After a turbulent year for sustainability in 2025, many businesses are reassessing how to move forward on climate action. While the impacts of global warming are accelerating, political and regulatory support for climate initiatives has become increasingly uneven across regions. For companies navigating climate risk, sustainability disclosures, and reputational exposure, this uncertainty raises a critical question: how will climate action be credible and valued over the long term?
As we look to 2026, two clear themes are emerging. First, businesses need a steady, long-term approach to managing carbon emissions that is resilient to political shifts. Second, governments, global coalitions, and leading climate frameworks are reinforcing the role of high-integrity carbon credits—providing clearer rules for how credits can be used alongside decarbonization, establishing global quality standards, and offering guidance that protects companies from greenwashing accusations. Together, these developments signal an important evolution in how carbon credits fit into credible climate strategies.
Executive Takeaway
In 2026, credible climate action is no longer about choosing between decarbonization and carbon credits—it is about using both correctly. New guidance from global coalitions and frameworks such as The Coalition to Grow Carbon Markets and the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) is clarifying how high‑integrity carbon credits can complement sustained emissions reductions, mobilize global climate finance, and support transparent, defensible climate claims. For businesses, these developments reduce uncertainty and greenwashing risk while reinforcing the need for disciplined project selection, clear disclosures, and alignment between carbon credit attributes and their intended climate use.
Businesses Need a Steady, Long‑Term Strategy for Carbon Footprint Management
Global warming and climate change are happening, and they are not going away. Businesses and individuals are feeling the effects in very real ways. Higher temperatures are increasing our energy consumption and costs. (2) More frequent and severe storms are driving up insurance costs. (3) Tidal flooding events are more common. (4) While more talked about signs of global warming like shrinking glaciers and retreating sea ice feel like another world, global warming will increasingly affect all of us.
Businesses need to view carbon emissions are a long-term liability risk in addition to corporate environmental responsibility. Companies already face negative public and customer perception for greenhouse gas emissions, and regulatory penalties could increase over time. 2026 will have several new regulatory requirements in sustainability and climate. Australia, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand have enhanced their climate-related disclosure requirements. (7) EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) also enters its definitive phase. This trend will only continue. As the effects of global warming build, the historical impacts that a business has not addressed become an increasing liability concern. advances
Advances in understanding climate science, developments in zero emission technology, and progress in greenhouse gas regulation teach us that climate action will not be an abrupt shift. It will be a long-term sustained transition by businesses, governments, and society. Good business leaders recognize the difference between short-term political fluctuations and long-term drivers like global warming. It is inefficient for businesses to reactively stop and start programs based on the trends of the moment. Successful business leaders recognize long-term drivers and maintain programs to create future competitive advantages. The best way to mitigate the liability of greenhouse gas emissions is with consistent progress and action over time. Businesses who continue to implement and advance their climate programs will reduce their historic greenhouse gas liability and position their companies for long-term success. This is also an important way for a business to show customers that it cares about its impact on the planet.
Carbon Credits are an Important Part of Climate Action, Especially in Times Like This
Widespread and consistent government support for the transition to a net-zero economy has been difficult to achieve. Progress is challenging when government programs stop and start with political changes. A major benefit of voluntary carbon projects is that they don’t rely on government support. They rely on climate finance from businesses and individuals who purchase carbon credits to take responsibility for their footprint by contributing to global greenhouse gas reduction. Carbon credits are a way for businesses and individuals to drive carbon reduction and sustainability independent of the politics of the moment.
Carbon markets also help reduce the cost to society for climate action by directing funding to projects that achieve the biggest impact at the lowest cost. Even long-time climate activist Bill Gates acknowledged that social well-being must be maintained while we address global warming. (1) With limited funds to drive economic growth, social welfare, and carbon reduction, it is in everyone’s best interest to make climate action as efficient as possible.
Lastly, while the priority is eliminating our own carbon emissions wherever possible, we know that is not enough. Our global carbon reduction needs are bigger than our ability to eliminate our emissions. Supporting high-quality voluntary carbon projects alongside science-aligned carbon reduction is the new formula for leading climate action.

