Published

8 months ago

September 25, 2025

Alice Rush

* Disseminated on behalf of ARMR Sciences Inc.
* For Accredited Investors Only. Offered pursuant to Rule 506(c). Reasonable steps to verify accreditation will be taken before any sale.
PAID ADVERTISEMENT – SPONSORED CONTENT

Artificial intelligence (AI) is helping transform medicine, finance, and logistics. But experts warn it could also be turned against us. With advanced modeling, AI can now generate chemical blueprints at a substantially faster rate than previously available processes. As a result, National security leaders and AI thought leaders (including OpenAI’s Sam Altman), have voiced concerns that adversaries could weaponize AI to design new bioweapons.

The New Threat Landscape

Fentanyl already stands as the deadliest synthetic opioid in U.S. history, responsible for more than 220 deaths every day. But fentanyl itself is only the beginning.

Analogs like carfentanil (100x stronger), xylazine (non-opioid threat), and nitazenes (40x stronger) are beginning to spread, many of which are not reversible with Narcan.

The drug supply is becoming a testing ground for increasingly lethal compounds, some of which could be accelerated by AI-driven chemistry.

This dual challenge – lethal analogs on the street and the potential for AI-designed agents – has led federal agencies, including the Department of Defense and Homeland Security, to classify fentanyl and its cousins as chemical weapons of mass destruction.

The crisis is no longer just a health issue; it is a national security emergency.

ARMR’s Defense Labs Approach

ARMR Sciences is working to position itself to confront this next phase. Its Defense Labs initiative combines AI-powered drug discovery with seven years of Department of Defense–funded science with the goal of building a scalable biodefense platform.

The company’s lead candidate, ARMR-100, designed to train the immune system to block fentanyl before it reaches the brain. In preclinical (animal) studies, ARMR-100 blocked 92% of fentanyl’s entry into the brain and eliminated its addictive behavioral effects (at this stage ARMR-100 is not FDA-approved, human safety and efficacy have not been established, and preclinical results may not predict clinical outcomes).

Unlike reactive tools such as naloxone, ARMR-100 is designed to provide months of protection – a biochemical shield against fentanyl and, eventually, other engineered analogs.

Beyond fentanyl, ARMR plans to develop additional immunotherapies for xylazine, nitazenes, and other emerging threats, creating a portfolio that evolves alongside the risks.

By leveraging AI in its own labs, ARMR seeks to stay ahead of adversaries who might misuse the same technology. And in the battle between innovation and misuse, its proactive biodefense may prove to be America’s strongest shield.

The Scale and the Urgency

With more than 130 million people in the U.S. considered high-risk – from opioid use disorder patients to first responders and military personnel – the potential market is vast.

For policymakers, the message is clear: synthetic opioids are no longer only a health crisis, but a recognized national security threat. Classified alongside terrorism and cyberwarfare, fentanyl and its analogs demand rapid action.

This urgency is creating bipartisan momentum for federal funding, regulatory fast-tracking, and stockpiling of new countermeasures.

Why Investors Should Pay Attention

For investors, we believe that ARMR represents an opportunity to back a company that combines social impact with growth potential. Its model combines biotechnology, AI, and biodefense – a convergence few companies are addressing:

Seven years of DoD-backed research formed the platform’s foundation
Lead candidate ARMR-100 blocked 92% of fentanyl from entering the brain in preclinical studies
A $30M private raise is now open
A targeted exchange listing in the future

By investing in this round, investors have a chance to support ARMR as it works to build a category-defining role in AI-powered biodefense.

Invest now to help support ARMR’s efforts to build the nation’s first line of defense against fentanyl and other synthetic threats.

* For Accredited Investors Only. This offering is made pursuant to Rule 506(c) of Regulation D. All purchasers must be accredited investors, and the issuer will take reasonable steps to verify accredited status before any sale. Investing involves high risk, including the potential loss of your entire investment.

* This is a paid advertisement for ARMR’s private offering. Please read the details of the offering at InvestARMR.com for additional information on the company and the risk factors related to the offering.

* For investors from Canada: This advertisement forms part of the issuer’s marketing materials and is incorporated by reference into the issuer’s Offering Memorandum/Private Placement Memorandum under NI 45-106. Investors must receive and review the OM/PPM and execute the prescribed Form 45-106F4 Risk Acknowledgement before subscribing.

DISCLOSURES & DISCLAIMERS

CLIENT CONTENT: Carboncredits.com is not responsible for any content hosted on ARMR Sciences’ sites; it is ARMR Sciences’ responsibility to ensure compliance with applicable laws.

NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE: Content is for educational, informational, and advertising purposes only and should NOT be construed as securities-related offers or solicitations. All content should be considered promotional and subject to disclosed conflicts of interest.

Do NOT rely on this as personalized investment advice. Do your own due diligence.

Carboncredits.com strongly recommends you consult a licensed or registered professional before making any investment decision.

REGULATORY STATUS: Neither Carboncredits.com nor any of its owners or employees is registered as a securities broker-dealer, broker, investment advisor, or IA representative with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, any state securities regulatory authority, or any self-regulatory organization.

CONTENT & COMPENSATION DISCLOSURE: Carboncredits.com has received compensation of thirty thousand dollars from ARMR Sciences for this sponsored content. You should assume we receive compensation as indicated for any purchases through links in this email via affiliate relationships, direct/indirect payments from companies or third parties who may own stock in or have other interests in promoted companies. We may purchase, sell, or hold long or short positions without notice in securities mentioned in this communication.

