Corporate buyers continue to rely on traditional carbon credit purchasing methods. Meanwhile, potential buyers of carbon removal credits need more education before committing to these newer options. This year’s NASDAQ survey revealed that even though companies are interested in CDR credits, a major proportion is unaware of the latest technologies like enhanced rock and coastal weathering, enhanced coastal weathering, ocean alkalinity enhancement, etc.

The survey revealed:

Support for maximizing the impact of carbon credit purchases increased from 25% in 2023 to 27% in 2024.
Support for offsetting emissions with carbon removal credits decreased from 24% in 2023 to 22% in 2024.

CDR: A Vital Tool for Achieving Net Zero

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is crucial for companies striving for net zero. Since Nasdaq’s first Global Net Zero Pulse survey, the voluntary carbon market (VCM) has evolved with new corporate feedback, updated SBTi guidelines, and U.S. government advice. The VCM allows companies to voluntarily buy credits that fund projects reducing emissions.

It is a well-known fact that limiting global warming to 1.5°C still requires removing massive amounts of CO2. Another proof is the palpable rising heat that emphasizes the urgency.

However, with growing concerns about greenwashing, companies are being more careful. This creates an opportunity to explore new CDR credit options with better risk protection. Companies must also closely examine their buying preferences for both traditional and new carbon removal efforts.

Companies need to evaluate the importance of the following criteria before buying carbon removal credits.

From June to July 2024, Nasdaq ESG Advisory conducted a survey focused on corporate buyers to explore market demand. The survey covered three key themes to help scale the VCM and drive CDR adoption.

1. Corporate Net Zero Alignment

Companies are increasingly adopting alternative strategies to reduce their emissions, but some emissions remain beyond their control. This is where they need carbon dioxide removal (CDR).

Currently, 40% of corporate buyers understand their company’s path to reducing emissions between 2024 and 2030. They also give importance to CDR.
About 30% expect to cut emissions by up to 40% without using CDR credits, while 31% plan to reduce emissions by up to 60% by 2030 before turning to CDR.

By 2050, the number of companies aiming for 80% or greater will become 3X. This indicates that CDR credits play a vital role in these efforts, with 87% of corporate buyers recognizing their importance in their net-zero strategies.

Moreover, B2C companies are more involved and use CDR as a key part of their strategy. This also shows the growing consumer demand for sustainable tools.

2. Carbon Credits Purchase Strategies

More companies, including those that haven’t been active in carbon markets before, are now planning to buy carbon credits. In the past, some companies have purchased carbon credits to offset emissions, but now even more are showing interest. This highlights rise in corporate demand for carbon credits.

Survey findings reveal a growing trend toward purchasing carbon reduction, avoidance, and removal credits. The energy and materials sectors, especially industries like cement, steel, and chemicals, are leading this shift. These sectors are hard-to-able and face considerable challenges to reducing their emissions. Thus, making carbon removal credits a key part of their mitigation strategy.

Additionally, corporate sectors are now aligning their carbon credit buying plans with their overall sustainability goals with a robust strategy in place. Another interesting factor is- corporate buyers tend to prefer locally sourced carbon credits. The report showed that this trend is especially strong in Canada and Asia-Pacific, where about two-thirds of respondents prefer to purchase local credits.

NASDAQ revealed,

While in 2024, less than 10% of respondents expect to abate 80% or more of their emissions with CDR, this increases by 1.5x in 2030 and 2x in 2050.

This upward trend is particularly noticeable among sectors like information technology, financial services, consumer staples, and utilities.

RELATED: Study: Fortune 500 Companies Using Carbon Credits Are Reducing Their Emissions Faster

Understanding the Scope of Emissions

Many companies are uncertain about how carbon dioxide removal will fit into their plans for reducing current emissions and in the future. A significant number of respondents in recent surveys expressed doubts about their understanding of how much of their Scope 1 and 2 emissions can be reduced through CDR.

This is the reason why they hesitate to use carbon dioxide removal (CDR) until they have significantly cut their emissions. Companies not including CDR in their strategy often focus on cutting emissions first.

Another complex scenario is reducing Scope 3 emissions, which encompass the largest portion of a company’s total emissions but are often the hardest to tackle. Consequently, companies having solid knowledge of this platform are using CDR to address these challenging Scope 3 emissions.