Governments and Climate Leaders want Aggressive Carbon Reduction and Global Climate Finance
Government and climate leaders focused on achieving the greatest climate progress to recognize the value of carbon credits in climate action. The governments of UK, France, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Canada, New Zealand, Kenya, Panama, Peru, and Zambia are leading The Coalition to Grow Carbon Markets which launched at London Climate Action Week 2025. The goal of The Coalition is to, “drive climate-positive growth and accelerate the pace of emissions reductions worldwide by strengthening the incentives businesses need to invest in high-integrity carbon credits across carbon markets, including voluntary and Article 6 markets.” (5) It recognizes that carbon credit markets are an under-used tool to drive investment to the global low-carbon transformation and put a value on the greenhouse gas (GHG). (5)
“With a $1.3 trillion annual climate finance gap, we must unlock the full potential of private sector action to accelerate emissions reductions and drive investment at scale.” Philippe Varin, Chair, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). (5)
Coalition partners include World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM), World Bank, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), and International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), which have worked closely with the Coalition to inform and shape the outputs.
The Coalition’s Shared Principles aim to align private sector action with national and global climate goals by providing direction, clarity, and confidence for companies to grow their voluntary carbon credit demand, alongside deep decarbonization, and to make credible claims regarding these actions. Companies who follow these rules ensure a high standard for carbon project integrity and also have important protection against greenwashing accusations. The Shared Principles include: (5)
- Use carbon credits in addition to decarbonization
Companies should prioritize measurable and sustained direct and indirect emissions reductions with carbon credits used in addition to decarbonization, in line with the mitigation hierarchy
- Use carbon credits with high environmental integrity
Companies should retire carbon credits of high environmental integrity
- Uphold fair price, social safeguards, and, where applicable, support co-benefits for people and nature
Companies should source carbon credits from activities that meet rigorous requirements for social, economic, and environmental safeguards
- Disclose carbon credit use publicly and transparently
Companies should publicly and transparently disclose how carbon credits are used as part of their climate strategies
- Make accurate, substantiated claims involving carbon credit use
Companies should ensure that claims involving carbon credits are clear, truthful, and substantiated, avoiding greenwashing and misleading representations
- Support growth of high-integrity carbon credit markets
In a rapidly evolving market for voluntary carbon credit use, companies should cooperate with other market participants to help improve market functionality.
SBTi and the Evolution of Business Climate Claims
Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi), the leading global framework for business climate action, is also undertaking its first broad revision of the Net Zero Standard. Among other changes, SBTi will add rules for the use of permanent carbon removals in business net-zero plans and recognition for addressing ongoing emissions with high-integrity carbon credits. The new Net Zero Standard is expected to be published in spring 2026 and becomes mandatory beginning January 1, 2028. There are two Key Elements of the Net Zero Standard Revision Related to Carbon Credits: (6)
- Companies can start using durable Carbon Removals now to achieve near-term and long-term carbon removal goals for Scope 1 Residual Emission requirements in their net-zero plan.
- SBTi will also recognize companies who use high-integrity carbon credits to address “ongoing emissions” (those released during the decarbonization journey), if they also achieved their carbon reduction goals for the year. SBTi states that by taking responsibility for these ongoing emissions, companies can help limit temperature overshoot, reduce transition risks, and support climate solutions.
This also reflects the increasing importance of aligning the attributes of a carbon reduction project with the intended use. SBTi identifies that only durable removal credits can be used for science-aligned global net-zero progress because the carbon removal has the same lifetime as carbon emitted. Non-durable carbon removals and carbon reductions/avoidances can be used to address ongoing emissions because they are not tied to a science-aligned net zero goal. This element of SBTi focuses instead on driving climate finance that supports the transition to a net-zero economy and invests in natural climate resilience.
