The Dutch government has committed $726 million (639 million euros) to the Aramis carbon capture and storage (CCS) project, the largest of its kind in the Netherlands. This major investment comes after energy companies Shell and TotalEnergies decided to reduce their financial support for part of the project.
Shell and TotalEnergies had originally planned to help fund the construction of a large pipeline system. This pipeline would connect factories and industrial areas to underground storage sites in the North Sea.
However, both companies have now chosen to focus only on developing the carbon storage sites and offering carbon storage services. They pulled out of investing in the pipeline infrastructure.
Without government help, Aramis’s future was uncertain. In response, the government stepped in to cover the risk and keep the project moving forward. Climate Minister Sophie Hermans said that the decision would help ensure that the country could still meet its climate goals, saying:
“This takes away a large part of the risk in the project.”
How Aramis Will Trap Carbon and Cut Emissions
The Aramis project is designed to capture carbon dioxide (CO₂) from industries and transport it to underground storage locations. These sites are in empty gas fields deep under the North Sea. Once stored, the CO₂ will stay underground permanently, preventing it from entering the atmosphere and contributing to climate change.

Aramis plans to transport up to 22 million tonnes of CO₂ every year. The system will be open-access, meaning many different industrial companies can use it. The goal is for construction to finish by 2030, after a final investment decision in 2026.
The pipeline is a central part of the Netherlands’ plan to reduce its carbon emissions. The country wants to cut emissions by 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels.

Although emissions were 37% lower than 1990 levels as of 2024, government experts warn that current policies are not strong enough to meet the 2030 target. Projects like Aramis are seen as essential to closing that gap.
By capturing and storing carbon from hard-to-decarbonize sectors like cement, chemicals, and steel, Aramis will help industries reduce their impact without shutting down operations.
Shell and TotalEnergies Shift Gears: What It Means
Shell and TotalEnergies’ decision to back away from the pipeline part of Aramis reflects a larger shift happening among European energy companies. In recent years, many companies have set ambitious climate goals and promised large investments in renewable energy.
However, competition from American oil and gas companies, who stayed focused on fossil fuels, has made it harder for European firms to keep up financially.
Now, some European energy giants are slowing down their clean energy plans to focus again on their core oil and gas businesses. Shell, for example, announced in 2023 that it would focus more on delivering value to shareholders and less on expanding renewable energy investments.
- RELATED: Shell and Microsoft Are The Biggest Carbon Credit Buyers in 2024: What Projects Do They Support?
Despite reducing their funding, Shell and TotalEnergies are still involved in Aramis. They will work with Gasunie and Energie Beheer Nederland (EBN) to develop two offshore CO₂ storage sites. They also plan to offer carbon storage and transport services once the system is built.
With Shell and TotalEnergies pulling back on pipeline investment, state-owned EBN and gas grid operator Gasunie will take greater control of the Aramis infrastructure. They will jointly own and operate the pipeline system as a 50:50 partnership.
Building a Carbon Capture Superhighway
Aramis is not the only CCS project underway in the Netherlands. Several other infrastructure projects are linked to it, helping to build a broader carbon capture network.
One of these projects is CO₂next, a new terminal being built by Gasunie, Vopak, Shell, and TotalEnergies. Located in Rotterdam’s Maasvlakte area, the terminal will allow ships to bring in or ship out liquid CO₂. The CO₂next terminal will connect to the Aramis pipeline system, making it easier for industries not directly connected to the pipeline to use CCS services.
Another related project is the planned expansion of the Porthos compression station. This station will help compress CO₂ so that it can be safely pushed into storage sites under the sea.
In addition to these projects, the Dutch government announced a new €8 billion ($8.6 billion) package to support renewable energy, electric vehicles, and other sustainable technologies. Industries will also receive compensation to help deal with high energy prices, which can make the transition to cleaner energy harder.
Why CCS Matters More Than Ever
Carbon capture and storage is becoming an important tool in the global fight against climate change. Some industries, like cement and steel, are very hard to decarbonize.
Even with new technologies, they are likely to continue producing some emissions for years to come. CCS offers a way to deal with these emissions by capturing them before they enter the atmosphere.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 will require capturing more than 7.6 billion tonnes of CO₂ globally each year. Right now, global CCS capacity is much smaller — only about 50 million tonnes per year — so major expansion is needed.
As of 2024, the following is the global CCS project trend per McKenzie’s data.

Several European countries are investing heavily in CCS. Norway’s Longship project and the United Kingdom’s East Coast Cluster are examples of large CCS hubs being developed. The Netherlands hopes that by investing early, it can become a leader in carbon capture services for Europe.
- READ MORE: Shell, Equinor, and TotalEnergies Expand Northern Lights CCS with $714 Million Investment
By supporting Aramis, the Dutch government is not just working toward national climate goals. It is also protecting its industrial economy and creating new business opportunities for the future.
If it succeeds, the Aramis project could guide other countries. They can learn how to balance economic growth with climate action. It also boosts Europe’s efforts to use CCS technology.
As the energy transition continues, partnerships between governments and businesses will be crucial. The Netherlands’ bold move to back the Aramis CCS project shows a clear commitment to finding practical solutions to the climate crisis — even as market dynamics shift and corporate strategies evolve.
The post Netherlands Invests $726 Million in Aramis CCS as Shell and Total Shift Strategies 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.
![]()
-
Climate Change9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases9 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

