Connect with us

Published

on

China’s CHANGAN Automobile and battery giant CATL have unveiled the world’s first mass-production passenger vehicle powered by sodium-ion batteries. The launch event took place in Yakeshi, Inner Mongolia, and the vehicle is scheduled to reach the market by mid-2026.

The press release explains that this milestone marks a shift from laboratory research and pilot projects to real-world consumer electric vehicles. It also signals the start of a dual-chemistry battery era, where sodium-ion and lithium-ion technologies work together to meet diverse electric mobility needs.

Why Sodium-Ion Batteries Are Gaining Momentum

Lithium-ion batteries have dominated electric vehicles for more than a decade. However, concerns over lithium supply, cost volatility, and environmental impacts have pushed researchers to explore alternatives. Sodium-ion batteries emerged as one of the most promising contenders.

Sodium is abundant, widely distributed, and inexpensive. Unlike lithium, it can be extracted from seawater and common salt deposits, reducing geopolitical risks and environmental strain. This makes sodium-ion batteries attractive for countries seeking greater energy independence.

Cold-weather performance is another major advantage. Lithium-ion batteries lose significant capacity in freezing temperatures, which limits EV adoption in colder regions. Sodium-ion batteries, by contrast, maintain strong performance even in extreme cold, opening new markets for electric mobility.

                          Lithium-ion batteries vs Sodium-ion batteries 

sodium ion

sodium ion battery

Analysts see 2026 as a turning point, when sodium-ion technology begins large-scale commercialization in vehicles and energy storage.

CATL’s Naxtra Sets New Benchmarks for Sodium-Ion Performance

CATL began sodium-ion research in 2016 and invested nearly RMB 10 billion in the program. The company developed close to 300,000 test cells and assembled a dedicated team of more than 300 R&D engineers, including 20 PhDs.

Research focused on fast-ion transport pathways, composite low-temperature electrolytes, and high-safety electrolyte systems. CATL also leveraged its vast battery management data from millions of deployed units to improve range accuracy and reliability.

This long-term investment highlights how major battery breakthroughs require years of sustained research, testing, and industrial scaling.

Under the partnership, CATL will supply its Naxtra sodium-ion batteries across CHANGAN’s full brand lineup, including AVATR, Deepal, Qiyuan, and UNI. The collaboration positions both companies as early leaders in what could become one of the most disruptive battery technologies of the decade.

Urban and Suburban EVs Made Practical

CATL’s Naxtra sodium-ion battery achieves an energy density of up to 175 Wh/kg, which currently sets a benchmark for mass-produced sodium-ion cells. While this is still lower than leading lithium-ion batteries, it is high enough to support practical passenger vehicles.

Combined with CATL’s Cell-to-Pack (CTP) architecture and intelligent battery management system, the technology enables a pure-electric range exceeding 400 kilometers. As the supply chain matures and chemistry improves, CATL expects future sodium-ion EVs to reach 500–600 kilometers per charge. Range-extended and hybrid configurations could achieve 300–400 kilometers on electric power alone.

These figures cover more than half of the typical daily driving needs in the global new energy vehicle market. For many urban and suburban drivers, sodium-ion vehicles could provide sufficient range at a lower cost.

Cold-Climate Performance Could Transform EV Adoption

One of the biggest barriers to EV adoption is winter performance. Lithium-ion batteries often lose capacity and charging speed in cold conditions, which reduces driving range and convenience.

CATL claims:

  • Its sodium-ion battery delivers nearly three times the discharge power of comparable LFP batteries at –30°C.
  • Capacity retention remains above 90% at –40°C, and the system continues to provide stable power at –50°C.

This performance could make sodium-ion batteries particularly attractive in regions such as Northern Europe, Canada, Russia, and northern Japan. In these markets, winter range anxiety has slowed EV adoption despite strong policy support.

If sodium-ion batteries deliver on these claims, they could unlock electric mobility in some of the world’s most challenging climates.

Safety Advantages Strengthen Consumer Confidence

Battery safety remains a top concern for automakers and consumers. CATL subjected its Naxtra cells to extreme tests, including crushing, drilling, and sawing. The batteries reportedly showed no smoke, fire, or explosion and continued delivering power even after physical damage.