SBTi also provides support for businesses who make climate claims when they follow these rules. The latest update on the Corporate Net Zero Standard Revision says, “Companies that meet the recognition criteria and public reporting criteria in CNZS-C25 shall be eligible to make claims related to Ongoing Emissions Responsibility. (6) Similar to The Coalition to Grow Carbon Markets, companies who follow SBTi rules ensure a high standard for carbon project integrity and have important protection against greenwashing accusations. SBTi also provides sample statements on how to make a credible claim about addressing ongoing emissions: (6)
- “Between 2025 and 2030, we took responsibility for 50% of our ongoing emissions over the five-year target timeframe as a contribution to global net-zero, achieving SBTi Ongoing Emissions Responsibility Recognized status.” Mandatory elements:
- “We funded 100,000 t CO2e of third-party verified emissions reductions beyond our value chain to take responsibility for 50% of ongoing emissions as a contribution to global net-zero.”
- “We supported 800,000 tCO₂e of verified ex-post mitigation outcomes (40% of our total ongoing emissions) through emission reductions and carbon removals.”
It is worth mentioning that many, including SBTi, have moved away from the phrase “offsetting” because some interpreted it to suggest that carbon emissions have been cancelled. Instead, the climate science community is moving towards the view of carbon credits as a positive contribution to the global climate. At Terrapass we also increasingly refer to carbon credits as a climate contribution. However, “carbon offsetting” is historically and today one of the most widely recognized terms for climate action. Many people and companies who want to make a climate contribution still use this phrase. It is important to connect with everyone looking for help with climate action. For this reason, Terrapass still references carbon offsetting as we also transition towards climate contribution language.
Resolving Critical Needs for Business Climate Action
The Coalition to Grow Carbon Markets and SBTi Net Zero Standard 2.0 solve problematic gaps in sustainability and climate action. Companies are not in the business of creating sustainability rules. They need independent organizations with scientific and administrative rigor to set rules that can be followed with confidence. Globally aligned standards for carbon project quality are essential. That was lacking historically and led to inconsistencies in project quality that drove much of the controversy about carbon markets. However, new global quality standards like ICVCM have addressed this gap, and we are seeing climate initiatives across the world align with this standard.
In addition to rules for project quality, we also need independent organizations that define how businesses should use carbon credits and promote their climate contributions. The new rules from The Coalition to Grow Carbon Markets and SBTi drive climate progress by giving businesses confidence in how to use carbon credits and how to talk about it. This gives businesses much needed protection from greenwashing accusations by pointing to the rules created by independent global climate leaders.
Build a Credible Climate Strategy
If your organization is evaluating how carbon credits fit into your climate strategy — whether you’re
prioritizing decarbonization, addressing ongoing emissions, or navigating evolving disclosure and climate
claims guidance — Terrapass Advisors can help.
Our team works with businesses to assess project integrity, align carbon credit use with leading global
frameworks, and support transparent, defensible climate claims as part of a long-term sustainability strategy.
Get Started on Your Sustainability Journey
Sources:
(1) https://www.gatesnotes.com/home/home-page-topic/reader/three-tough-truths-about-climate
(2) https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/record-heat-rising
(3) https://www.usnews.com/insurance/homeowners-insurance/climate-change-and-rates
(4) https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/us-high-tide-flooding-continues-to-break-records
(5) https://coalitiontogrowcarbonmarkets.org/shared-principles/
(6) https://sciencebasedtargets.org/developing-the-net-zero-standard
The post Climate Action in 2026: New Rules Add High-Integrity Carbon Credits to Aggressive Decarbonization appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
Why a forest with more species stores more carbon
A forest is not just trees. The number of species it holds, from canopy giants to understorey shrubs to soil fungi, directly determines how much carbon it can absorb, and, more importantly, how much it can keep over time. Buyers of carbon credits increasingly ask a reasonable question: Is the carbon in this project long-lasting? The science of biodiversity has a clear answer.
![]()
Carbon Footprint
OpenAI Hits Pause on $40B UK AI Project: Energy Costs Shake Data Center Economics
ChatGPT developer OpenAI has paused its flagship UK data center project, known as “Stargate UK,” citing high energy costs and regulatory uncertainty. The project was part of a broader £31 billion ($40+ billion) investment plan aimed at expanding artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure in the country.
