to solve this issue.

In October 2023, Stellantis and Orano teamed up to recycle EV batteries and factory scrap in Europe and North America. Such collaborations are driving a more sustainable and scalable battery recycling industry.

Similarly, last December Li-Cycle Holdings Corp. resumed its collaboration with Glencore International AG, (a subsidiary of Glencore plc). Both companies will evaluate the feasibility of building a new Hub facility in Portovesme, Italy that could potentially produce critical battery materials such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt from recycled battery content.

• FURTHER READING: Lithium’s Essential Role in EV Battery Chemistry and Global Supply Dynamics 

The post Are EVs Truly Green? How Battery Recycling is Powering a Cleaner Future appeared first on Carbon Credits.

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to ramp up U.S. production of critical minerals. The order uses emergency powers under the Defense Production Act to increase financing, streamline permits, and encourage domestic mining and processing of minerals vital for national security and economic growth. 

The goal is to cut down on dependence on foreign suppliers, especially China. China leads the global supply chain for key minerals. The order has raised worries about its effect on the environment and how it matches climate goals.

What Are The Key Aspects of the Executive Order?

• Defense Production Act for Critical Minerals

The executive order authorizes the use of the Defense Production Act (DPA) to provide financial support to U.S. mining and mineral processing projects. This includes loans and investments from the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) and the Department of Defense. The goal is to speed up the production of key minerals. This includes lithium, cobalt, nickel, rare earth elements, and maybe coal.

• Faster Permitting for Mining Projects

Trump’s order directs federal agencies to speed up the permitting process for new mining and processing facilities. The Department of the Interior has been tasked with prioritizing critical mineral production on federal lands. The administration wants to cut red tape. This will help private companies invest more in domestic mineral production.

• Expanding the Scope of Critical Minerals

The order lets the National Energy Dominance Council add uranium, copper, potash, and gold to the list of critical minerals. Additionally, there is speculation that coal could be included. This can potentially lead to increased production of fossil fuels under the guise of national security.

Why Is the U.S. Expanding Mineral Production?

The U.S. gets 70% of its rare earth minerals from China. This makes the supply chain weak for important industries like defense, electronics, and renewable energy. China has also imposed export controls on key materials like gallium and germanium. This further increases the urgency for the U.S. to secure its own resources.

Critical minerals are key for military use, particularly antimony. They support missile systems, fighter jets, and advanced communications technology. By expanding domestic production, the U.S. aims to strengthen its defense capabilities and reduce the risk of supply chain disruptions.

Lastly, lithium, cobalt, and nickel are crucial for battery storage, electric vehicles (EVs), and renewable energy infrastructure. Boosting local production of these materials can speed up the clean energy shift and cut down on fossil fuel use.

Global Market Trends and U.S. Critical Mineral Production and Consumption

The global demand for critical minerals has been on the rise, driven by the transition to clean energy technologies. In 2023, lithium demand surged by 30%, while nickel, cobalt, graphite, and rare earth elements also saw significant increases. 

Investment in critical mineral mining grew by 10% in 2023; however, this was a slowdown compared to the 30% growth observed in 2022. This is partly due to declining prices putting pressure on producers.

The United States has significant mineral resources but remains heavily dependent on imports for many critical minerals. According to the U.S. Geological Survey’s 2024 Mineral Commodity Summaries, the U.S. was 100% import-dependent for 15 nonfuel mineral commodities and over 50% import-dependent for 49 such commodities. 

For instance, aluminum consumption in 2024 reached 4.3 million metric tons, underscoring the nation’s reliance on external sources. For other minerals, refer to the following table for US 2023 consumption and production per USGS report. 

Trump’s recent executive order targets several critical minerals, including:​

• Rare Earth Elements (REEs): Essential for electronics, defense systems, and renewable energy technologies.
• Lithium: Vital for battery production in electric vehicles and energy storage systems.​
• Nickel: Used in stainless steel and battery manufacturing.​
• Cobalt: Important for battery electrodes.
• Graphite: Used in batteries and fuel cells.

Economic, Environmental, and Climate Implications

The EO has a significant impact on mining companies. Shares of U.S. mining companies surged following the announcement. 

MP Materials, a rare earth miner, saw its stock rise by 4.6%, while coal producer Peabody Energy gained more than 2%. However, Australian and Chinese mining companies experienced stock declines, reflecting concerns over reduced demand for imported minerals. 

The decision also has the potential to spur international trade conflicts. China and other major mineral-exporting nations may view this policy shift as a direct threat to their economic interests. This could lead to trade tensions and potential retaliatory measures, further complicating global supply chains.