These results suggest sodium-ion batteries could offer inherent safety advantages over some lithium-ion chemistries. Reduced thermal runaway risk could lower insurance costs, simplify thermal management systems, and improve consumer confidence.

Safety improvements are also critical for regulatory approval and large-scale adoption, especially in densely populated cities.

CATL
Source: CATL

A Dual-Chemistry Future for Electric Mobility

Both companies emphasized that sodium-ion batteries will not replace lithium-ion batteries. Instead, both chemistries will coexist and complement each other.

Lithium-ion batteries will remain dominant in high-energy applications such as long-range EVs, aviation, and premium vehicles. Sodium-ion batteries are likely to excel in cost-sensitive segments, cold-climate markets, entry-level EVs, and stationary energy storage.

This dual-chemistry ecosystem could accelerate electrification by offering tailored solutions for different use cases. It also diversifies supply chains and reduces reliance on critical minerals.

Choco-Swap Network Could Supercharge Sodium-Ion EV Growth

To support sodium-ion adoption, CATL plans to deploy more than 3,000 Choco-Swap battery swap stations across 140 Chinese cities by 2026. Over 600 of these stations will be located in colder northern regions.

Battery swapping could reduce charging times from hours to minutes, improving convenience for drivers and commercial fleets. It also allows centralized battery management, which can extend battery life and optimize grid integration.

If successful, this infrastructure could give China a major advantage in next-generation EV ecosystems.

Market Outlook: Rapid Growth Across Multiple Sectors

Gao Huan, CTO of CATL’s China E-car Business

“The arrival of sodium-ion technology marks the beginning of a dual-chemistry era.
CHANGAN’s vision shows both its responsibility for energy security and its strategic
foresight. Much as it embraced electric vehicles years ago, CHANGAN is once again
taking the lead with its sodium-ion roadmap. At CATL, we value the opportunity to
work alongside such an industry leader and fully support its strategy, combining our
expertise to bring safe, reliable, and high-performance sodium-ion technology to
market.” 

According to data released by SPIR:

  • Global sodium-ion battery shipments reached 9 GWh in 2025, representing a 150% year-on-year increase.
  • Analysts expect strong growth in energy storage, light-duty vehicles, and passenger EVs starting in 2026.
  • By 2030, sodium-ion batteries could reach 580 GWh in energy storage and over 410 GWh in automotive applications. This would be enough to support around 10 million new energy users.

Energy storage is expected to be the largest early market, followed by entry-level EVs and commercial vehicles. Passenger cars are now entering the commercialization phase, signaling broader industry confidence.

Supply Chain Security and Geopolitical Implications

One of the most strategic benefits of sodium-ion batteries is supply chain resilience. Sodium is around 1,000 times more abundant in the Earth’s crust and roughly 60,000 times more abundant in oceans than lithium.

This abundance reduces the risk of supply shortages, price spikes, and geopolitical conflicts associated with lithium, cobalt, and nickel. Countries without lithium resources could still build domestic battery industries using sodium.

For governments, sodium-ion technology offers a pathway to greater energy independence and localized manufacturing.

Environmental and Lifecycle Benefits

Sodium-ion batteries also offer environmental advantages across their lifecycle. Sodium extraction is less water-intensive than lithium brine mining, which has raised concerns in South America’s lithium triangle. Production often uses less hazardous materials, such as iron and carbon-based cathodes.

Research suggests sodium-ion battery production could reduce carbon emissions by up to 60% per kWh compared with some lithium-ion chemistries. Recycling processes may also be simpler and more energy-efficient.

However, sodium-ion batteries currently require more material per kWh due to lower energy density, which could offset some emissions benefits. Continued improvements in chemistry and manufacturing are expected to close this gap.

China’s Strategic First-Mover Advantage

China is taking a lead in next-generation battery technologies by moving sodium-ion batteries from lab research to large-scale commercialization.

Mordor Intelligence report shows that lithium-ion dominated with a 75.5% share in 2025, while sodium-ion is expected to register the fastest CAGR of 18% between 2026 and 2031. Through advanced R&D, robust manufacturing, and supporting infrastructure, Chinese companies are turning experimental technology into market-ready solutions.

china battery market
Source: Modor Intelligence

The CHANGAN–CATL partnership illustrates this shift. Their sodium-ion passenger car, launching in 2026, marks one of the first instances of mass-produced vehicles powered by this chemistry. The technology promises lower costs, enhanced safety, strong cold-weather performance, and more secure supply chains, making it a practical complement to lithium-ion batteries.

