Climeworks, a Swiss company known for its carbon removal technology, announced a major partnership with Mitsui O.S.K. Lines (MOL), one of the world’s largest shipping companies. This is Climeworks’ first collaboration with a shipping company and its first agreement with a Japanese partner.
As part of the deal, Climeworks will remove 13,400 tons of carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the air on behalf of MOL by 2030.
This agreement supports MOL’s goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. MOL is already using clean energy, improving energy efficiency, and testing new technologies. But because shipping is one of the hardest industries to decarbonize, carbon removal is seen as a necessary tool to meet climate goals.
Christoph Gebald, co-founder and Co-CEO of Climeworks, said,
“Shipping is a hard-to-abate sector where residual emissions are likely to remain even with ambitious mitigation measures. Carbon removal solutions will be necessary to address those emissions and reach full climate targets.”
How Climeworks’ Direct Air Capture Technology Works
Climeworks uses a method called Direct Air Capture (DAC) to remove CO₂ directly from the atmosphere. Special machines with large fans pull in air, which passes through filters that trap CO₂.
When the filters are full, they are heated to release the CO₂ gas. This gas is then either stored underground, where it turns into rock over time, or reused in other processes. This approach removes CO₂ permanently and allows it to be measured, verified, and tracked.

Climeworks opened its largest DAC facility, called Mammoth, in Iceland in 2024. This plant can capture up to 36,000 tons of CO₂ per year. It builds on Climeworks’ Orca project. This is part of their plan to remove multi-megaton CO₂ by the 2030s and reach gigaton levels by 2050.
Hard-to-Abate Emissions and the Role of Carbon Removal
Shipping contributes about 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions. The chart below shows the industry’s emissions since 2012 by vessel type. Unlike cars or buildings, which can switch to electric or renewable energy solutions more easily, cargo ships are harder to decarbonize.

Even with low-carbon fuels and better designs, some emissions will remain. That’s why companies like MOL are turning to carbon removal.
Through this agreement, MOL is taking early action to address the challenge. It plans to remove 2.2 million tons of CO₂ by 2030. The partnership with Climeworks marks an important first step in reaching this goal.
MOL’s Commitment to Net-Zero Emissions
MOL has set a clear goal to achieve net-zero GHG emissions by 2050, as outlined in its “MOL Group Environmental Vision 2.2.” This roadmap outlines clear goals and milestones. They will help the company reduce emissions in its operations.

To reach this goal, MOL is implementing various strategies, including:
-
Adopting Clean Energy. MOL is investing in alternative fuels, such as e-methane and bio-methanol, to power its vessels. These cleaner energy sources are part of the company’s plan to reduce reliance on traditional fossil fuels.
-
Energy-Saving Technologies. The company is enhancing ship designs and operations to improve energy efficiency. This includes utilizing wind power for vessel propulsion and other innovative technologies to lower fuel consumption.
-
Carbon Removal Initiatives. MOL has partnered with Climeworks to remove CO₂ from the atmosphere using DAC technology. This collaboration aims to offset emissions that are difficult to eliminate through other means.
Hisashi Umemura, Senior Executive Officer of MOL, explained,
“At Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, we’re committed to navigating toward a net-zero future. Contributing the expansion of high-integrity carbon removal credits, driven by Climeworks’ state-of-the-art Direct Air Capture technology, empowers us to address emissions that are hard to eliminate through conventional methods. This is not just an investment in carbon removal but an investment in the future of sustainable shipping.”
Japan’s Role in the Carbon Removal Market
Japan is playing a bigger role in the carbon removal industry. In 2024, it became the first country to allow international, durable carbon removal credits in its national emissions trading system. This made it easier for companies like MOL to invest in projects like Climeworks’.
MOL is not only Climeworks’ first shipping client but also its first customer from Japan. This shows how both are working together to push the boundaries of climate solutions.
The Growing Market for Direct Air Capture
A Bigger Vision for Global Impact
Alongside the offtake agreement to remove 13,400 tons of CO₂, MOL and Climeworks also signed a Memorandum of Understanding. This means MOL might invest in future Climeworks projects. These investments would help Climeworks build more DAC plants worldwide, increasing their ability to remove CO₂ on a large scale.
This partnership goes beyond reducing emissions in shipping. It shows how companies can take the lead in fighting climate change. By working with Climeworks, MOL is also helping to create demand for high-quality carbon removal solutions. These early actions could make it easier and more affordable for other industries to follow.
More initiatives like this can help carbon removal technologies grow to become a key part in decarbonizing the shipping industry and be a global strategy to fight climate change.
The post From Sea to Sky: MOL & Climeworks Launch Maritime Carbon Removal First appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain
Carbon Footprint
How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living
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

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:
- Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
- Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
- 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.
Carbon Footprint
Carbon credit project stewardship: what happens after credit issuance
A carbon credit purchase is not a transaction that closes at issuance. The credit may be retired, the certificate filed, and the reporting box ticked. But on the ground, in the forest, in the field, and in the community, the work continues. It endures for years. In many cases, for decades.
![]()
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change10 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
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测