• RELATED: US-China Trade War: Can the US Beat China’s Critical Minerals Grip?

Environmental Concerns and Climate Impacts

Mining and processing critical minerals contribute about 8% of global carbon emissions. Copper production emits 4.6 tonnes of CO₂ per tonne, while nickel ranges between 12 and 78 tonnes per tonne. However, these emissions do not negate clean energy benefits—EVs still produce half the lifecycle emissions of gasoline cars. Using low-carbon electricity can further lower these emissions. ​

Coal’s potential inclusion as a critical mineral raises concerns. Fossil fuels from federal lands accounted for nearly 25% of U.S. CO₂ emissions over a decade. Expanding mining on public lands risks habitat destruction and toxic contamination, with 22,500 abandoned mine sites already leaking harmful chemicals.

Securing critical minerals is key for national security and clean energy. Yet, experts also stress the need for sustainable practices. This includes recycling, improved mining tech, and carbon-cutting ideas. For example, using CO₂ to weaken rocks could make mining carbon-negative.

The Biden administration used the Defense Production Act before. This was to boost the production of battery materials in the U.S. The goal is to cut emissions and support renewable energy. In contrast, Trump’s order may list coal and other fossil fuels as critical minerals. This could slow down efforts for net-zero emissions and hurt global climate leadership. 

Expanding fossil fuel extraction on federal lands may worsen climate change, undermining progress toward emission reduction targets. ​

Conclusion: A Double-Edged Sword?

Trump’s executive order to boost critical mineral production is a significant policy shift that aims to reduce dependence on foreign sources, enhance national security, and support key industries. However, the inclusion of coal and the potential rollback of environmental safeguards raises concerns about its impact on climate goals.

As the U.S. moves forward with this strategy, it must find a balance between securing essential minerals and ensuring sustainable, environmentally responsible development. The outcome of this policy will shape not only the country’s economic future but also its role in global efforts to combat climate change.

• MUST READ: Trump’s EPA Cancels $20 Billion in Climate Funding: What It Means for Clean Energy

The post Donald Trump Uses Emergency Powers to Boost U.S. Critical Mineral (and Coal?) Production appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Tesla has established itself as a leader in the fight against climate change. It often emphasizes its role in cutting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by promoting electric vehicles (EVs).

In 2023, the company claimed its fleet helped avoid 20 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions. A recent study by Greenly, a firm specializing in carbon footprint measurement and management, however, questions this figure. They estimate the real avoided emissions at 10.2 to 14.4 million metric tons, which is 28-49% lower than Tesla’s claims.

What’s the basis for Greenly’s claim? Let’s find out, and how this may impact Tesla’s position and the entire industry.

Breaking Down Tesla’s Avoided Emissions Calculations

Tesla calculates avoided emissions by comparing its EV fleet to a similar fleet of ICE (internal combustion engine) vehicles. The process follows these steps:

1. Fleet Size Calculation. Using sales data, Tesla estimates the number of active vehicles in its fleet. By the end of 2023, Greenly estimated this number to be around 5.35 million Teslas worldwide.
2. ICE Emissions Comparison. Tesla assumes that ICE vehicles emit an average of 445 grams of CO2e per mile in the U.S. and 459 grams in Europe, based on data from Consumer Reports.
3. EV Emissions Calculation. Tesla estimates U.S. emissions from electricity generation at 116 gCO2e/mile. But Greenly, using IEA data, finds a much higher figure of 206 gCO2e/mile.
4. Manufacturing Emissions. Tesla estimates that making an ICE vehicle releases 10 metric tons of CO2e. In contrast, an EV generates 20 metric tons, mainly because of battery production.

Tesla found that in 2023, swapping ICE vehicles for its EVs cut emissions by 20 million metric tons. Now, let’s uncover Greenly’s calculations.

Greenly’s Findings and Discrepancies: A Reality Check for Tesla?

Greenly reanalyzed Tesla’s approach using independent emissions factors and found significant discrepancies. These include the following analysis findings:

Overestimation of ICE Vehicle Emissions. Tesla’s emissions factor for ICE vehicles is 445-459 gCO2e/mile. This is much higher than the UK standard for large diesel cars, which is 415 gCO2e/mile. This difference suggests that Tesla might have overstated the emissions avoided.

Underestimation of Grid Emissions. Tesla uses a lower emissions factor for electricity at 116 gCO2e/mile. In contrast, the IEA calculates it at 206 gCO2e/mile. This suggests Tesla might have underestimated the emissions from charging its EVs.