As the dual-chemistry era unfolds, sodium-ion batteries are set to expand the possibilities for electric mobility and energy storage. By combining affordability, reliability, and environmental advantages, they could play a central role in the global transition to clean energy and reshape the future of electric vehicles.

The post CATL & CHANGAN Make History with World’s First Mass-Production Sodium-Ion Passenger EV appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

The real cost of 1 tonne of CO2: Translating carbon into hectares

Published

on

Every business carbon footprint report ends with a number, the amount of carbon emissions produced by the business, less the amount of carbon reduced and offset, given in tonnes of CO₂. Many of the people who sign off on that number, including those who paid for it, cannot picture what it represents on the ground. A tonne is a unit of mass. CO₂ is invisible. The link between the amount offset in the report and a real piece of restored forest somewhere in the world is almost never indicated.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain

Published

on

“…Protecting nature makes our business more resilient…”

For companies with land, water, food, fiber, or commodity exposure, the supply chain may be the most practical place to turn nature from a risk into an operating asset.

Your supply chain already has a nature strategy. It may be undocumented. It may live in procurement files, supplier contracts, commodity maps, and one spreadsheet nobody opens without coffee. But it exists.

If your business depends on farms, forests, water, soil, packaging, rubber, timber, fibers, minerals, or food ingredients, nature is part of your operating system. The question is whether you manage that system with intent, or discover it during a disruption, audit, or difficult board question.

That is why more companies are asking how to find Nature-Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain. Do not begin by shopping for offsets. Begin by asking where nature already affects cost, continuity, emissions, regulatory exposure, and supplier resilience.

What Nature-Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain Means

The European Commission defines nature-based solutions as approaches inspired and supported by nature that are cost-effective, deliver environmental, social, and economic benefits, and help build resilience. They should also benefit biodiversity and support ecosystem services.

In supply-chain terms, that becomes practical. Nature-based solutions in your supply chain can include agroforestry in cocoa, coffee, rubber, or palm supply chains. They can include soil health programs for food ingredients, watershed restoration near water-intensive operations, mangrove restoration linked to coastal sourcing regions, and avoided deforestation in forest-linked commodities.

The key test is business relevance. If your procurement team relies on a landscape, watershed, crop, or supplier base, that is where opportunity may sit. The best projects do not hover outside the business like a framed certificate. They plug into the system that already produces your revenue.

Why the Boardroom Should Care

For many companies, the largest climate and nature exposure sits outside direct operations. The GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard gives companies a method to account for and report value-chain emissions across sectors. Purchased goods, land use, transport, supplier energy, and product use can make direct emissions look like the visible tip of a very large iceberg.

The Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures notes that many nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities arise upstream and downstream. That is why nature-based supply chain investments matter to boards. You are managing supply security, audit readiness, investor confidence, and regulatory preparedness.

For companies exposed to EU markets, this also connects to rules and expectations such as CSRD, CSDDD, EUDR, and SBTi FLAG.

Step One: Map Where You Touch Land, Water, and Living Systems

Finding Nature-Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain starts with mapping, not marketing.

Begin with procurement and Scope 3 data. Which categories carry high spend, high emissions, or high sourcing risk? Which suppliers depend on agriculture, forestry, mining, water-intensive processing, or land conversion? Which regions face water stress, heat, flood risk, soil degradation, deforestation, or biodiversity pressure?

The Science Based Targets Network uses a clear process for companies: assess, prioritize, set targets, act, and track. That sequence keeps companies from treating nature as a mood board. You identify where the business has exposure, then decide where intervention can create measurable value.

Step Two: Look for Operational Value Before Carbon Value

This is the center of CCC’s Dual-Value Model. A nature-based supply chain investment should do useful work for the business before anyone counts the carbon.

Agroforestry may improve farmer resilience, shade crops, protect soil, and reduce pressure on forests. Watershed restoration may reduce water risk for beverage, textile, or manufacturing sites. Soil health programs may improve the stability of agricultural inputs.

Carbon and sustainability value can still be created. In some cases, the project may support Scope 3 insetting. In others, it may generate verified carbon credits. Sometimes the main value may be resilience, readiness, and better supplier data.

