The aviation industry is under pressure to cut emissions while demand for air travel continues to grow. Against this backdrop, Boeing’s latest agreement with Grassroots Carbon signals a clear shift in how large emitters approach climate action. Instead of relying heavily on traditional offsets, the company is now backing high-quality carbon removal rooted in nature.
This multi-year deal focuses on verified soil carbon removal. It reflects a broader industry trend: moving from compensation to actual carbon removal. More importantly, it connects climate goals with real economic benefits for rural communities.
Boeing’s Shift: From Offsets to Real Carbon Removal
Boeing’s agreement to purchase at least 40,000 metric tons of carbon removal credits marks more than just another sustainability initiative. It shows a deeper transition in its carbon strategy.
Earlier, many companies relied on carbon offsets to balance emissions. However, Boeing has refined its approach. It now follows an “avoid first, remove second” model. This means the company prioritizes cutting emissions directly—through renewable electricity and sustainable aviation fuel—before addressing the remaining footprint.
Targeting Scope 3 Emissions
Still, not all emissions can be eliminated. Business travel, classified under Scope 3 emissions, remains difficult to reduce. This is where carbon removal comes in. By investing in verified soil carbon credits, Boeing aims to tackle these residual emissions more credibly.
At the same time, this approach aligns with growing scrutiny in voluntary carbon markets. Buyers are increasingly looking for durable, science-backed solutions. Soil carbon, when properly measured and maintained, can meet these expectations.

Allison Melia, vice president, Global Enterprise Sustainability, Boeing, said:
“We’re proud to work with Grassroots to accelerate carbon-removal technology that will benefit the entire global aviation industry. Enabling the long-term growth of air travel and supporting our airline customers’ emissions reduction targets are key priorities for Boeing.”
Regenerative Ranching: Turning Soil into a Climate Asset
At the core of this agreement lies regenerative ranching—a land management approach that restores ecosystems while capturing carbon.
Unlike conventional grazing, regenerative systems mimic natural herd movements. Ranchers rotate livestock across pastures. This prevents overgrazing and allows vegetation to recover. As a result, plant roots grow deeper and stronger.
This process plays a critical role in carbon sequestration. Through photosynthesis, grasses absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. They then transfer this carbon into the soil through roots and organic matter. Over time, this builds stable soil carbon that can remain stored for decades.
Additionally, grazing itself can enhance this process. When managed properly, it stimulates plant growth and increases carbon storage below ground. Studies suggest these systems can capture between 1 to 5 tons of CO2 per hectare each year.
However, the benefits go beyond carbon. Healthier soils improve water retention, reduce erosion, and support biodiversity. Ranchers also see improved productivity and greater resilience to climate extremes.
This makes regenerative ranching a rare win-win solution. It supports climate goals while strengthening agricultural systems.
Soil Carbon Credits Are Gaining Credibility
Carbon credits often face criticism for lacking transparency or permanence. However, soil carbon credits are evolving quickly.
In this case, credits are generated by tracking changes in soil carbon over time. Projects establish a baseline and then measure improvements driven by regenerative practices. Each credit corresponds to one metric ton of CO2 removed or avoided.
To ensure credibility, projects use a combination of soil sampling, satellite monitoring, and modeling. Independent verification further strengthens trust. Many of these credits meet standards set by leading registries such as Verra and the Climate Action Reserve.
Durability remains a key question. Soil carbon is considered a long-term storage solution, especially when supported by ongoing land management. In many cases, carbon can remain stored for 25 to 100 years or more.
For corporate buyers, this level of integrity is critical. It allows them to make credible climate claims while supporting real-world impact.

How Grassroots Carbon Is Scaling a Natural Climate Solution
The United States holds a unique advantage in this space. Its grasslands cover roughly 655 million acres—nearly 40% of the country’s land area. These landscapes represent one of the largest untapped carbon sinks.
If managed effectively, they could remove up to 1 billion tons of CO2 equivalent annually. That potential makes soil carbon one of the most scalable nature-based solutions available today.
Grassroots Carbon is working to unlock this opportunity. The company partners with ranchers across more than 2.2 million acres in 22 states. It supports them in adopting regenerative practices while ensuring measurable climate outcomes.
Importantly, the company focuses on scientific rigor. It measures soil carbon directly, often up to one meter deep. Then, independent third parties verify the data using recognized standards. This process ensures that each carbon credit represents real and additional carbon removal.
- The company has already delivered 1.9 million tons of verified carbon removals. A large portion of these credits has been retired by corporate buyers, reflecting strong market demand.
This scale matters. It shows that soil carbon is not just a niche solution. Instead, it can operate at a level relevant to global climate goals.

Supporting Rural Economies
Moving on, regenerative ranching supports rural communities by creating new revenue streams. Ranchers can earn income from carbon credits while improving their land. This reduces financial pressure and encourages long-term stewardship.
Moreover, healthier ecosystems provide broader benefits. Improved soil structure enhances water retention, which is critical in drought-prone areas. Restored grasslands also support wildlife habitats, including bird populations.
Grassroots Carbon works with partners such as conservation groups and research institutions to ensure these outcomes. This collaborative approach strengthens both environmental and social impact.

Aviation’s Broader Climate Challenge
The aviation sector faces one of the toughest decarbonization challenges. Unlike power generation or road transport, it cannot be easily electrified. Aircraft require high-energy-density fuels, which limit near-term options.
Sustainable aviation fuel offers a partial solution. However, supply remains limited, and costs are high. As a result, carbon removal will likely play a growing role in the sector’s strategy.
AlliedOffsets estimates that carbon credit buyers will spend around $2.27 billion per year. Aviation and energy are expected to contribute the most.
- The aviation sector alone has a budget of over $800 million per year, which is about one-third of the total.
Boeing, by supporting soil carbon projects, diversifies its approach to emissions reduction. The biggest advantage is that soil carbon removal is both scalable and immediately deployable. Unlike emerging technologies, it does not require decades of development. Instead, it builds on existing agricultural practices.
At the same time, this move sends a signal to the market. Large buyers can drive demand for high-quality carbon removal. This, in turn, encourages more investment and innovation in the space.
However, scaling this solution will require continued investment, strong verification, and supportive policies. It will also depend on maintaining trust in carbon markets. However, as demand for carbon removal grows, partnerships like this could become a cornerstone of global decarbonization efforts.
The post Boeing Locks in 40,000 Tons of Soil Carbon Removal with Texas-Based Grassroots Carbon 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