Mileage Assumptions: Tesla assumes its EVs travel 200,000 miles over 17 years. If this assumption were lowered to 150,000 miles, Greenly found that avoided emissions would drop significantly to 6.9 million metric tons.

• After adjustments, Greenly estimated Tesla’s real avoided emissions at 10.2-14.4 million metric tons. This is much lower than Tesla’s reported 20 million metric tons.

What This Means for the EV Industry’s Climate Goals

EVs are widely recognized as key to reducing transportation-related GHG emissions. In 2023, the sector was the world’s second-largest source of GHG emissions with 8.24 GtCO₂. Road vehicles are the top polluters.

By 2023, the growing use of EVs helped cut CO₂ emissions from new vehicles by 11%, bringing the average down to 319 grams per mile—the lowest ever recorded. The chart below shows the difference in GHG emissions for an EV and gas-powered car.

However, accurate carbon emissions accounting is crucial. It helps maintain credibility and shows the industry’s real environmental impact.

Tesla’s potentially inflated claims could have several consequences for the broader EV market. 

Regulatory Scrutiny:

Exaggerating avoided emissions may result in more regulatory scrutiny of EV makers’ climate claims. If Tesla’s reports are misleading, policymakers might require stricter checks on EV carbon reduction claims.

Investor and Consumer Trust:

The EV industry has gained from high public and investor trust. This confidence comes from the promise of major emission cuts. Greenly’s findings might hurt this trust. This could make investors wary of supporting EV companies. It can also lead consumers to doubt the environmental benefits of leaving ICE vehicles behind.

Competitive Pressures:

Tesla’s competitors, including BYD, Rivian, and traditional automakers like Ford and BMW, are also marketing their EVs as low-emission alternatives. If a big player is caught exaggerating claims, it could push all EV makers to get third-party checks on their environmental impact.

• RELATED: BYD’s 5-Minute EV Charging: A New Era for Electric Cars or Just Hype?

The Billion-Dollar Carbon Credit Question

One of Tesla’s key revenue streams has been the sale of carbon credits to other automakers that do not meet emissions standards. Since Tesla produces only electric vehicles, it accumulates large amounts of regulatory credits.

The EV maker then sells these credits to companies still producing gasoline-powered cars. Tesla’s carbon credit sales have earned billions, with over $10.4 billion since 2017. Last year’s revenue was record high. This profit helps keep the company strong, especially in years with lower vehicle margins.

If Tesla’s avoided emissions claims are found to be inflated, it could undermine the credibility of its carbon credit sales. Regulatory bodies may set stricter rules for issuing and verifying carbon credits. This change could make it tougher for Tesla to profit from this market.

Also, automakers buying these credits might want more transparency. This helps them confirm they meet rules without depending on possibly inflated numbers. Any disruptions in this market could significantly impact Tesla’s bottom line.

Tesla’s Reputation at Stake: Environmental Claims Under Fire

Greenly’s findings come at a bad time for Tesla. The company already faces reputational issues because of CEO Elon Musk’s political activities. Plus, its stock price has dropped sharply. Musk’s controversial comments and changing political views have turned off some customers and investors. This has hurt Tesla’s brand image.

Moreover, Tesla’s stock has struggled in recent months, with share prices down over 25% year-to-date. The combination of financial struggles, leadership controversies, and now questions about its environmental impact could further erode confidence in Tesla’s long-term growth potential.

Moreover, governments worldwide are increasing scrutiny of corporate sustainability claims. If Tesla overstated its emissions reductions, it might face legal issues. This could include fines or losing access to incentive programs.

The Need for Transparency in Carbon Accounting

Tesla’s differences in avoided emissions estimates show a bigger problem: the EV industry needs independent and standardized carbon accounting. Without clear, verifiable methods for calculating avoided emissions, companies could mislead stakeholders about their true climate impact.

Greenly’s report says manufacturers should use 3rd-party audits for emissions claims. This is like how financial audits work to help keep their credibility. More rigorous carbon accounting would help:

• Ensure that avoided emissions are not exaggerated to attract investment or government incentives.
• Provide policymakers with reliable data to shape EV-related regulations.
• Prevent backlash similar to the Dieselgate scandal, where automakers manipulated emissions data.

Tesla plays a big role in boosting EV adoption and cutting emissions. However, it’s important to check how accurate its environmental claims are. The Greenly report raises concerns about transparency in EV industry reporting.

As governments and consumers push for more rigorous climate accountability, automakers must ensure their emissions calculations are accurate and independently verified.

• READ MORE: Carbon Markets in 2025: A New Era of Accountability, Quality, and Transparency

The post Tesla’s Avoided Emissions Are Up to 49% Overstated, A Study Claims appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Westinghouse and Urenco Team Up to Fuel the eVinci Microreactor

Westinghouse recently announced partnering with Urenco to power up their blueprint eVinci microreactor. Urenco will supply high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) for five years to help the reactor’s rollout. This partnership aims to provide clean and reliable energy around the clock, anywhere.

Laurent Odeh, Chief Commercial Officer for Urenco reaffirmed the company’s commitment to supplying enriched uranium for both current and future nuclear reactors. He stated that they are proud to sign an agreement-in-principle with Westinghouse to support the eVinci microreactor.

Tarik Choho, President of Nuclear Fuel at Westinghouse noted,

“This is a key step in building our capabilities to supply advanced nuclear fuels. Urenco is a valued supplier of enriched uranium. They will play an important role in providing nuclear fuel for our eVinci microreactor, which is a safe, simple and economical clean-energy solution for a range of industries like remote mining, data centers, and off-grid communities.”

The Small and Mighty eVinci Microreactor:

The eVinci microreactor is a game-changer for clean energy. It can power data centers, mining sites, oil and gas operations, remote communities, industrial hubs, universities, and military bases. In the future, it could even be used for space missions, including powering operations on the Moon.

Furthermore, it’s different from traditional nuclear plants. It comes fully built in a factory. Then, it is packed in a container for easy shipping and setup. It operates just like a battery with minimal moving parts.

• eVinci can produce 5MWe with a 15MWth core design. The reactor core can run for eight or more full-power years 24/7 before refueling.

Net Zero Goals and Safety Standards

The eVinci microreactor provides carbon-free energy. It doesn’t need water cooling, which makes it an eco-friendly power option. This partnership shows how the companies are helping countries meet their net-zero targets.

• Each reactor cuts up to 55,000 tons of CO2 each year. This helps lower carbon footprints significantly.

After use, spent fuel is sent back to the manufacturer or stored in deep geological repositories (DGR) for safe, long-term storage. Additionally, Westinghouse ensures high safety standards even in unexpected scenarios. This is due to advanced features that lower failure risks. They make it a reliable and eco-friendly energy source.

This small, easy-to-use reactor could change the game for industries and communities. It provides reliable, carbon-free power anywhere on Earth or even beyond.

• READ MORE: Westinghouse and CORE POWER Partner to Revolutionize Floating Nuclear Power Plants with eVinci™ Microreactors

Westinghouse and Shawflex Partner to Deploy Advanced Reactors

Westinghouse Electric Company has partnered with Shawflex for new nuclear power projects in Canada and beyond. Shawflex will supply cables, connectors, and assemblies for Westinghouse’s AP1000®, AP300™, and eVinci™ reactors under this agreement.

Shawflex, located in Rexdale, Ontario, has supplied electrical wire and cable for over 40 years. The company specializes in designing complex cable systems for the nuclear industry. Shawflex is moving to a bigger facility in Vaughan, Ontario. This change will help them meet rising demand. It will also expand production and improve support for nuclear projects.

Jarrod Shugg, Vice President and General Manager at Shawflex, said,

“Shawflex’s nuclear wire, cable, and assembly solutions are a great fit for Westinghouse’s advanced nuclear power projects. We are ready to leverage our high-quality Canadian manufacturing and decades of nuclear experience in support of Westinghouse’s vision to expand the power of clean energy around the globe.”

The AP1000: More Power, More Prosperity

Westinghouse, owned by Brookfield and Cameco, has the only fully developed Generation III+ reactor in Canada and it’s ready for use. The AP1000 reactor can power over 750,000 homes with one unit. A four-unit plant could supply electricity to at least three million homes.

Building a four-unit AP1000 plant would greatly boost Canada’s economy. It would add $28.7 billion CAD to the GDP during construction. Once up and running, the plant would generate CAD 8.1 billion each year. It would also create 12,000 full-time, high-quality jobs.

Canadian firms will have a chance to work on more than 30 AP1000 reactors planned worldwide. No other Western reactor technology has such a clear and promising path for growth.

Moving on businesses can prepare for future investments in Westinghouse’s AP300® Small Modular Reactor (SMR).

A Carbon-Free Path for Canada

This project will also enhance Canada’s nuclear capacity. Notably, the AP1000 provides carbon-free energy, supporting Canada’s goal of reducing emissions by 45–50% below 2005 levels by 2035.

• LATEST: Canada’s Nuclear Boom: Big Investments in CANDU and SMRs 

The post Westinghouse Expands Nuclear Power to Fuel Canada’s Clean Energy Future appeared first on Carbon Credits.