The IPCC has found that ecosystem-based adaptation can reduce climate risks to people, biodiversity, and ecosystem services, with multiple co-benefits, while also warning that effectiveness declines as warming increases. That is a sober argument for acting early.

Step Three: Separate Insetting, Offsetting, and Resilience

Nature-based solutions in your supply chain are not automatically carbon credits. They are not automatically Scope 3 reductions either.

An insetting opportunity usually sits inside or close to your value chain. It may support Scope 3 reporting if the accounting rules, project boundaries, supplier connection, and data quality are strong enough.

An offsetting opportunity usually involves verified credits outside your value chain. High-quality credits can still play a role for residual emissions, but they should not distract from direct reductions or credible value-chain work.

A resilience opportunity may deliver business value even if you cannot claim a Scope 3 reduction immediately. That may include water security, supplier capacity, land restoration, biodiversity protection, or regulatory readiness.

Gold Standard’s Scope 3 value-chain guidance focuses on reporting emissions reductions from interventions in purchased goods and services. Verra’s Scope 3 Standard Program is being developed to certify value-chain interventions and issue units for companies’ emissions accounting. The direction is clear: stronger evidence, tighter boundaries, and more disciplined claims.

Step Four: Design for Audit-Readiness From the Beginning

Weak data is where promising nature projects go to become expensive anecdotes.

Before public claims are made, you need to know the baseline. What would have happened without the project? Who owns or manages the land? Which suppliers are involved? How will outcomes be measured? How will leakage, permanence, and double counting be addressed?

The GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard gives companies methods to quantify, report, and track land emissions, CO2 removals, and related metrics. This matters because land projects are rarely neat. Farms change practices. Suppliers shift volumes. Weather changes outcomes.

What Recent Corporate Examples Show

Recent case studies show that supply-chain nature work is becoming more serious, and more scrutinized.

Reuters has reported on insetting to reduce emissions within supply chains, including examples linked to Reckitt, Danone, Nestlé, Earthworm Foundation, and Nature-based Insights. The same article highlights familiar problems: measurement, double counting, supplier incentives, and credibility.

Reuters has also reported on companies using the Science Based Targets Network process to examine nature impacts. GSK, Holcim, and Kering were among the first companies with validated science-based targets for nature.

The Financial Times has covered the promise and difficulty of soil carbon in corporate supply chains, including a PepsiCo example in India where yields reportedly increased while greenhouse gas emissions fell. The lesson is that carbon, soil, biodiversity, farmer economics, and measurement need to be handled together.

A Practical Screening Checklist

A supply-chain nature-based solution deserves deeper review when you can answer yes to most of these questions:

  • Does it sit in or near a material supply-chain hotspot?
  • Does it address a real business risk?
  • Can you connect it to supplier behavior, land management, or sourcing practices?
  • Can the outcomes be measured?
  • Are the claim boundaries clear?
  • Does it support Scope 3 strategy, SBTi FLAG, CSRD, CSDDD, EUDR, or investor reporting needs?
  • Are permanence, leakage, land rights, and community issues addressed?

Build the Asset, Then Make the Claim

Finding Nature-Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain is about identifying where your business already depends on living systems, then designing interventions that make those systems more resilient, measurable, and commercially useful.

For companies with material Scope 3 exposure, the right project can support supplier resilience, emissions strategy, regulatory readiness, and credible climate communication. The wrong project can become a glossy story with a weak audit trail.

Carbon Credit Capital helps companies design nature-based carbon and sustainability assets that embed directly into corporate supply chains. Through CCC’s Dual-Value Model, you can assess where sustainability investment may support operational resilience, Scope 3 insetting eligibility, regulatory readiness, and high-quality carbon or sustainability value.

Schedule your consultation with the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital to explore how nature-based supply chain investments can support your next stage of climate strategy.