RESULTS NOT TYPICAL: Past performance and results are unverified and NOT indicative of future results. Results presented are NOT guaranteed as TYPICAL. Market conditions and individual circumstances vary significantly. Actual results will vary widely. Investing in securities is speculative and carries high risk; you may lose some, all, or possibly more than your original investment.

HIGH-RISK: Securities discussed may be highly speculative investments subject to extreme volatility, limited liquidity, and potential total loss. The Securities are suitable only for persons who can afford to lose their entire investment. Furthermore, investors must understand that such investment could be illiquid for an indefinite period of time. No public market currently exists for the securities, and if a public market develops, it may not continue.

DISCLAIMERS & CAUTIONARY STATEMENT: Certain statements in this presentation (the “Presentation”) may be deemed to be “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the 1933 Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as ”should,” ”may,” ”intends,” ”anticipates,” ”believes,” ”estimates,” ”projects,” ”forecasts,” ”expects,” ”plans,” and ”proposes.” Forward-looking statements, which are based on the current plans, forecasts and expectations of management of ARMR Sciences Inc. (the “Company” or “ARMR Sciences”), are inherently less reliable than historical information. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including events and circumstances that may be outside our control.

Although management believes that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, there are a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially include, without limitation, those risks identified in the Private Placement Memorandum. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of the document in which they are contained, and ARMR Sciences Inc. does not undertake any duty to update any forward-looking statements except as may be required by law.

Any forward-looking financial forecasts contained in this Presentation are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forecasts. No assurances can be given that the future results indicated, whether expressed or implied, will be achieved. While sometimes presented with numerical specificity, all such forecasts are based upon a variety of assumptions that may not be realized, and which are highly variable. Because of the number and range of the assumptions underlying any such forecasts, many of which are subject to significant uncertainties and contingencies that are beyond the reasonable control of the issuing company, many of the assumptions inevitably will not materialize and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur subsequent to the date of any financial forecast.

ARMR Sciences Inc. takes no responsibility for any forecasts contained within the Presentation. None of the information contained in any offering materials should be regarded as a representation by ARMR Sciences Inc. The Company’s forecasts have not been prepared with a view toward public disclosure or compliance with the guidelines of the SEC, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants or the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Independent public accountants have not examined nor compiled any forecasts and have not expressed an opinion or assurance with respect to the figures.

This Presentation also contains estimates and other statistical data made by independent parties and by management relating to market size and other data about our industry. This data involves a number of assumptions and limitations, and you are cautioned not to give undue weight to such estimates.

ARMR Sciences Inc. is currently undertaking a private placement offering of Offered Shares pursuant to Section 4(a)(2) of the 1933 Act and/or Rule 506(c) of Regulation D promulgated thereunder. Investors should consider the investment objectives, risks, and investment time horizon of the Company carefully before investing. The private placement memorandum relating to the offering of Securities will contain this and other information concerning the Company, including risk factors, which should be read carefully before investing.

The Securities are being offered and sold in reliance on exemptions from registration under the 1933 Act. In accordance therewith, you should be aware that (i) the Securities may be sold only to “accredited investors,” as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D; (ii) the Securities will only be offered in reliance on an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act and will not be required to comply with specific disclosure requirements that apply to registration under the Securities Act; (iii) the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) will not pass upon the merits of or give its approval to the terms of the Securities or the offering, or the accuracy or completeness of any offering materials; (iv) the Securities will be subject to legal restrictions on transfer and resale and investors should not assume they will be able to resell their securities; and (v) investing in these Securities involves a high degree of risk, and investors should be able to bear the loss of their entire investment. Furthermore, investors must understand that such investment could be illiquid for an indefinite period of time.

The Company is “Testing the Waters” under Regulation A under the Securities Act of 1933. The Company is not under any obligation to make an offering under Regulation A. No money or other consideration is being solicited in connection with the information provided, and if sent in response, will not be accepted. No offer to buy the securities can be accepted and no part of the purchase price can be received until an offering statement on Form 1-A has been filed and until the offering statement is qualified pursuant to Regulation A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and any such offer may be withdrawn or revoked, without obligation or commitment of any kind, at any time before notice of its acceptance given after the qualification date.

The securities offered using Regulation A are highly speculative and involve significant risks. The investment is suitable only for persons who can afford to lose their entire investment. Furthermore, investors must understand that such investment could be illiquid for an indefinite period of time. No public market currently exists for the securities, and if a public market develops following the offering, it may not continue. The Company intends to list its securities on a national exchange and doing so entails significant ongoing corporate obligations including but not limited to disclosure, filing and notification requirements, as well compliance with applicable continued quantitative and qualitative listing standards.

The post AI and Biodefense – Working to Stay Ahead of Synthetic Drug Threats appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Carbon Footprint

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

Published

5 hours ago

May 28, 2026

Alice Rush

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.

Carbon Footprint

Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain

Published

1 week ago

May 20, 2026

Alice Rush

“…Protecting nature makes our business more resilient…”

Julie Brown, Chief Financial Officer, GSK, and Co-Chair, A4S CFO Leadership Network (Europe)

Tweet

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

Carbon Footprint

How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living

Published

1 week ago

May 19, 2026

Alice Rush

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:

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.