Apple announced a new environmental project: it will help protect and restore a redwood forest in California. This effort is part of its larger climate plan. Apple’s work spans carbon reduction, sustainable supply chains, and nature-based carbon removal.
Protecting the Gualala River Redwood Forest
Apple joined with The Conservation Fund to invest in the Gualala River Forest, a working coastal redwood forest in Mendocino County, California. The project protects 14,000 acres of coastal redwoods. The tech titan will help restore and manage the forest in ways that allow both forest growth and sustainable economic use.
As trees grow, they absorb carbon dioxide, so forests act like natural “carbon sinks.” As such, Apple will receive carbon credits as the forest strengthens its capacity to store carbon. Each credit represents one ton of carbon removed from the atmosphere.
The Conservation Fund will manage the forest, measuring tree growth over time, marking certain trees to track diameter and height. This grants Apple a way to count how much additional carbon the forest stores.
Apple’s Restore Fund and Its Role in Carbon Removal
This forest work is part of Apple’s Restore Fund, which began in 2021. The fund supports conservation and regenerative agriculture projects in many countries—and now six continents. Not only the Gualala Forest, but also other forest, mangrove, and grassland projects around the world benefit from Apple’s investment.
Apple plans to be carbon neutral by 2030. This goal includes the whole business footprint. It covers the supply chain, product manufacturing, usage, and end-of-life. Apple aims to cut its emissions by 75% from its 2015 levels.

For any remaining emissions, it will use nature-based carbon removal solutions. Apple says it has already cut more than 60% of its emissions versus 2015.
Counting Carbon: Apple’s Progress in Numbers
The iPhone maker has made measurable gains in cutting emissions and increasing clean energy. Here are the latest achievements so far:
- Apple has achieved a 60% reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions since 2015.
- In 2024, Apple’s suppliers put 17.8 gigawatts (GW) of renewable electricity into their operations. That avoided about 21.8 million metric tons of greenhouse gases.
- They also avoided nearly 2 million metric tons of emissions from energy efficiency improvements.
- Apple reduced emissions in product manufacturing by nearly half: from about 16.1 million tons in 2020 to 8.2 million tons in 2024.
- The company uses over 99% recycled rare earth elements in magnets, and 100% recycled cobalt in its Apple-designed batteries.

These stats show that Apple is not just promising, but also delivering in some key areas.
- RELATED: Apple to Invest $500 Million in MP Materials for U.S.-Made Recycled Rare Earth Magnets
- SEE MORE: Apple (AAPL Stock) Rings Up $94B Q3 Win Fueled by iPhones, AI Push, and Climate Smarts
Why Nature-Based Solutions Matter in Apple’s Strategy
Forests, mangroves, and healthy ecosystems do more than store carbon. They support biodiversity, clean water, and local economies. Apple emphasizes that its new redwood project will also help communities in Northern California whose economies depend on forests.
Nature-based solutions are important because some emissions are tough to fully eliminate. This is especially true for emissions from materials extraction, manufacturing, transportation, and product use.
By restoring forests, Apple can “offset” some residual emissions. But offsetting isn’t a substitute for cutting emissions—it works best combined with deep reductions.
Nature-Based Solutions Taking Root
The push for carbon neutrality is shaping the entire tech industry. Global supply chains are under increasing pressure to switch to renewable energy, but progress is uneven. In areas with limited clean power, many suppliers depend on fossil fuels. This reliance slows down efforts to reduce emissions in various industries.
Nature-based carbon removal is now a key part of Apple’s climate plan. The company aims to cut emissions by 75% from 2015 levels and balance the rest through projects that restore and protect ecosystems. Its Restore Fund supports forest conservation and regenerative farming around the world.
The newest project will help protect California’s redwood forests. This approach reflects a broader industry trend, as most companies still rely on nature-based removals to meet their climate goals.
Demand for carbon removal has been rising fast. In 2024, about 180 million carbon credits were retired, roughly the same as the year before, but with stronger growth in removal-focused projects.
Nature-based solutions like reforestation and forest protection still made up most of these retirements. Between 2022 and 2024, nature-based methods accounted for 98% of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) credits issued.

At the same time, newer methods such as biochar saw retirements double, showing that buyers are starting to support more durable forms of carbon storage.
Still, the scale is far too small compared to climate needs. In 2023, the world could remove only 41 million tonnes of CO₂ per year. Net-zero roadmaps show that this must grow 25 to 100 times larger by the early 2030s. That means companies like Apple must invest in projects that store carbon for the long term.
Forest growth, healthy soils, and mangroves are strong options, but they face risks from wildfire, drought, and disease. Ensuring that carbon stays stored is just as important as planting new trees.
From Silicon Valley to Forest Valleys: The Bigger Picture
Apple is making a case that technology companies can leverage nature as part of climate action. The redwood forest investment boosts its global portfolio. It includes projects like mangroves, agriculture, and other forest restorations. These projects help sequester carbon and bring co-benefits (biodiversity, local jobs, ecosystem services).
Apple is making strides in material and renewable energy. Its efforts include recycling, using clean energy from suppliers, and cutting emissions in manufacturing. Many parts of its value chain are already advancing, while the forest project helps cover emissions that are otherwise hard to eliminate.
As 2030 approaches, Apple must keep pushing on supplier transitions, transparency, and reducing emissions in all material, energy, and product use areas. If it can do that, the company stands a strong chance of meeting its carbon-neutral goal. Its journey shows that large companies can scale up both innovation and nature in their work toward a low-carbon future.
- READ MORE on Apple:
- Is Apple Stock a Green Investment? Net-Zero Goals and Sustainable Supply Chain
- Apple: $94 Billion Record Earnings and the Breakthrough Climate Solutions Fueling Growth
The post Apple Stock (AAPL) Goes Green: 14,000-Acre California Forest Deal Advances Carbon Neutral Strategy 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 Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases10 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 Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