Sources

  1. European Commission: Nature-based solutions
  2. GHG Protocol: Corporate Value Chain Scope 3 Standard
  3. TNFD: Guidance on value chains
  4. European Commission: Corporate Sustainability Reporting
  5. European Commission: Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence
  6. European Commission: Regulation on Deforestation-free Products
  7. SBTi: Forest, Land and Agriculture FLAG
  8. Science Based Targets Network: Take Action
  9. IPCC AR6 WGII Summary for Policymakers
  10. Gold Standard: Scope 3 Value Chain Interventions Guidance
  11. Verra: Scope 3 Standard Program
  12. GHG Protocol: Land Sector and Removals Standard
  13. Reuters: Can insetting stack the cards towards more sustainable supply chains?
  14. Reuters: Three companies put their impacts on nature under a microscope
  15. Financial Times: The dubious climate gains of turning soil into a carbon sink

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living

Published

on

Americans are paying more for insurance, electricity, taxes, and home repairs every year. What many people may not realize is that climate change is already one of the drivers behind those rising costs.

For many households, climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It is becoming a cost-of-living issue. While climate impacts like melting glaciers and shrinking polar ice can feel distant from everyday life, the financial effects are already showing up in monthly budgets across the country.

Today, a larger share of household income is consumed by fixed costs such as housing, insurance, utilities, and healthcare. (3) Climate change and climate inaction are adding pressure to many of those expenses through higher disaster recovery costs, rising energy demand, infrastructure repairs, and increased insurance risk.

The goal of this article is to help connect climate change to the everyday financial realities people already experience. Regardless of where someone stands on climate policy, it is important to recognize that climate change is already increasing costs for households, businesses, and taxpayers across the United States.

More conservative estimates indicate that the average household has experienced an increase of about $400 per year from observed climate change, while less conservative estimates suggest an increase of $900.(1) Those in more disaster-prone regions of the country face disproportionate costs, with some households experiencing climate-related costs averaging $1,300 per year.(1) Another study found that climate adaptation costs driven by climate change have already consumed over 3% of personal income in the U.S. since 2015.(9) By the end of the century, housing units could spend an additional $5,600 on adaptation costs.(1)

Whether we realize it or not, Americans are already paying for climate change through higher insurance premiums, energy costs, taxes, and infrastructure repairs. These growing expenses are often referred to as climate adaptation costs.

Without meaningful climate action, these costs are expected to continue rising. Choosing not to invest in climate action is also choosing to spend more on climate adaptation.

Here are a few ways climate change is already increasing the cost of living:

  • Higher insurance costs from more frequent and severe storms
  • Higher energy use during longer and hotter summers
  • Higher electricity rates tied to storm recovery and grid upgrades
  • Higher government spending and taxpayer-funded disaster recovery costs

The real debate is not whether climate change costs money. Americans are already paying for it. The question is where we want those costs to go. Should we invest more in climate action to help reduce future climate adaptation costs, or continue paying growing recovery and adaptation expenses in everyday life?

How Climate Change Is Increasing Insurance Costs

There is one industry that closely tracks the financial impact of natural disasters: insurance. Insurance companies are focused on assessing risk, estimating damages, and collecting enough revenue to cover losses and remain financially stable.

Comparing the 20-year periods 1980–1999 and 2000–2019, climate-related disasters increased 83% globally from 3,656 events to 6,681 events. The average time between billion-dollar disasters dropped from 82 days during the 1980s to 16 days during the last 10 years, and in 2025 the average time between disasters fell to just 10 days. (6)

According to the reinsurance firm Munich Re, total economic losses from natural disasters in 2024 exceeded $320 billion globally, nearly 40% higher than the decade-long annual average. Average annual inflation-adjusted costs more than quadrupled from $22.6 billion per year in the 1980s to $102 billion per year in the 2010s. Costs increased further to an average of $153.2 billion annually during 2020–2024, representing another 50% increase over the 2010s. (6)

In the United States, billion-dollar weather and climate disasters have also increased significantly. The average number of billion-dollar disasters per year has grown from roughly three annually during the 1980s to 19 annually over the last decade. In 2023 and 2024, the U.S. recorded 28 and 27 billion-dollar disasters respectively, both setting new records. (6)

The growing impact of climate change is one reason insurance costs continue to rise. “There are two things that drive insurance loss costs, which is the frequency of events and how much they cost,” said Robert Passmore, assistant vice president of personal lines at the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. “So, as these events become more frequent, that’s definitely going to have an impact.” (8)

After adjusting for inflation, insurance costs have steadily increased over time. From 2000 to 2020, insurance costs consistently grew faster than the Consumer Price Index due to rising rebuilding costs and weather-related losses.(3) Between 2020 and 2023 alone, the average home insurance premium increased from $75 to $360 due to climate change impacts, with disaster-prone regions experiencing especially steep increases.(1) Since 2015, homeowners in some regions affected by more extreme weather have seen home insurance costs increased by nearly 57%.(1) Some insurers have also limited or stopped offering coverage in high-risk areas.(7)

For many families, rising insurance costs are no longer occasional financial burdens. They are becoming recurring monthly expenses tied directly to growing climate risk.

How Rising Temperatures Increase Household Energy Costs

A light bulb, a pen, a calculator and some copper euro cent coins lie on top of an electricity bill

The financial impacts of climate change extend beyond insurance. Rising temperatures are also changing how much energy Americans use and how utilities plan for future electricity demand.

Between 1950 and 2010, per capita electricity use increased 10-fold, though usage has flattened or slightly declined since 2012 due to more efficient appliances and LED lighting. (3) A significant share of increased energy demand comes from cooling needs associated with higher temperatures.

Over the last 20 years, the United States has experienced increasing Cooling Degree Days (CDD) and decreasing Heating Degree Days (HDD). Nearly all counties have become warmer over the past three decades, with some areas experiencing several hundred additional cooling degree days, equivalent to roughly one additional degree of warmth on most days. (1) This trend reflects a warming climate where air conditioning demand is increasing while heating demand generally declines. (4)

As temperatures continue rising, households are expected to spend more on cooling than they save on heating. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that by 2050, national Heating Degree Days will be 11% lower while Cooling Degree Days will be 28% higher than 2021 levels. Cooling demand is projected to rise 2.5 times faster than heating demand declines. (5)

These projections come from energy and infrastructure experts planning for future electricity demand and grid capacity needs. Utilities and grid operators are already preparing for higher peak summer electricity loads caused by rising temperatures. (5)

Longer and hotter summers also affect how homes and buildings are designed. Buildings constructed for past climate conditions may require upgrades such as larger air conditioning systems, stronger insulation, and improved ventilation to remain comfortable and energy efficient in the future. (10)

For many households, this means higher monthly utility bills and potentially higher long-term home improvement costs as temperatures continue to rise.

How Climate Change Affects Electricity Rates

On an inflation-adjusted basis, average U.S. residential electricity rates are slightly lower today than they were 50 years ago. (2) However, climate-related damage to utility infrastructure is creating new upward pressure on electricity costs.

Electric utilities rely heavily on above-ground poles, wires, transformers, and substations that can be damaged by hurricanes, storms, floods, and wildfires. Repairing and upgrading this infrastructure often requires substantial investment.

As a result, utilities are increasing electricity rates in response to wildfire and hurricane events to fund infrastructure repairs and future mitigation efforts. (1) The average cumulative increase in per-household electricity expenditures due to climate-related price changes is approximately $30. (1)

While this increase may appear modest today, utility costs are expected to rise further as climate-related infrastructure damage becomes more frequent and severe.

How Climate Disasters Increase Government Spending and Taxes

Extreme weather events also damage public infrastructure, including roads, schools, bridges, airports, water systems, and emergency services infrastructure. Recovery and rebuilding costs are often funded through taxpayer dollars at the federal, state, and local levels.

The average annual government cost tied to climate-related disaster recovery is estimated at nearly $142 per household. (1) States that frequently experience hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, or flooding can face even higher public recovery costs.

These expenses affect taxpayers whether they personally experience a disaster or not. Climate-related recovery spending can increase pressure on public budgets, emergency management systems, and infrastructure funding nationwide.

Reducing Climate Costs Through Climate Action

While this article focuses on the growing financial costs associated with climate change, the issue is not only about money for many people. It is also about recognizing our environmental impact and taking responsibility for reducing it in order to help preserve a healthy planet for future generations.

While individuals alone cannot solve climate change, collective action can help reduce future climate adaptation costs over time.

For those interested in taking action, there are three important steps:

  1. Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
  2. Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
  3. Address remaining emissions by supporting verified carbon reduction projects through carbon credits.

Carbon credits are one of the most cost-effective tools available for climate action because they help fund projects that generate verified emission reductions at scale. Supporting global emission reduction efforts can help reduce the long-term impacts and costs associated with climate change.

Visit Terrapass to learn more about carbon footprints, carbon credits, and climate action solutions.

The post How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living appeared first on Terrapass.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com