However, even though companies are facing uncertainties in their emissions profiles, CDR will be crucial to meet their sustainability goals.

The following figure indicates the expected percentage of a company’s emissions to be abated using high-quality carbon removal credits.

3. Carbon Market Dynamics

The report has thrown light on how companies’ decarbonization and carbon credit strategies are influenced by changing policies and regulations. While carbon removals were mostly unregulated, rising concerns from stakeholders have caught the attention of regulators. As a result, the voluntary carbon markets are now under more scrutiny.

Since last year’s survey, several major policies were introduced by the SEC, California Air Resources Board (CARB), Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and European Commission (EC). These climate-related policies are putting pressure on both public and private companies.

In fact, 72% of respondents reported feeling the impact, especially from the SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules and California’s AB-1305.

Interestingly, a deeper look reveals regional differences. Canadian respondents said these policies directly affect their carbon credit strategies. On the contrary, fewer U.S. (72%) and European (60%) respondents felt the same impact. U.S. and Canadian companies are primarily focused on the SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules and California’s AB-1305.

In Europe, 33% of companies are more focused on EU regulations, which ban greenwashing and require companies to verify environmental claims before promoting them.

Clearer regulatory standards will increase transparency for U.S. and EU companies regarding their decarbonization and carbon credit plans. Without these guidelines, companies may hesitate to use carbon removals to offset residual emissions due to concerns over potential anti-greenwashing lawsuits.

Growing Interest in Carbon Credits Education

Corporate buyers are showing increased interest in learning more about carbon removals. The recent survey of NASDAQ revealed that 80% of respondents want more education on the topic. Many companies are turning to external experts to help them make informed decisions about carbon credit purchases.

Carbon credit registries like Puro.earth set standardized protocols and track credits to ensure market credibility. For 62% of corporate buyers, these registries and standards play a key role in their purchasing decisions.

Subsequently, this is becoming important as they navigate the complexities of different carbon removal methods, such as terrestrial, technological, and ocean-based options. Additionally, corporate buyers are increasingly expecting carbon credits to offer long-term CO2 storage. This shows a clear shift towards prioritizing permanent solutions for carbon removal.

From CDR to carbon credits to carbon offsets, understanding all these factors is critical for building effective decarbonization strategies for the corporate sector. And NASDAQ’s report is a perfect guide to that.

Source: Data and Visuals collected from 2024 NASDAQ Global Net Zero Pulse.

FURTHER READING: Xpansiv and Puro.earth Partner to Scale Carbon Removal Credits Market

The post CDR and Carbon Credits: NASDAQ Surveys the Key Trends Shaping Corporate Sustainability appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Power density is essential for evaluating how efficiently a system works. It is a measurement of the power it can handle or produce compared to its size or volume. 

The infographic compares the power density of different energy sources—wood, oil, coal, and uranium—based on how much energy each can generate in megawatt hours (MWh). The comparison uses a baseline of 11 MWh, which is the average annual electricity consumption of an American household.

As you can see, nuclear energy is by far more efficient. This is because just a small amount of uranium can generate as much power as large quantities of fossil fuels or wood. Here’s the breakdown:

Wood: You need about 2.5 tons of wood to generate 11 MWh of electricity. This hefty amount shows how low wood’s energy density is compared to other fuel sources.
Oil: It takes 7.4 barrels of oil to produce the same 11 MWh. While oil is more energy-dense than wood, it still requires a significant amount to reach this energy target.
Coal: Producing 11 MWh takes about 1.5 tons of coal. This makes coal more efficient than wood and oil in terms of energy density.
Uranium: Amazingly, just 100 grams of uranium can generate 11 MWh. This emphasizes the incredible energy density of nuclear fuel compared to traditional fossil fuels or biomass.

The Heavyweight Champ of Low Emissions

The infographic clearly shows that uranium has a much higher energy density than traditional energy sources. While renewables and biomass are important for combating carbon emissions, nuclear energy is much more efficient. It can meet large-scale energy demands with very little fuel. 

Right now, nuclear power provides 10% of the world’s electricity. 

According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), nuclear power is projected to increase by 22% between 2022 and 2050.

However, as overall electricity generation grows, nuclear’s share is set to decline, dropping from around 10% of global electricity generation to about 8% by 2050.