The initiative was designed to deploy up to 8,000 GPUs initially, with plans to scale to 31,000 GPUs over time. It was aimed to boost the UK’s “sovereign compute” capacity. This means building local infrastructure to support AI development and reduce reliance on foreign systems.
However, the company has now paused development. An OpenAI spokesperson stated that they:
“…support the government’s ambition to be an AI leader. AI compute is foundational to that goal – we continue to explore Stargate UK and will move forward when the right conditions such as regulation and the cost of energy enable long-term infrastructure investment.”
Energy Costs Are Now a Core Constraint
The main issue is energy. AI data centers require large amounts of electricity to run GPUs and cooling systems.
In the UK, industrial electricity prices are among the highest in developed markets. Recent estimates show costs at around £168 per megawatt-hour, compared to £69 in France and £38 in Texas. This gap creates a major disadvantage for large-scale data center investments.
AI workloads are especially power-intensive. A single large data center can consume as much electricity as tens of thousands of homes. As AI adoption grows, this demand is rising quickly.
Globally, the International Energy Agency estimates that data centers could consume over 1,000 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity by 2030, up sharply from about 415 TWh in 2024. This growth is largely driven by AI.

The result is clear. Energy is no longer just a cost. It is a key factor in where AI infrastructure gets built.
Regulation Adds Another Layer of Risk
Energy is only part of the challenge. Regulation is also slowing investment. In the UK, uncertainty around AI rules, especially copyright laws for training data, has created hesitation among companies.
Earlier proposals to allow AI firms to use copyrighted content were withdrawn after backlash. This left companies without clear guidance on compliance.
For large infrastructure projects, this uncertainty increases risk. Data centers require billions in upfront investment. Companies need stable rules before committing capital.
Planning delays and grid connection timelines also add friction. These factors increase both cost and project timelines.
Together, energy costs and regulatory uncertainty create a difficult environment for hyperscale AI infrastructure.
OpenAI’s Global Infrastructure Expands, But More Selectively
Despite the pause, ChatGPT-maker is still expanding globally. The company is investing heavily in AI infrastructure through partnerships with Microsoft, NVIDIA, and Oracle. It is also linked to a much larger $500 billion “Stargate” initiative in the United States, focused on building next-generation AI data centers.
At the same time, the company faces rising costs. Reports suggest OpenAI could lose billions of dollars annually as it scales infrastructure to meet demand.
This reflects a broader industry shift. AI is becoming more like energy or telecom infrastructure. It requires large capital investment, long timelines, and stable operating conditions.
The pause also highlights a deeper issue. AI growth is increasing pressure on energy systems and the environment.
The Hidden Carbon Cost Behind Every AI Query
ChatGPT and similar tools rely on large data centers. These facilities already account for about 1% to 1.5% of global electricity use. Projections for their energy use vary widely due to various factors.
Each individual query may seem small. A typical ChatGPT request can use about 0.3 watt-hours of electricity, which is relatively low. However, usage at scale changes the picture.
ChatGPT now serves hundreds of millions of users. Even small energy use per query adds up quickly. Training models is even more energy-intensive. For example, training GPT-3 required about 1,287 megawatt-hours of electricity and produced roughly 550 metric tons of CO₂.

Newer models are even larger. Some estimates suggest training advanced models like GPT-4 could emit up to 15,000 metric tons of CO₂, depending on the energy source.
At the system level, the impact is growing fast. AI systems could generate between 32.6 and 79.7 million tons of CO₂ emissions in 2025 alone. By 2030, AI-driven data centers could add 24 to 44 million tons of CO₂ annually.

Looking further ahead, global generative AI emissions could reach up to 245 million tons per year by 2035 if growth continues. These numbers show a clear pattern. Efficiency is improving, but total demand is rising faster.
Big Tech Scrambles to Balance AI Growth and Emissions
OpenAI has not published a detailed standalone net-zero target. However, its operations rely heavily on partners such as Microsoft, which has committed to becoming carbon negative by 2030.
The company has acknowledged that energy use is a real concern. Leadership has pointed to the need for more renewable energy, including nuclear and clean power, to support AI growth.
