Connect with us

Published

on

Climate change is the defining issue of our time, and we are at a defining moment. We face a direct existential threat.

According to the World Economic Forum’s 2022 Global Risks Report, climate change risks are now classified as worlds’ biggest threats.

The Urgency of Climate Change Risks

Failure to take climate action and extreme weather events top the list of threats for the next 5-10 years. These risks lead to additional environmental issues such as biodiversity loss, resource scarcity, and environmental degradation. In 2022, environmental risks dominated the top five global risks for the first time.

Financial Impact on Global Companies

Climate-related risks significantly impact a company’s revenues, costs, operations, and strategy. A 2019 report found that over 200 of the largest global companies faced nearly $1 trillion in climate impacts over five years.

Climate Change – An Investment Concern for SMEs

Climate change is not just an environmental issue but also a critical investment issue for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The SEC’s 2021 examination priorities reflect a growing focus on climate-related risks as investors increasingly consider these risks in their decisions. SMEs face new and growing risks such as natural hazards, technological risks, real estate loss, and rising energy and raw material costs due to climate change. Furthermore, concerns regarding costs for maintenance and infrastructure reconstruction must also be addressed.

Financial Risk Mitigation for SMEs

By proactively managing their environmental impact, SMEs can mitigate these risks and safeguard their financial stability.

Regulatory Compliance

Governments are increasingly implementing policies and regulations aimed at reducing GHG emissions, such as carbon taxes, emissions trading systems, and stringent reporting requirements. SMEs need to comply with these regulations to avoid penalties and remain competitive in their markets.

Investor Expectations

Increasingly investors are considering climate risks and prioritizing sustainability. SMEs that fail to address their environmental impact will find it harder to attract investment, while those that demonstrate robust environmental management practices are likely to gain traction.

Market Competitiveness

Millennials’ and Gen Zs’ attitudes and demand for environmentally friendly products and services is growing steadily. SMEs that want to appeal to these increasingly dominant demographics must commit to reducing their GHG emissions and developing sustainable products. These are tactics that can lead to increased market share and customer loyalty with these consumers.

Operational Efficiency

Monitoring and reducing GHG emissions can lead to increased energy efficiency and lower operational costs. By optimizing energy use and reducing waste, SMEs can achieve cost savings and improve their bottom line, which in turn also increases their appeal to potential investors.

Corporate Reputation

Companies that manage their environmental impacts proactively are seen as responsible and forward-thinking. This enhances their brand reputation, builds trust with internal and external stakeholders, and leads directly to better financial outcomes:

  1. Sales increase due to increased customer satisfaction and loyalty
  2. Employee retention increases in response to employees’ higher job satisfaction, leading to increases in operational efficiency, and savings on recruitment costs.

Businesses’ Perspective on Climate Change

Michael E. Porter and Forest L. Reinhardt from Harvard Business School emphasize that treating climate change as a business problem, rather than just a corporate social responsibility issue, is essential. Companies that fail to adapt will face severe consequences. By monitoring and reducing GHG emissions, businesses can increase energy efficiency, which lowers costs and enhances profitability.

Starting Sustainable Business Practices

In the context of managing climate-related risks and optimizing operational efficiency, it’s clear that integrating sustainable practices, such as utilizing carbon credits (more on this below) is vital for SMEs. According to Michael E. Porter and Forest L. Reinhardt from Harvard Business School: “Companies that persist in treating climate change solely as a corporate social responsibility issue, rather than a business problem, will risk the greatest consequences”.

Achieving Net-Zero: Key Steps

Unlocking the aforementioned benefits, reducing financial risks, meeting regulatory compliance, and meeting investor expectations all hinge on a company’s ability to, not only manage its carbon footprint, but also bring it to net-zero. This requires the company to:

  • Have awareness for, and keep tabs on, its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
  • Create and enact a plan for reducing these emissions through improvements to operational efficiency, technology, and practices.
  • For those GHGs that cannot be reduced or removed thanks to improved efficiencies and changed business practices, companies must engage in carbon emission trading, where they buy and sell carbon credits to account for whatever emissions remain.

But before we can consider these trades, it’s important to understand the global frameworks that have been developed and approved to help businesses do their greenhouse gas emission accounting correctly.

Introducing the GHG Protocol Standard for SMEs

The GHG Protocol Standard, published by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), is a crucial framework for SMEs aiming to manage and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. It is the most comprehensive, policy-neutral evaluation tool for quantifying GHG. This globally recognized standard helps define, measure and report emissions across three scopes:

  • Scope 1 – Direct emissions
  • Scope 2 – Indirect emissions from purchased energy.
  • Scope 3 – Other indirect emissions within the value chain.

The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard requires businesses to report their scope 1 and 2 emissions, whereas scope 3 is voluntary, however companies that report all three scopes stand to gain the most definitive and sustainable advantages. Let’s dive in and understand these three scopes a little better…

Scope 1: Direct Emissions

Scope 1 emissions are those directly produced by the company’s activities. These include:

  • Stationary Combustion: Emissions from fuel used for heating and other stationary sources.
  • Mobile Combustion: Emissions from company-owned vehicles.
  • Fugitive Emissions: Greenhouse gas leaks from equipment like air conditioning units.
  • Process Emissions: Emissions released during manufacturing and industrial processes.

Scope 2: Indirect Emissions-Owned

Scope 2 emissions are indirect emissions from the consumption of energy that the company purchases from utility providers, such as electricity.

Scope 3: Indirect Emissions-Not Owned

Scope 3 emissions are all other indirect emissions occurring in the company’s value chain. These emissions come from sources not owned or directly controlled by the company, such as:

  • Purchased goods and services
  • Financial investments
  • Storage by other companies
  • Transportation and distribution of manufactured goods
  • Use and disposal of sold products
  • Activities of the company’s franchisees
  • Leasing of assets
  • Business travel and staff commuting
  • Waste management and processing
  • Capital goods like machinery, vehicles, buildings, and offices

Aggregate and Report Emissions

Once the company is aware of its emissions across all three scopes, these should be aggregated into the company’s total emissions value, which may then be reported using standardized formats, such as the GHG Protocol reporting template.

Using the GHG Protocol Standard helps companies not only to create effective strategies for managing and reducing emissions, but also to achieve related business goals:

  • Identifying GHG Reduction Opportunities: Find ways to lower emissions.
  • Managing Emission Risks: Assess and handle risks related to GHG emissions.
  • Public Reporting: Participate in voluntary programs for monitoring and reducing GHGs.
  • Regulatory Compliance: Meet mandatory GHG emissions reporting requirements.

The GHG Protocol Standard can be viewed as the roadmap by which a company may align its sustainability efforts to global best practices. It’s a research backed pathway towards better environmental and business performance.

Financial metrics

While measuring a company’s environmental impact is a painstaking process, it’s ultimately an exercise in accounting. As can be expected, this accounting becomes more complex when a number of companies are working together to complete a project, since it becomes increasingly difficult and messy to figure out how to allocate the projects’ environmental impact among the participating companies. This is where financed emissions come into play.

Understanding Financed Emissions

Financed emissions involve aggregating GHG emissions at the portfolio level, linked to the underlying entities or projects. These emissions are allocated proportionally based on the financial stake in the underlying entity or project.

The Role of Carbon Credits

Once a company has a clear insight into its overall carbon footprint, it can start formulating a plan on how to reduce it. This typically includes steps towards optimizing energy consumption and reducing waste, however in most cases there’s a certain portion of the company’s environmental impact that can’t be “optimized” away. It’s precisely for handling the zero-ing out the carbon accounting of this remainder that Carbon Credits were invented.

Carbon credits are certificates denoting audited equivalents for the removal of one metric ton of carbon dioxide, or its equivalent in GHGs, from the atmosphere, and can be bought and sold on specialized markets.

Companies can purchase these credits to cover whatever emission deficit they have remaining after eliminating as much as their footprint as possible through process, energy and waste optimizations.

By effectively managing their GHG emissions and utilizing carbon credits, companies can reduce their environmental impact, comply with regulations, and meet investor expectations.

The Practicality Aspects of Carbon Accounting

In terms of practicality, the effort required to estimate GHG emissions/financed emissions at the group level is highly dependent on the level of accuracy desired – Tracking such emissions from the bottom up for each relationship can become impractical and exceed the estimated value of the entire effort. Approximation methods exist, but these are subject to critiquing over their accuracy and value.

Conclusion

Ultimately an organization’s commitment to becoming net-zero comes down to the degree to which every individual in the organization feels committed to this goal. The existing frameworks provide best practice guidelines for organizations’ for strategy, reporting, and implementations, but the degree to which execution is motivated by mere compliance or by deeply held beliefs are what will dictate the outcome. The overarching principle should be to focus on the forest – becoming net-zero, rather than the trees – overthinking the accounting.

Image Credit

Thomas Richter on Unsplash

Carbon Footprint

Why a forest with more species stores more carbon

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

OpenAI Hits Pause on $40B UK AI Project: Energy Costs Shake Data Center Economics

Published

on

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. 

data center electricity use 2035
Source: IEA

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.

chatgpt environmental footprint

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.

AI servers annual carbon emissions
Note: carbon emissions (g) of AI servers from 2024 to 2030 under different scenarios. The red dashed lines in e–g denote the forecast footprint of the US data centres, based on previous literature. Source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-025-01681-y

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.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

U.S. Uranium Mining Returns: UEC Launches First New Mine in a Decade

Published

on

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.

UEC burke hollow resources

UEC Christensen Ranch resources

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.

nuclear power capacity additions IAEA projection 2024 to 2050
Source: IAEA

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.

uranium demand and supply UEC

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.

uranium production US 2025 EIA

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.

UEC stock price

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.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com