With its high power density, nuclear energy is crucial for reducing emissions and meeting global energy needs in this era of clean energy transition.

Notably, energy-related emissions make up about 80% of all human-related greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. and EU. Despite electricity accounting for only 20% of total energy consumption, it generates over 40% of energy-related emissions. 

Burning fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas releases around 34 billion tonnes of CO2 annually, with coal contributing 45%, oil 35%, and gas 20%. In contrast, nuclear power produces significantly lower carbon emissions. 

According to the UN IPCC, nuclear energy emits about 12 grams of CO2 equivalent per kWh. This is closely the same as wind and much lower than solar, making it a cleaner electricity source.

Talking about environmental impact, nuclear energy is superior and a cleaner resource. 

It can significantly lower emissions by using less material making it a better sustainable alternative to fossil fuels and biomass.

Learn More >> The Atomic Awakening: Unplugging The Energy Crisis | Fueled by Uranium

The post More Power per Punch: Nuclear Energy Outshines Fossil Fuels appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is gaining momentum as an important solution for reducing global carbon emissions. With significant projects like Gevo’s $1.46 billion Net-Zero 1 plant in South Dakota and a surge in CCS developments worldwide, the industry is expanding rapidly. 

Gevo’s Groundbreaking SAF Plant

Gevo Inc., a Colorado-based alternative fuels company, has been offered a $1.46 billion loan by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to build a “clean” fuels plant in eastern South Dakota that captures carbon emissions. 

The facility, named Net-Zero 1, aims to produce sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), renewable diesel, and renewable naphtha using corn feedstock in Lake Preston. The plant aims to produce SAF while incorporating carbon-negative production processes to offset tailpipe emissions. 

SAF refers to a broad category of biofuels and synthetic fuels intended to replace conventional jet fuel. These fuels still produce tailpipe emissions, but they are counterbalanced by a carbon-negative production process.

Gevo has taken a significant step towards expanding its carbon capture and storage capabilities by acquiring Red Trail Energy LLC’s ethanol plant and associated carbon capture and storage (CCS) assets in North Dakota last month. Valued at $210 million, this acquisition supports Gevo’s ambitious plans to establish Net Zero-1. 

The Richardton, North Dakota facility, brings critical assets to Gevo’s strategy, especially its permitted CO2 storage infrastructure. This site is capable of storing up to 1 million metric tons of CO2 annually, though Red Trail has only used less than 20% of this capacity so far. 

Net-Zero 1 would be the first SAF facility of its kind in the U.S., as noted by the DOE. The conditional loan was one of two announced on the same day; the other, worth $1.44 billion, was offered to Montana Renewables for expanding a renewable fuels plant in Great Falls.

Gevo expects to close the deal in 2025, with third-party project equity making up most of the project’s funding. 

The company has partnered with Summit Carbon Solutions, which is developing a pipeline to transport the captured CO2 to a storage site in North Dakota, to manage its carbon emissions. 

With capitalized interest during construction, the loan guarantee could provide Gevo with a borrowing capacity of $1.63 billion. The said financing is subject to specific conditions and an environmental review by the DOE.

Global Growth and Trends in Carbon Capture Projects

Globally, the CCS landscape is seeing a significant expansion, according to the Global CCS Institute report. The think tank’s 2024 annual status update highlights a notable increase in projects worldwide, with 291 CCS projects in advanced development or under construction as of mid-2024. 

Chart from Global CCS Institute report

This figure represents a substantial growth from 147 projects in mid-2023. It shows the rising momentum of CCS technology as governments across the globe implement policies to combat climate change. There are now 50 operational CCS projects worldwide, but the majority remain in the design and permitting stages.

The total CO2 capture capacity of these projects has also increased, growing from 177 million metric tons annually in 2023 to 231 million metric tons by mid-2024. However, this growth comes despite setbacks, including several high-profile cancellations. 

For instance, Navigator CO2 Ventures recently scrapped plans for a 1,300-mile CO2 pipeline in the U.S. Midwest. The reason for this is the challenges faced in securing state permits. 

Still, government incentives, such as federal tax credits for CCS, have been instrumental in driving new projects in the US. Currently, 13 CCS projects are under construction, primarily associated with hydrogen, ammonia, and ethanol production facilities, which are often easier to retrofit with CCS technology. 

Moreover, a growing number of direct air capture (DAC) projects are in development, catering to the increasing demand for carbon credits. These credits are seen as more easily verifiable than those from traditional carbon capture methods. 

Government subsidies and supportive regulations have played a crucial role in boosting CCS deployment. 

RELATED: PETRONAS, ADNOC, and Storegga Forge Deal to Explore CCS in Malaysia

The Global CCS Institute’s report emphasizes the need for continued public funding. Without a price on CO2 or mandatory capture regulations, many CCS projects may struggle to remain financially viable. The case of Alcoa Corporation is an example of this.

A Push for CO2 Compensation 

Alcoa Corporation is pursuing $80 million in CO2 compensation from the Spanish government, seeking reimbursement for carbon-related costs incurred between 2018 and 2021 at its San Ciprian aluminum and alumina production complex. 

The compensation is critical for Alcoa as it faces increasing competitive pressure in the European market. Its neighboring countries like France offer significant carbon credits and subsidies to support smelters. These subsidies make French operations more viable compared to those in Spain. 

CEO William Oplinger echoed the need for equal support to ensure the competitiveness of Alcoa’s operations in Spain.

The Pittsburgh-based company’s challenges in Spain extend beyond the lack of CO2 compensation. It is also working on a strategic cooperation agreement with Ignis Equity Holdings to secure the future of the San Ciprian complex. Under this agreement, Ignis will invest €25 million for a 25% stake in the facility, while Alcoa commits €75 million to ongoing operations. 

Additionally, Alcoa seeks access to around $85 million in restricted cash controlled by unions at the site to help cover operating expenses.

These ongoing developments in carbon capture across companies and countries underscore both the opportunities and challenges facing the sector. As more projects move from planning to execution, the potential of CCS to play a critical role in achieving climate targets becomes increasingly clear. 

READ MORE: The “Northern Lights” Shines: Shell, Equinor, and TotalEnergies JV Powers the Norway CCS Project

The post A $1.46 Billion Boost for First-of-Its-Kind Carbon Capture and Clean Fuels appeared first on Carbon Credits.

As governments across the world push for cleaner energy, the competition between India and China for cleantech dominance intensifies. China’s early investment in clean energy technology and manufacturing has given it a significant lead. However, India is rapidly building its capacity, aiming to grab the spotlight in the global market.

This analysis explores the current landscape, identifying strengths, weaknesses, and what lies ahead for both nations in the cleantech race.

China’s Technological Edge and Cost Advantage

China remains a global leader in clean energy manufacturing. The country’s investments in solar PV, battery technology, and wind energy have solidified its dominance. China’s advantage stems from its ability to manufacture at a lower cost while maintaining high technological sophistication.

For instance, in solar PV manufacturing, China controls key parts of the supply chain, including wafers and polysilicon, both essential for solar panel production.

S&P Global highlighted that while countries like India are taking big steps, China’s manufacturing output and efficiency continue to overshadow most nations. Its cleantech products are not only produced at a lower cost but have also overcome previous concerns about quality. This quality and competitive pricing have allowed Chinese manufacturers to grow their market share, even in sectors like wind energy, where they face strong competition.

According to a Wood Mackenzie report, China now commands the manufacturing landscape across major clean technologies.

It holds 60% of the wind foundation market and an impressive 97% share of solar PV wafer production.
China’s dominance extends beyond manufacturing, with booming electric vehicle (EV) sales further highlighting its leadership in the sector.

India’s Growing Investment in Cleantech Market

India is starting to invest more in its global cleantech market. This is getting a push with its low-cost manufacturing base and government support.

For example, the Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme, has helped reduce solar PV manufacturing costs by up to 24%, making India competitive in the global market. This program aims to establish domestic manufacturing for critical clean energy components like solar modules and batteries.

Additionally, India’s energy efficiency program has been in place for years, and the country recently introduced a hydrogen policy focused on producing low-carbon hydrogen through domestic electrolyzer manufacturing.

India’s clean energy sector has seen a massive uptick in investment. In 2023, the country invested $68 billion in clean energy projects, a 40% increase compared to the 2016-2020 average. Almost 50% of this spending was directed toward low-emissions power generation, particularly solar PV.

Conversely, India’s fossil fuel investments also grew by 6% to $33 billion in 2023, as the country continued to grapple with rising fuel demand.

READ MORE: How India’s Budget 2024 Sets a Global Standard for its Critical Minerals

Image: Past and future energy investment in India in the Announced Pledges Scenario and the Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario, 2016-2030

Source: IEA

After evaluating the current scenario, we can say that India is on the brink of a clean energy revolution. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s commitment to add 500 gigawatts (GW) of clean energy by 2030 will certainly help India to be a global leader in renewable energy. But the question remains how is the country planning to meet this ambitious target?

2024 Looks Rosy for India…

After years of slow progress, 2024 has marked a turning point for India’s renewable energy sector. Solar panels and wind turbines are being installed at a commendable pace. Media reports reveal that 18.8 GW of new renewable energy capacity was added till August this year. This way more than the total capacity of last year.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), India is on track to add 34 GW by the end of the year, with projections showing growth will nearly double to 62 GW annually by 2030.

On October 14, India’s power ministry announced a plan to upgrade its power grid to support renewable energy expansion through 2032. The project involves a $109 billion investment and aims to bolster Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision for clean India.

India is also benefiting from Western countries’ efforts to diversify supply chains and reduce reliance on China. The US and the EU have enacted tariffs and trade restrictions on Chinese products, giving Indian manufacturers an opening to supply premium-priced markets, particularly in solar PV. By 2028, S&P Global predicts that India could become the second-largest solar PV manufacturing region after China.

Industry experts predict that this rapid expansion might outpace China’s growth rate in the second half of the decade, positioning India as the world’s fastest-growing clean energy market.

But is it as rosy as it seems to be? The answer is probably no. We unlock the challenges below.

READ MORE: Tata’s $11 Billion Leap: India’s First Semiconductor Fab in Partnership with Taiwan’s PSMC 

A Lingering Challenge for India’s Clean Tech Future

However, India still faces several challenges. Despite the progress and one of the fastest growing economies, Indian manufacturers remain dependent on China for inputs like wafers and polysilicon. Thus, India is not yet 100% self-sufficient in these areas.

Furthermore, as the country is growing so does its energy demand. By 2050, energy demand in India is expected to outpace every other region in the world. This growing demand could put enormous pressure on its energy system, which still heavily relies on imported fossil fuels like crude oil and natural gas.

And with this rising demand comes the risk of increased carbon emissions, particularly if fossil fuel consumption continues to grow for transportation, power generation, and industrial use.

S&P Global analyzed that India is also moving slower than China in wind energy and battery manufacturing, While the country is scaling up battery production, it’s unclear whether it can meet its goal of self-sufficiency by 2030. In wind energy, India’s infrastructure is better suited for onshore projects, and it may struggle to compete with China in the growing offshore wind market.

Risks of Trade Barriers and Global Oversupply

One of the major risks facing India’s cleantech expansion is potential trade barriers. As the US and EU focus on domestic reindustrialization, Indian cleantech exports could become targets for new tariffs, especially in sectors like solar PV and batteries. There’s a delicate balance between encouraging global supply chain diversification and protecting domestic industries.

Additionally, in some cleantech sectors like electrolyzers, global oversupply could make it difficult for Indian manufacturers to remain competitive. Although India is expected to produce more electrolyzers than it needs by 2030, stiff competition from established players could drive prices down, potentially limiting India’s growth in this space.

Can India Compete Without China?

China dominates global supply chains, making it unrealistic for India to fully take over its manufacturing space, according to the Economic Survey 2023-24. The survey, presented by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, emphasized that India may need Chinese investment and technology to boost its manufacturing sector. Instead of distancing from China, partnering with its expertise could be key to driving India’s cleantech growth.

The Survey pointed out that,

“It may not be the most prudent approach to think that India can take up the slack from China vacating certain spaces in manufacturing. Indeed, recent data cast doubt on whether China is even vacating light manufacturing.”

This is self-explanatory.

China’s dominance in the cleantech sector is undeniable, but India is making strides to close the gap. With strategic government support and lower production costs, India has the potential to become a key supplier of cleantech products to the US and Europe.

RELATED: U.S. Raises Tariffs on $8B China Imports: EVs, Batteries, and Solar Cells Included

The post India’s Cleantech Boom: Can It Challenge China’s Reign? appeared first on Carbon Credits.