Across the industry, companies are responding in several ways:
- Improving model efficiency to reduce energy per query
- Investing in renewable energy and long-term power contracts
- Exploring new cooling systems to reduce water and energy use
Efficiency gains are already visible. Some AI systems have reduced energy per query by more than 30 times within a year, showing how quickly technology can improve. Still, total emissions continue to rise because demand is scaling faster than efficiency gains.
The Global AI Infrastructure Race
The pause in the UK highlights a larger trend. AI infrastructure is becoming a global competition shaped by energy, policy, and cost.
Regions with lower energy prices and faster permitting processes have an advantage. The United States and parts of the Middle East are attracting large-scale AI investments due to cheaper power and supportive policies.
At the same time, governments are trying to attract these projects. The UK has pledged billions to support AI growth and improve compute capacity. But this case shows that policy ambition alone is not enough. Companies need reliable energy, clear rules, and predictable costs.
AI’s Next Phase Will Be Decided by Energy, Not Code
The decision by OpenAI does not signal a retreat from AI investment. Instead, it reflects a shift in priorities.
Companies are becoming more selective about where they build infrastructure. They are focusing on locations that offer the right mix of energy access, cost stability, and regulatory clarity.
The UK project may still move forward, but only if conditions improve. For now, the message is clear. The future of AI will not be shaped by technology alone. It will also depend on energy systems, policy frameworks, and long-term investment conditions.
The post OpenAI Hits Pause on $40B UK AI Project: Energy Costs Shake Data Center Economics appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
U.S. Uranium Mining Returns: UEC Launches First New Mine in a Decade
Uranium Energy Corporation (NYSE: UEC) has started production at its Burke Hollow project in South Texas. This is the first new uranium mine to open in the U.S. in over ten years.
The project started production in April 2026 after getting final regulatory approval. This marks a big step for domestic uranium supply. It’s also the world’s newest in-situ recovery (ISR) uranium mine, which shows a move toward less harmful extraction methods.
Burke Hollow was originally discovered in 2012 and spans roughly 20,000 acres, with only about half of the site explored so far. This suggests significant long-term expansion potential as additional wellfields are developed.
The mine’s output will go to UEC’s Hobson Central Processing Plant in Texas. This plant can produce up to 4 million pounds of uranium each year.
A Scalable ISR Platform Expands U.S. Uranium Capacity
The Burke Hollow launch transforms UEC into a multi-site uranium producer in the United States. The company runs two active ISR production platforms. The second one is at its Christensen Ranch facility in Wyoming; both are shown in the table from UEC.


This “hub-and-spoke” model allows uranium from multiple wellfields to be processed through centralized facilities, improving efficiency and scalability. UEC’s operations in Texas and Wyoming are now active. This gives them a licensed production capacity of about 12 million pounds per year across the U.S.
ISR mining plays a key role in this strategy. Unlike conventional mining, ISR involves circulating solutions underground to dissolve uranium and pump it to the surface. This reduces surface disturbance and can lower environmental impact compared to open-pit or underground mining.
Burke Hollow is the largest ISR uranium discovery in the U.S. in the last ten years. This boosts its long-term value as a domestic resource.
Unhedged Strategy Pays Off as Uranium Prices Rise
UEC’s production launch comes at a time of strong uranium market conditions. The company uses a fully unhedged strategy. This means it sells uranium at current market prices instead of securing long-term contracts.
This approach has recently delivered strong financial results. In early 2026, UEC sold 200,000 pounds of uranium for $101 each. This price was about 25% higher than average market rates. The sale brought in over $20 million in revenue and around $10 million in gross profit.
The strategy allows the company to benefit directly from rising uranium prices, which have been supported by:
- Growing global nuclear energy demand
- Supply constraints in key producing regions
- Increased long-term contracting by utilities
Unhedged exposure raises risk in downturns, but offers more upside in strong markets. UEC is currently taking advantage of this.
Nuclear Energy Growth Is Driving Demand for Uranium
The timing of Burke Hollow’s launch aligns with a broader global shift back toward nuclear energy. Governments are increasingly turning to nuclear power as a reliable, low-carbon energy source.

The International Atomic Energy Agency projects that global nuclear capacity could double by 2050, depending on policy and investment trends. This would require a significant increase in uranium supply.
In the United States, nuclear energy accounts for around 20% of electricity generation. It also produces zero carbon emissions during operations. This makes it a key component of many net-zero strategies.
There are several factors supporting renewed nuclear demand, including:
- Development of small modular reactors (SMRs)
- Extension of existing nuclear plant lifetimes
- Government funding to maintain nuclear capacity
- Rising electricity demand from data centers and electrification
As demand grows, securing a reliable uranium supply becomes increasingly important.

Reducing Import Risk: A Strategic Domestic Supply Push
The Burke Hollow project also addresses a major vulnerability in U.S. energy policy. The country currently imports about 95% of its uranium needs, leaving it exposed to global supply risks.
A large share of uranium production and enrichment capacity is concentrated in a few countries, including Russia and Kazakhstan. This concentration has raised concerns about supply disruptions and geopolitical risk.

By expanding domestic production, UEC is helping to reduce reliance on imports and strengthen the U.S. nuclear fuel supply chain.
The company’s broader strategy includes building a vertically integrated platform covering mining, processing, and, eventually, uranium conversion. This approach aligns with U.S. government efforts to rebuild domestic nuclear fuel capabilities.
Federal programs have allocated billions to boost uranium production and enrichment. This shows how important the sector is.
Two Hubs, One Strategy: Wyoming Supports the Texas Breakthrough
While Burke Hollow is the main focus, UEC’s Christensen Ranch operation in Wyoming remains an important part of its production base.
The Wyoming site has recently received approvals for expanded wellfield development, allowing it to increase output alongside the Texas operation.
Together, the two sites form the foundation of UEC’s dual-hub production model. However, it is the Texas project that marks the first new U.S. uranium mine in over a decade, making it the central milestone in the company’s growth strategy.
Investor Momentum Builds Around Uranium Revival
The restart of U.S. uranium production is drawing strong attention from investors and industry players. Uranium markets have tightened in recent years, driven by rising demand and limited new supply.
UEC’s production launch has already had a positive market impact. The company’s share price rose following the announcement, reflecting investor confidence in its growth strategy.

At the same time, utilities are increasing long-term contracting activity to secure fuel supply. This trend is expected to continue as new nuclear capacity comes online and existing plants extend operations.
Industry forecasts suggest that uranium demand will remain strong through the 2030s, supporting higher prices and increased investment in new production.
Lower Impact Mining, Higher ESG Expectations
The use of ISR mining at Burke Hollow reflects a broader shift toward more sustainable extraction methods. ISR typically reduces land disturbance and avoids large-scale excavation.
However, environmental management remains critical. Key issues include groundwater protection, chemical use, and long-term site restoration.
UEC has emphasized environmental controls and regulatory compliance in its operations. These efforts are important for maintaining social license and meeting ESG expectations.
From a climate perspective, uranium production plays an indirect but important role. Supporting nuclear energy, it helps enable low-carbon electricity generation and reduces reliance on fossil fuels.
The Bottom Line: A Defining Moment for U.S. Uranium Production
The launch of the Burke Hollow mine marks a major milestone for the U.S. uranium sector. It ends a decade-long gap in new mine development and signals renewed momentum in domestic production.
In the short term, it strengthens supply and supports rising uranium markets. In the long term, it highlights the growing role of nuclear energy in global decarbonization strategies.
UEC’s Burke Hollow shows that new uranium projects can advance in today’s market. There are still challenges, like scaling production and handling environmental risks, but progress is possible.
As demand for nuclear energy continues to grow, domestic projects like Burke Hollow will play a key role in shaping the future of energy security and low-carbon power.
The post U.S. Uranium Mining Returns: UEC Launches First New Mine in a Decade appeared first on Carbon Credits.
-
Climate Change8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases8 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
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
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 Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Renewable Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits


