“Greenhouse gas emissions keep growing. Global temperatures keep rising. And our planet is fast approaching tipping points that will make climate chaos irreversible. We are on a highway to climate hell with our foot on the accelerator.”
Introduction
The significance of the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP28) in the global dialogue on climate action cannot be overstated. Set in Dubai, this gathering of climate leaders, advocates, and civil society representatives marks a pivotal moment in our journey towards a more sustainable future, with Climate Finance topics central to the discussions.
Climate finance, in its essence, embodies the financial streams and investments aimed at supporting mitigation and adaptation activities to counter climate change.
This year, COP28 unfolds against a backdrop of efforts aimed at transforming financial institutions and mobilizing new funds. Significant steps have been made towards this end, including:
- Updates to multilateral development banks.
- Discussions of debt restructuring held at the Paris Summit for a New Global Financing Pact.
- The United Arab Emirates’ announcement of a $4.5 billion fund for clean energy in Africa.
But, despite these efforts, the stark reality remains that global climate finance remains alarmingly inadequate to keep the global temperature rise within the crucial limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
The discrepancy highlights an urgent need for increased private sector investment, particularly in the Global South and for adaptation projects. A need that becomes even more evident given the past and current state of climate finance.
The Current State of Climate Finance
As we approach COP28, the state of climate finance reveals a rapidly evolving landscape. In 2021/2022, average annual climate finance flows nearly doubled from 2019/2020 levels, and reached nearly USD 1.3 trillion. This significant increase was mainly due to a surge in mitigation finance, particularly in the renewable energy and transport sectors, accounting for USD 439 billion of the growth. Notably, methodological improvements and new data sources have also contributed substantially, enhancing the tracking and understanding of climate finance flows.
Global trends in climate finance
The distribution of climate finance remains uneven, both geographically and sector-wise. Developed economies continue to mobilize the majority of climate finance, with China, the US, Europe, Brazil, Japan, and India receiving 90% of the increased funds. This concentration highlights significant gaps in climate finance in other high-emissions and climate-vulnerable countries. Additionally, while energy and transport sectors attract the bulk of mitigation finance, industries like agriculture and emerging technologies like battery storage and hydrogen still receive disproportionately less funding.
The adaptation finance, although reaching an all-time high, falls far short of the estimated needs, particularly for developing countries. Moreover, this finance is predominantly driven by public actors, with private sector contributions remaining fragmented.
In summary, while climate finance has grown significantly, challenges in equitable distribution, sector coverage, and the scale of investment remain. These issues underscore the need for a more coordinated and strategic approach to climate finance, a critical topic for discussion and action at COP28.
Climate Finance Challenges
Despite notable progress in climate finance, challenges persist, particularly in equitable distribution and meeting escalating needs. It’s a simple truth that the current investment of 1% of the global GDP, is simply nowhere near enough to support the vast scale of initiatives needed to support those climate initiatives that are required to keep us within tolerable benchmarks. Looking forward, the need for climate finance is projected to increase dramatically – By 2030, annual requirements are expected to rise steadily, reaching over $10 trillion each year from 2031 to 2050. This indicates that climate finance must increase at least five-fold annually to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change effectively.
Delay in meeting these investment needs not only escalates the costs associated with mitigating global temperature rise but also with managing its impacts. The economic burden of continued business-as-usual investments includes:
- Heightened weather-related damages
- Increased production costs
- Substantial health expenses.
The geographical concentration of climate finance adds to the challenge, with developed economies, notably East Asia, the Pacific, the US, Canada, and Western Europe, mobilizing the majority of these funds. In contrast, less developed countries, particularly vulnerable to climate change, receive a significantly smaller share of global climate finance, exacerbating existing disparities. The private sector’s contribution, though growing, remains insufficient in scale and pace, particularly in emerging markets and developing economies.
These investments are vital to ensure that those most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, yet least responsible for its causes, have the resources necessary to mitigate, adapt to, and ultimately overcome the challenges posed by this crisis.
Addressing these challenges necessitates a concerted effort to increase funding, enhance equitable distribution, and foster global collaboration, ensuring that all regions can effectively combat and adapt to climate change.
Opportunities and Innovations
Climate finance at COP28 is a dynamic arena, marked by both challenges and breakthroughs. Innovative market-driven solutions like tradable carbon credits* and debt-for-nature swaps are gaining traction. However, the absence of universally recognized climate finance parameters leads to discrepancies in reported investments. Experts advocate for more equity financing from commercial investors and stress the need for institutional capacity in poor countries to manage these investments.
Accountability in meeting financing promises remains a critical challenge, with wealthier nations often falling short of their responsibilities. COP28 discussions will likely focus on risk-sharing strategies, blending public and private money, and increasing grants to developing countries for local project ownership. Multilateral bank reforms are also on the agenda to attract more private finance for vulnerable communities. The European Union’s Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation, implemented in 2023, is a step towards addressing greenwashing in investor markets.
Overall, COP28 presents an opportunity to reshape climate finance, emphasizing transparency, equity, and innovation to meet the urgent needs of a warming world.
The Role of Governments and Private Sector
At COP28, the evolving roles of governments and private sectors in climate finance will take center stage, and reflect a shift from traditional paradigms that highlights the increasing emphasis on voluntary contributions, while moving away from the erstwhile model of historical financial responsibilities of developed nations towards developing ones. This redefinition marks a notable departure from longstanding multilateral frameworks, spotlighting equity concerns in global climate finance.
Discussions at COP28 will focus on the need for reinvigorating trust and momentum in international climate processes. The Global Stocktake (GST) at COP28 underscores this, revealing a significant shortfall in current efforts to limit global warming. The summit must serve as a focal point for negotiating new financing arrangements, particularly the establishment and operationalization of the new Loss & Damage Fund. This fund represents a critical juncture in climate finance, with developed countries advocating for voluntary contributions despite pressures from developing nations for acknowledgment of historical financial responsibilities.
The contentious nature of funding sources for the Loss & Damage Fund underscores broader debates about the future financial obligations under climate agreements. Despite the insistence of developing countries on acknowledging historical responsibility, the final agreements lean towards voluntary support, indicating a potential weakening in the differentiation between the contributions of developed and developing countries. This outcome raises concerns about the adequacy and operationalization of the Fund.
These negotiations and the decisions made at COP28 will have profound implications on the future trajectory of international climate finance, setting the tone for how both government policies and private sector investments will shape our collective response to the climate crisis.
Conclusion
In conclusion, COP28 represents a watershed moment in the evolution of climate finance. The conference is not just a forum for discussion, but a crucible for action, where the urgency of climate change meets the complexities of global finance.
As the world grapples with the challenges of equitable distribution, scaling of investments, and fostering collaboration, the roles of governments and private sectors are undergoing a transformative shift. Embracing this change requires a commitment to innovation, transparency, and equity. The decisions and strategies forged at COP28 will be critical in shaping a sustainable, resilient world, where finance is not just a tool for growth, but a beacon of hope for a planet facing an existential threat. As we look ahead, the spirit of COP28 must galvanize us to create a financial framework that is not only robust and dynamic, but also inclusive and responsive to the needs of those most vulnerable to climate change.
(*) – For an in depth review on the evolution of emissions, climate impacts, and human activities exacerbating the problem, as well as how Carbon Credits can be part of the solution, check out our latest report here.
Image credit
Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash
Carbon Footprint
Meta, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft Dominate Clean Energy Deals as Global Buying Slips in 2025
For nearly a decade, global companies have been racing to buy clean energy from wind farms, solar parks, and other green power projects. But 2025 marked the first decline in this trend in almost ten years — a surprising shift that signals a changing landscape for corporate sustainability.
The latest report from BloombergNEF (BNEF) shows that corporate clean energy purchasing dropped about 10% in 2025, falling from roughly 62.2 gigawatts (GW) in 2024 to 55.9 GW last year.
Let’s break down why this happened, what it means, and how the market could evolve in the coming years.
Clean Energy Buying: The Big Picture
Corporate clean energy buying usually happens through power purchase agreements (PPAs). They are long-term contracts where companies agree to buy electricity directly from renewable energy projects, often wind or solar farms.
For years, this was one of the fastest-growing parts of the clean energy market. Companies like Google, Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft drove most of the demand, helping build huge amounts of renewable capacity. But 2025 interrupted that streak.
Even though 55.9 GW is still one of the largest annual totals ever, the fact that it is lower than the year before shows a real shift in how companies approach renewable energy deals.
Why Corporate Clean Energy Buying Fell
There are several reasons why corporate clean energy buying slowed in 2025:
Corporate buyers are sensitive to electricity market rules and government policies. In many regions, uncertain policy environments made it harder to finalize long-term clean energy contracts. In the United States, for example, uncertainty about future clean energy incentives and carbon accounting standards caused many smaller corporations to hold off on signing new deals.
In some power markets, especially in parts of Europe, there were long hours of negative electricity prices. This happens when supply exceeds demand and power becomes so cheap that producers pay buyers to take it.
These price swings make standalone solar and wind contracts less attractive, especially for companies that want predictable, long-term value from their clean energy purchases.
Dominance of Big Tech
Another key point in the BloombergNEF findings is that the market is becoming more concentrated. As said before, four major tech firms, like Meta, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft, signed nearly half of all clean energy deals in 2025.
Meta and Amazon alone contracted over 20 GW of clean power last year, including deals that cover not just solar or wind, but also nuclear power — something unusual in past corporate PPA markets.
While this heavy concentration helps maintain volume, it also means that smaller companies are scaling back, which lowers the total number of buyers and contributes to the overall slowdown.
- READ MORE: Clean Energy Investment Hits Record $2.3T in 2025 Says BloombergNEF: What Leads the Surge?
Regional Differences: Where Things Slowed and Where They Didn’t
Corporate clean energy markets didn’t all move in the same direction last year. Bloomberg’s data shows clear regional patterns:
United States
The U.S. remained the largest single market for corporate clean energy deals, signing a record 29.5 GW of commitments. Much of this came from major technology companies looking to match their growing electricity needs with zero-carbon power sources.
Yet despite these high numbers, the number of unique corporate buyers in the U.S. dropped by about 51%, as many smaller firms pulled back from signing new PPAs.
Europe, Middle East & Africa (EMEA)
In the EMEA region, corporate PPAs fell around 13% in 2025, slipping back to levels closer to 2023. In Europe, in particular, rising negative prices and unstable policy conditions discouraged many new deals.
Asia Pacific
Asia had a mixed story. Some markets like Japan and Malaysia continued to attract corporate clean energy buyers, thanks to mature PPA markets and supportive regulations. But slower activity in countries like India and South Korea contributed to a drop in total volumes in the region.
The Rise of Hybrid and Firm Power Deals
One interesting trend that emerged in 2025 is that companies are looking beyond just wind and solar. Because of the limitations with standalone renewable deals, many buyers are now exploring hybrid power contracts that mix renewables with storage, or even nuclear and geothermal sources.
Hybrid deals like solar paired with battery storage give companies more reliable power and help manage price and supply risks. BloombergNEF tracked nearly 6 GW of these hybrid agreements in 2025, and expects this share to grow.
- According to a report by SEIA and Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, the United States added a record 28 gigawatts (GW) / 57 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of battery energy storage systems (BESS) in 2025. It reflected a 29% year-over-year increase.
Cheaper battery costs are part of this trend. Recent data shows that the cost of four-hour battery storage projects fell about 27% in 2025, reaching record lows. This makes storage-based renewable contracts more financially compelling.
Big Companies Still Push the Market
Even with the overall slowdown, corporate clean energy buying remains strong, especially among large technology firms.
In fact, while smaller companies took a step back, the major tech buyers helped keep total volumes near all-time highs. In other words, the market didn’t crash; it just shifted shape.
This becomes even clearer when we look at individual company progress. Microsoft reported recently that it now matches 100% of its global electricity use with renewable energy, an achievement that required decades of energy contracts and partnerships.
The Clean Energy Market Is Resetting, Not Retreating
The IEA projects that renewables will provide 36% of global electricity in 2026. This shows that the energy transition is moving forward, even if corporate clean energy purchases dipped in 2025. The slowdown does not signal failure. Instead, it reflects a market that is adapting as companies, technologies, policies, and economics evolve together.
Growth in corporate renewable deals is not always steady. A single year of lower volumes does not erase the gains of the past decade. Instead, it highlights the natural adjustments markets go through as strategies shift and conditions change.
In this transitioning phase, policy and regulation remain critical. Clear rules, incentives, and supportive frameworks encourage smaller companies to participate. Additionally, regions that provide stability, such as parts of the Asia Pacific, are seeing continued growth in corporate clean energy demand.
In conclusion, even with the dip in 2025, corporate renewable energy purchasing is far larger than it was ten years ago. The market is shifting rather than shrinking, and companies continue to find ways to power growth with clean energy. This slowdown may serve as a wake-up call, encouraging smarter, more flexible strategies that can sustain the energy transition for years to come.
- ALSO READ: Renewables 2025: How China, the US, Europe, and India Are Leading the World’s Clean Energy Growth
The post Meta, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft Dominate Clean Energy Deals as Global Buying Slips in 2025 appeared first on Carbon Credits.
“…Human subtlety… will never devise an invention more beautiful, more simple or more direct than does nature, because in her inventions nothing is lacking, and nothing is superfluous…”
The voluntary carbon market (VCM) has passed its inflection point. The volatility that characterized 2023 and 2024 has settled into a stark, data-driven reality: the market has bifurcated. As we look toward 2026, corporate leaders face two distinct markets. One is a liquid, low-price market of legacy credits facing increasing obsolescence. The other is a constrained, high-value market of high-quality assets. Specifically within Nature-Based Solutions (NBS), where demand is beginning to structurally outstrip supply.
For the capital-intensive, risk-averse organization, the strategy for 2026 cannot rely on the spot market procurement tactics of the past decade. The data from 2025 indicates that securing access to high-quality NBS is no longer just a corporate social responsibility objective; it is a balance sheet imperative driven by regulatory convergence and the tangible risk of stranded assets.
The End of Uniformity: The Quality Premium Widens
The most critical signal for your 2026 strategy is the decoupling of credit prices based on integrity.
In 2025, while total credit retirements marginally declined by 4.5% to 168 million tonnes, the primary market value actually grew by over 6% to $1.04 billion. This counter-intuitive dynamic—lower volume, higher value—proves that buyers are actively discarding low-quality inventory in favor of fewer, higher-quality assets.
This “flight to quality” has created a substantial price premium. In previous years, the spread between high and low-rated credits was negligible. By mid-2025, MSCI reported that credits rated ‘BBB’ and above were trading at a premium of approximately 360% over lower-rated credits. Specifically within NBS, Afforestation, Reforestation, and Revegetation (ARR) projects rated ‘BBB+’ averaged $26.10 per tonne, while their lower-rated counterparts (‘BB-‘ and below) languished at $14.50.
For the CFO, this presents a clear heuristic: the “cheap” option carries a hidden cost. Low-quality credits now face a high probability of becoming stranded assets. Credits that are technically issued but unusable for credible net-zero claims or compliance obligations due to reputational toxicity or regulatory exclusion.
The Supply Crunch in High-Quality NBS
As your organization forecasts its procurement needs for 2026, you must account for a deepening supply deficit in the specific assets you likely desire. While the overall market holds a surplus of legacy credits, the inventory of high-quality credits is shrinking.
For the third consecutive year, highly-rated credits (BBB+) experienced a market deficit in 2025, meaning retirements (consumption) exceeded new issuances. This scarcity is acute in Nature-Based Solutions. While forestry and land use, accounting for 68 million tonnes in 2024, remain the most frequently retired project category, the composition of that supply is changing.
Buyers are aggressively shifting away from legacy REDD+ (avoided deforestation) projects toward removal-based NBS, such as ARR and Improved Forest Management (IFM). In 2025, transaction volumes for IFM projects grew over 300%, while legacy REDD+ volumes fell by 52%.
The implication for your 2026 planning is scarcity. The lead time for new high-quality NBS projects to come online is significant. Consequently, we are witnessing a surge in early-stage offtake agreements. In 2025, the value of announced offtake deals totaled $12.25 billion… a massive leap from $3.95 billion in 2024. Sophisticated buyers, including major energy and technology firms, are locking in future supply at weighted average prices of $160 per credit for durable removals, effectively bypassing the spot market entirely.
Regulatory Convergence: The Compliance Floor
The distinction between “voluntary” and “compliance” markets is eroding, and this convergence will be a primary price driver in 2026. Regulatory bodies are increasingly creating a floor for credit quality that impacts voluntary buyers.
Two mechanisms are driving this shift:
1. CORSIA Phase 1
The Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) has entered its first mandatory compliance phase (2024–2026). The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has tightened eligibility, creating a “compliance-grade” stamp of approval. Sylvera modeling suggests that compliance demand could exceed voluntary demand as early as 2027, largely driven by the approaching CORSIA Phase 1 deadline. This will create direct competition for high-integrity credits between voluntary corporate buyers and regulated aviation entities, inevitably driving up price floors for eligible NBS credits.
2. Article 6 and Corresponding Adjustments
The operationalization of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement is accelerating. As of late 2025, 176 bilateral agreements were in place under Article 6.2. This mechanism allows countries to transfer carbon credits (Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes, or ITMOs) to one another.
For corporate buyers, the critical development for 2026 is the “Corresponding Adjustment” (CA). A CA ensures that when a credit is sold abroad, the host country deducts it from its own national inventory, preventing double-counting. We project that credits with a CA will command a distinct premium and may become a requirement for companies making specific claims under the Paris Agreement framework. With countries like Singapore and Japan already executing trades, the infrastructure for this high-compliance market is solidifying.
3. The Role of Independent Assurance
In an environment of rising prices and regulatory complexity, “trust” is a risk management tool. Reliance on project developer marketing materials is insufficient for audit committees and risk officers.
The rise of independent rating agencies such as MSCI, Sylvera, Calyx Global, and BeZero, has fundamentally altered the due diligence landscape. These agencies now cover the majority of the market; Calyx Global’s ratings alone cover 70% of all retirements from 2021 to 2024.
Data indicates that utilizing these ratings is becoming a prerequisite for transaction security. Buyers are increasingly writing clauses into offtake agreements that allow them to exit the contract if a project’s third-party rating drops below a certain threshold (e.g., ‘BBB’). For 2026, we advise integrating independent ratings data directly into your procurement workflows to mitigate delivery and reputational risk.
Strategic Outlook for 2026
Based on the current trajectory, the role of Nature-Based Solutions in 2026 will be defined by three core realities:
- NBS as a Removal Mechanism: The market will continue to prize “removals” (sequestering carbon) over “avoidance” (preventing emissions). In 2024, removal credits commanded a 381% price premium over reduction credits, up from 245% the previous year. Corporations with net-zero targets must prioritize ARR and IFM projects to align with the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) guidance on residual emissions.
- Co-Benefits as Value Drivers: Buyers are no longer paying solely for the carbon molecule. They are paying for the verified impact on biodiversity and local communities. Projects with quantifiable co-benefits are achieving measurable price uplifts. In 2026, expect biodiversity monitoring to become a standard component of high-quality NBS due diligence.
- The Necessity of Long-Term Positions: The spot market for high-integrity NBS is thinning. If your organization waits to purchase 2026 vintage credits in 2026, you will likely face a restricted supply of “leftover” inventory at inflated prices. The $12 billion surge in offtakes signals that your peers are moving upstream to finance project development directly.
Recommendations for the C-Suite
To navigate the 2026 carbon market landscape effectively, we recommend the following actions:
- Audit Your Inventory: Assess your current holdings against independent ratings. Identify assets at risk of becoming “stranded” due to low integrity scores or lack of alignment with Core Carbon Principles (CCPs).
- Pivot to Offtakes: Move from spot purchasing to multi-year offtake agreements for high-quality ARR and IFM projects. This hedges against future price spikes and secures supply.
- Integrate Compliance Standards: Even if your purchasing is voluntary, align your quality thresholds with CORSIA Phase 1 or Article 6 requirements to future-proof your investments against regulatory creep.
- Demand Data: Require independent ratings and granular monitoring data (MRV) for all prospective NBS investments. Do not rely on issuer claims alone.
The era of cheap, opaque carbon credits is effectively over. The market of 2026 offers clarity and impact, but only for those willing to invest in integrity.
About Carbon Credit Capital
For over 20 years, Carbon Credit Capital has guided global organizations through the complexities of sustainability strategy and carbon finance. To discuss how these 2026 forecasts impact your specific net-zero roadmap, or to analyze the integrity of your current portfolio, connect with our sustainability experts.
Carbon Footprint
Surge Battery Metals Strengthens Nevada North With High-Grade Expansion and Infill Success
Surge Battery Metals (TSX-V: NILI | OTCQX: NILIF | FRA: DJ5C) delivered two strong updates from its Nevada North Lithium Project (NNLP) in February 2026. Together, these results confirm expansion potential, reinforce high-grade continuity, and advance technical work needed for the upcoming Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS).
On February 17, Surge reported a major step-out success. The company drilled a 31-meter intercept grading 4,196 ppm lithium from surface in a hole located 640 meters southeast of the existing resource boundary. This intercept sits well above the current resource average grade of 3,010 ppm lithium. The wide step-out confirms that high-grade mineralization extends significantly beyond the defined resource footprint.
Just one week later, on February 25, Surge released the final batch of results from its 2025 core drilling program. These infill holes focused on upgrading inferred resources to higher confidence categories and collecting technical data for the PFS. The results returned some of the strongest intercepts drilled to date.
Together, these two updates strengthen the project’s scale, quality, and development readiness.
Infill Drilling Confirms a Thick, High-Grade Core
The February 25 news highlighted Hole NNL-030 as a standout result. The hole intersected 116 meters, averaging 3,752 ppm lithium. Within that interval, a 32.1-meter zone graded 4,521 ppm lithium. These grades exceed the project’s current average and confirm the presence of a thick, ultra-high-grade core.
Hole NNL-032 also delivered strong results, returning 82.29 meters, averaging 3,664 ppm lithium. Hole NNL-036 intersected 78.63 meters, averaging 3,141 ppm lithium, including a deep 9.4-meter zone grading 4,580 ppm lithium.
These intercepts show both lateral and vertical continuity. They show that high-grade lithium persists across wide widths and at depth. Importantly, most of these zones occur near the surface. Near-surface mineralization reduces stripping requirements and can improve early-year mine economics.
The infill drilling supports resource upgrading efforts. It helps convert Inferred resources into Indicated and Measured categories. Higher confidence categories are critical for mine planning, financing, and permitting.
The results confirm that Nevada North’s high-grade core is consistent, thick, and scalable.
Mr. Greg Reimer, President & Chief Executive Officer and Director of Surge, stated,
“This infill drilling is doing exactly what it was designed to do: upgrade the resource, confirm continuity of some of our best lithium intercepts, and de-risk the early years of a potential mine plan at Nevada North. Coupled with a robust PEA economic profile, we believe Nevada North is strongly positioned as we move forward with the development of our PFS. We look forward to updating the Mineral Resource Estimate as our next key milestone.”
Expansion Beyond the Current Resource Boundary
The February 17 step-out result adds a new dimension to the project story. The 31-meter intercept grading 4,196 ppm lithium occurred 640 meters beyond the existing resource area. This large extension demonstrates strong mineral continuity outside the current pit-constrained model.
Step-out drilling is important because it tests the limits of a deposit. A successful 640-meter extension suggests the deposit remains open and may support future resource growth.
Nevada North already hosts a pit-constrained Inferred Resource of 11.24 million tonnes of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE) grading 3,010 ppm lithium at a 1,250 ppm cutoff. High-grade step-out intercepts increase confidence that future resource updates may expand both tonnage and overall contained lithium.
Highly anomalous soil values and geophysical surveys also suggest the clay horizons could extend even further. The mineralized zone currently spans more than 4,300 meters in strike length and over 1,500 meters in width. Continued drilling could increase the overall scale of the project.
This combination of strong infill and wide step-out success strengthens Nevada North’s long-term growth profile.
Advancing Toward Pre-Feasibility and Permitting
The 2025 drilling program did more than confirm grade. It also collected critical technical data required for the upcoming PFS and environmental permitting.
Hole NNL-035 was strategically positioned near Texas Spring to gather hydrogeological data. The hole successfully installed the Vibrating Wire Piezometers (VWPs) to monitor groundwater conditions. This data will help model basin hydrology and support environmental approvals.
The company also completed detailed geotechnical logging across all holes. High-resolution televiewer surveys mapped fault structures. Representative samples from each rock unit are now undergoing rock strength testing. These tests will help determine safe pit wall angles for future mine planning.
Remarkably, quality control procedures were rigorous. Of the 806 total samples analyzed, 134 were QA/QC samples. Certified reference standards, blanks, and duplicates were systematically inserted.
Standards are performed within acceptable limits. Duplicate samples fell within 10% tolerance. These results confirm strong analytical accuracy and reproducibility.
This technical work reduces development risk. This, in turn, ensures that the PFS is built on high-quality geological and engineering data.
Strategic Upside: By-Products and Strong Economics
In addition to lithium, the infill drilling consistently returned elevated cesium and rubidium values. Cesium reached up to 163 ppm and rubidium up to 349 ppm in association with the lithium core. Surge is evaluating the deportment of these elements in ongoing metallurgical studies.
If recoverable, these critical minerals could add value to the project economics. By-product potential can improve revenue streams and enhance overall project returns.
Nevada North already shows strong economic metrics from its Preliminary Economic Assessment. The PEA reports an after-tax NPV (8%) of approximately US$9.17 billion and an after-tax IRR of 22.8% at a lithium price of US$24,000 per tonne LCE. Operating costs are estimated at roughly US$5,243 per tonne LCE.
High grades play a central role in these economics. Thick intervals averaging 3,500–4,500 ppm lithium reduce the tonnage required to produce each unit of lithium. This supports lower operating costs and stronger early cash flow potential.
The joint venture with Evolution Mining also strengthens the project’s development pathway. Evolution is a globally recognized mining company with operational expertise. This partnership adds technical depth and financial strength to the Nevada North project.
A Strengthened Position in the U.S. Lithium Landscape
The United States is working to strengthen its domestic lithium supply chain. Federal incentives and policy measures emphasize secure, locally sourced battery materials. Projects that combine high grade, large scale, and technical readiness are well-positioned in this environment.
Nevada North now demonstrates three key strengths at once:
- Proven high-grade core through infill drilling,
- Expansion potential through 640-meter step-out success, and
- Advancing technical data for PFS and permitting.
These updates reinforce Nevada North as one of the highest-grade lithium clay projects in the United States. They show both growth and de-risking in the same drilling campaign.
As global demand for lithium continues to rise, supply sources with strong grade, scale, and development momentum will stand out. Surge Battery Metals’ recent results highlight meaningful progress on all three fronts.
The company’s Nevada North Lithium Project is not only expanding. It is advancing toward higher confidence resources, improved technical definition, and future development milestones. These combined achievements strengthen Surge’s position within the evolving North American lithium supply chain.
DISCLAIMER
New Era Publishing Inc. and/or CarbonCredits.com (“We” or “Us”) are not securities dealers or brokers, investment advisers, or financial advisers, and you should not rely on the information herein as investment advice. Surge Battery Metals Inc. (“Company”) made a one-time payment of $50,000 to provide marketing services for a term of two months. None of the owners, members, directors, or employees of New Era Publishing Inc. and/or CarbonCredits.com currently hold, or have any beneficial ownership in, any shares, stocks, or options of the companies mentioned.
This article is informational only and is solely for use by prospective investors in determining whether to seek additional information. It does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Examples that we provide of share price increases pertaining to a particular issuer from one referenced date to another represent arbitrarily chosen time periods and are no indication whatsoever of future stock prices for that issuer and are of no predictive value.
Our stock profiles are intended to highlight certain companies for your further investigation; they are not stock recommendations or an offer or sale of the referenced securities. The securities issued by the companies we profile should be considered high-risk; if you do invest despite these warnings, you may lose your entire investment. Please do your own research before investing, including reviewing the companies’ SEDAR+ and SEC filings, press releases, and risk disclosures.
It is our policy that information contained in this profile was provided by the company, extracted from SEDAR+ and SEC filings, company websites, and other publicly available sources. We believe the sources and information are accurate and reliable but we cannot guarantee them.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT AND FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
Certain statements contained in this news release may constitute “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Forward-looking information generally can be identified by words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “plan,” and similar expressions suggesting future outcomes or events. Forward-looking information is based on current expectations of management; however, it is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated.
These factors include, without limitation, statements relating to the Company’s exploration and development plans, the potential of its mineral projects, financing activities, regulatory approvals, market conditions, and future objectives. Forward-looking information involves numerous risks and uncertainties and actual results might differ materially from results suggested in any forward-looking information. These risks and uncertainties include, among other things, market volatility, the state of financial markets for the Company’s securities, fluctuations in commodity prices, operational challenges, and changes in business plans.
Forward-looking information is based on several key expectations and assumptions, including, without limitation, that the Company will continue with its stated business objectives and will be able to raise additional capital as required. Although management of the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated, or intended.
There can be no assurance that such forward-looking information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. Additional information about risks and uncertainties is contained in the Company’s management’s discussion and analysis and annual information form for the year ended December 31, 2024, copies of which are available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.
The forward-looking information contained herein is expressly qualified in its entirety by this cautionary statement. Forward-looking information reflects management’s current beliefs and is based on information currently available to the Company. The forward-looking information is made as of the date of this news release, and the Company assumes no obligation to update or revise such information to reflect new events or circumstances except as may be required by applicable law.
Carboncredits.com receives compensation for this publication and has a business relationship with any company whose stock(s) is/are mentioned in this article.
Additional disclosure: This communication serves the sole purpose of adding value to the research process and is for information only. Please do your own due diligence. Every investment in securities mentioned in publications of carboncredits.com involves risks that could lead to a total loss of the invested capital.
Please read our Full RISKS and DISCLOSURE here.
The post Surge Battery Metals Strengthens Nevada North With High-Grade Expansion and Infill Success appeared first on Carbon Credits.
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits