Deep Sky, a carbon removal project developer based in Montreal, and Carbfix, the world’s first operator of CO2 mineralization, have partnered to investigate CO2 mineral storage in Canada.
The press release mentions the pre-feasibility study examining potential reservoirs in Quebec for CO2 mineral storage will conclude in June.
The Role of Deep Sky
Deep Sky, renowned for its commitment to developing cutting-edge environmental technologies aims to revolutionize carbon capture and storage practices with this groundbreaking project.
Phil De Luna, Chief Carbon Scientist, Head of Engineering at Deep Sky noted,
At Deep Sky, we’re constantly on the lookout for new technologies that can capture carbon dioxide from the air or the ocean. The principle of engineered carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is relatively simple, separating a gas (CO2) from other gases (air) at very low concentrations. However, there are myriad ways and chemistries to make that separation happen.
CO2 mineralization, also known as carbon capture and storage (CCS) through mineralization. It involves the conversion of CO2 into stable mineral forms through chemical reactions with certain rocks. This process mimics and accelerates the natural geological carbon sequestration process, locking away CO2 for thousands of years.
Notably, Carbfix is a pioneer in “converting CO2 into stone”. The unique technique involves injecting CO2 into basaltic rock formations. Subsequently, reacting with minerals to form stable carbonates, effectively trapping the CO2 underground.
According to Carbfix, the company has injected 103, 273.5 MTs of CO2 since 2014.
It believes Europe alone can “theoretically” store at least 4,000 billion tons of CO2 in rocks while the United States can store at least 7,500 billion tons.
source: Carbfix
Let’s understand how the joint venture will help implement the process.
Project Implementation
In this partnership, the companies will screen geological and geochemical data of the selected subsurface. They will conduct laboratory work on ultramafic rock formations in various Quebec regions of Canada.
The CO2 mineralization storage project will involve the following key steps:
1.Site Selection: Identifying suitable basaltic rock formations for CO2 injection based on geological characteristics and proximity to emission sources.
2. Injection Process: Injecting CO2 captured from industrial sources into the selected basaltic reservoirs at controlled pressures and temperatures to initiate the mineralization reaction.
3. Monitoring and Verification: Implementing rigorous monitoring and verification protocols to assess the effectiveness of CO2 mineralization, track carbon storage volumes, and ensure the long-term integrity of storage sites.
4. Scaling Up: Scaling up the project to demonstrate its feasibility for large-scale deployment across various industrial sectors and geographical regions.
Subsequently, this data will assess the formations’ potential for in-situ carbon mineralization and safe, permanent CO2 sequestration. This is how their unique process transforms CO2 into stone underground within a couple of years.
Image of CO2 mineralization at an industrial scale
Source: Carbfix
Potential Impact of Deep Sky-Carbfix Collaboration
The successful implementation of the Deep Sky-Carbfix CO2 mineralization storage project holds immense promise for addressing the global climate crisis. Some key anticipated impacts include:
Carbon Emission Reduction: It can significantly reduce carbon emissions from industrial sources by capturing and storing CO2 in mineral form. Thereby helping to meet emission reduction targets outlined in international climate agreements.
Climate Mitigation: It would contribute to climate mitigation efforts by removing CO2 from the atmosphere and preventing its release. Thus, mitigating the adverse effects of global warming and climate change.
Technology Adoption: It can enhance the adoption of CO2 mineralization technology as a cost-effective and sustainable CCS solution across various industries.
The company aims to rapidly and permanently store one billion tons of CO2 (1GtCO2) to play a pivotal role in addressing the climate crisis.
Quebec’s Geological Heritage
Quebec boasts a rich and diverse geological history, with a wide variety of rocks shaped by volcanic activity, erosion, tectonic movements, and other geological processes over millions of years. The province’s geological heritage serves as a testament to the immense power of nature and a potential site for CO2 mineralization projects.
Edda Aradottir, Carbfix CEO commented,
“Our partnership with Deep Sky demonstrates Carbfix’s dedication to pioneering sustainable value chains and solutions for safe and permanent carbon storage. This collaboration in Québec is a key step towards realizing global net-zero ambitions, illustrating our shared commitment towards climate recovery.”
By partnering with Carbfix, we believe Deep Sky has combined its innovative approach with the former’s state-of-the-art CO2 mineralization technology.
“…”What gets measured gets managed. But what gets audited gets trusted….”
The disclosures regulators, auditors, and investors now read the same way they read your financial statements.
For most of the last decade, Scope 3 emissions sat in the appendix of the sustainability report. Auditors skimmed past it. Investors filed it under “nice to have.” Boards approved it without much pushback. The number was directional, the methodology was opaque, and everyone seemed comfortable with that arrangement.
That arrangement is now over. In the last 24 months, your Scope 3 reduction strategy has migrated from the appendix to the front of the disclosure file. The auditors who used to skim past it are now flagging it. The investors who used to file it are now asking follow-up questions on earnings calls. The boards that used to approve it are now asking whether you can defend the number under sworn testimony. The shift is uncomfortable but it is also rational, and you need a Scope 3 reduction strategy that holds up.
This article explains what changed, where most Scope 3 inventories fall apart under scrutiny, and what corporates with material exposure are doing to prepare.
What “audited Scope 3” actually means in 2026
Under the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, large companies operating in the European Union must now disclose Scope 3 emissions across all relevant value chain categories, with the same assurance expectations applied to financial reporting. The European Sustainability Reporting Standards require limited assurance now, with reasonable assurance phasing in over the next several years.
In the United States, the SEC’s climate disclosure rule remains contested in court, but California’s SB 253 requires large companies doing business in the state to disclose Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions with third-party assurance. The International Sustainability Standards Board’s IFRS S2 standard, adopted in over 20 jurisdictions, requires climate-related disclosures that auditors and securities regulators can test.
The practical effect is consistent across geographies. Scope 3 is no longer a marketing number. It is a regulated disclosure that travels with your financial statements and carries comparable legal weight.
Where most Scope 3 inventories fall apart under scrutiny
Three failure modes turn up over and over.
The first is over-reliance on spend-based methods. Most companies started Scope 3 reporting by multiplying spend by an industry-average emission factor, following the methodology set out in the GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard. That works for an initial estimate. It does not work for an audit. When the auditor asks why your category 1 number assumes the industry average for your top supplier, the answer “because we have not asked them” is no longer acceptable.
The second is missing or inconsistent supplier data. Category 1 (purchased goods and services) and category 11 (use of sold products) together can represent 70% or more of a company’s total footprint, according to CDP Supply Chain research. If half your tier-one suppliers have no measured data, your Scope 3 number is half a guess, and the auditor will say so.
The third is the boundary problem. What counts as part of your value chain, where the boundary sits between Scope 3 category 1 and category 4, how franchised operations are treated, how joint ventures are consolidated: each of these is now an auditable judgment. Two years ago, a quiet footnote covered the ambiguity. Now the footnote itself becomes the audit finding.
The shift from disclosure to defensibility
The reframe you need is not technical, it is governance. Your Scope 3 reduction strategy is now a disclosure controls question, in the same way that revenue recognition is a financial controls question. The auditors apply the same logic: where did the number come from, who signed off on the method, how is the supporting evidence retained, and how do you correct it when it turns out to be wrong.
What this means in practice: the procurement and finance functions are now stakeholders in your carbon math, whether you invited them or not. Procurement controls supplier data quality. Finance controls the documentation discipline that supports the disclosure. The CSO who used to own Scope 3 alone now owns it jointly with the controller and the head of procurement.
Why reduction strategy now sits inside procurement and finance
This is where the strategic question shifts. If the data sits with procurement and the disclosure controls sit with finance, your reduction strategy has to sit there too. Buying offsets in November to clean up a Q4 disclosure is not a reduction strategy; it is a write-down. Reducing the emissions inside your supply chain, at the supplier level, with verifiable interventions: that is what survives audit.
The Morgan Stanley Institute for Sustainable Investing survey published in January 2026 found that current and future carbon credit buyers expect 65% of their net-zero progress to come from inside the value chain, with 24% from supplier action and 41% from their own operations. Only 7% expect to rely on carbon removals to offset residual emissions. That number is the consensus view of where Scope 3 reduction strategy is heading: into the supply chain, embedded in procurement contracts, with finance signing off on the documentation.
Nature-based supply chain investments are the asset class purpose-built for this shift. They sit inside the company’s value chain rather than outside it. They generate verifiable emissions reductions that flow through Scope 3 categories 1 and 4 under the GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard. They produce the documentation trail an auditor can test. And they deliver operational co-benefits, including yield resilience, supplier loyalty, and regulatory readiness, that make the carbon math sustainable across the multi-year horizon that disclosure now requires.
If you are responsible for a Scope 3 reduction strategy that will face audit, investor questioning, and regulatory review across the next reporting cycle, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help you map your exposure to a Dual-Value Model engagement built for that scrutiny. Schedule a consultation.
Selecting a carbon credit provider has become a material decision for corporate sustainability teams. Regulatory requirements are tightening, independent rating agencies now scrutinise credit quality, and procurement standards have risen accordingly. Buyers increasingly require clear evidence of where capital is directed and what each credit delivers.
The lithium story at Nevada North is well understood. The project has scale, grade, and long-term production potential.
What is less discussed is the presence of other critical minerals within the same system. Recent drill results show that rubidium (Rb) and cesium (Cs) occur alongside lithium mineralization at the Nevada North Lithium Project (NNLP) of Surge Battery Metals (TSX-V: NILI | OTCQX: NILIF). These elements are not the primary focus of development today, but they may represent an additional strategic layer of value.
Both rubidium and cesium are classified as critical minerals in the United States. Yet, neither mineral is mined domestically, and supply is largely dependent on imports, mainly from China and Canada. At the same time, both elements are used in high-value applications such as atomic clocks, fiber optics, satellite systems, and advanced defense electronics.
A New Layer in the Drill Results
In early 2026, assay results from NNLP began to highlight the consistent presence of rubidium and cesium within the lithium-bearing zones.
Follow-up results from the February 25, 2026, news release showed similar trends. Infill drilling returned values of up to:
349 ppm rubidium
163 ppm cesium
These results are important because they show that rubidium and cesium are directly associated with the lithium core, not isolated occurrences. This suggests a consistent geological relationship across the deposit.
At this stage, these findings remain exploration results. They have not been incorporated into the project’s Preliminary Economic Assessment, and their economic contribution is still being evaluated. However, their presence is clear and repeatable across multiple drill holes.
Rubidium and Cesium for Tech and Defense
Rubidium and cesium are not widely known compared to lithium, but they play critical roles in advanced technologies.
Cesium is used in atomic clocks, which are essential for GPS systems, telecommunications networks, and defense infrastructure. It is also used in specialty drilling fluids and electronics.
Rubidium is used in fiber optic systems, specialty glass, and emerging quantum technologies. Both elements are also relevant for aerospace and satellite applications.
Despite their importance, the global supply is limited. There are a few large-scale producers, and production is often tied to other mining operations rather than dedicated projects. As a result, supply chains can be concentrated and less transparent than those for more widely traded commodities.
For the United States, this creates a dependency on imported material for applications that are increasingly tied to national security and advanced technology.
More Than Lithium: A Multi-Critical-Mineral Profile
The presence of rubidium and cesium at NNLP introduces a different way to view the project. It is not only a lithium resource, but potentially a multi-critical-mineral system. The project’s updated resource base includes 10.5 million tonnes LCE in Measured & Indicated categories, with additional high-grade mineralization identified at 3,820 ppm lithium.
This does not change the core development strategy, which remains focused on lithium. However, it adds another dimension to how the asset may be evaluated over time.
Recent developments also point to growing confidence in the project’s advancement. On June 3, Surge Battery Metals announced a strategic financing of up to C$30 million, with an option to increase the amount to C$36 million.
The company said the funding is intended to help fast-track Nevada North toward a construction decision. The financing strengthens Surge’s ability to continue resource development, metallurgical work, and project studies while further evaluating the broader critical mineral potential of the deposit.
Graham Harris, Chairman of Surge, commented,
“This announcement marks a defining moment for Surge. With Nevada North fully funded, upon the successful closing, toward a construction decision, and with Brian and Michael leading our Strategic Advisory Board, we believe that we have the capital, the expertise, and the relationships to move this project at the pace the current environment demands. The United States is focused on developing a secure and sustainable domestic supply of critical minerals.[2] Once constructed, we plan to participate in the domestic supply of lithium through Nevada North.”
Some of the key points to consider include:
Rubidium and cesium are co-located with lithium mineralization, not in separate zones.
Both elements are classified as critical minerals with a limited U.S. supply.
Supply chains are currently import-dependent, with concentration in a few countries, but no data is available on specific percentages.
NNLP is a domestic resource located in Nevada.
These factors align with broader trends in resource development, where projects are increasingly assessed not only for their primary commodity but also for associated critical minerals.
Ongoing Evaluation Through Metallurgy: Can Rb & Cs Add Value?
At this stage, the key question is not whether rubidium and cesium are present, but how they behave during processing.
Surge Battery Metals is evaluating the deportment of these elements as part of its ongoing metallurgical work. This step is important. It will determine whether these minerals can be recovered, how they interact with lithium processing, and whether they could contribute to future project economics.
Moreover, it is too early to draw conclusions yet. No economic assumptions have been made for rubidium or cesium in the current project studies. However, identifying their presence at this stage allows for a more complete understanding of the resource.
Strategic Context: Beyond Batteries
The broader context is also evolving. Critical minerals are increasingly tied to national strategy, not just market demand.
Lithium remains central to EVs and energy storage. But rubidium and cesium connect the project to defense, communications, and advanced technology sectors. These are areas where supply security is becoming a priority.
In this sense, NNLP sits at the intersection of multiple strategic themes:
Energy transition, through lithium,
Technology infrastructure, through battery materials and electronics, and
National security, through the critical mineral supply.
This combination is not common among lithium projects, particularly within Nevada clay deposits.
Standing Out in Nevada’s Lithium Landscape
Within the Nevada lithium landscape, most projects are evaluated on grade, scale, and processing pathways. NNLP meets those criteria. The additional presence of rubidium and cesium introduces a differentiated element that is not widely highlighted in comparable projects.
Importantly, this differentiation should be viewed with the right level of caution. These elements are still under study. Their economic value has not been defined, and their recovery is not yet established.
At the same time, their consistent presence in drilling results is a data point worth noting, especially in a market where supply chains for critical minerals are under increasing scrutiny.
The Next Chapter for Nevada North’s Mineral Story
As metallurgical work progresses, more information will become available on how rubidium and cesium behave within the NNLP system. This will help determine whether they remain a geological feature or evolve into a potential secondary value stream.
For now, the key takeaway is straightforward. Nevada North is not only a lithium project. It is also a broader critical mineral system, with exposure to materials that support advanced technology and defense applications.
The latest financing also highlights how Nevada North is moving beyond the exploration stage. With the project now supported by a major strategic funding package and an expanded advisory team, attention is increasingly shifting toward development readiness and long-term value creation.
While lithium remains the primary focus, the presence of additional critical minerals may provide further strategic relevance as the project advances. And in a market focused on securing supply chains, that distinction may become more relevant over time.
New Era Publishing Inc. and/or CarbonCredits.com (“We” or “Us”) are not securities dealers or brokers, investment advisers, or financial advisers, and you should not rely on the information herein as investment advice. Surge Battery Metals Inc. (“Company”) made a one-time payment of $75,000 to provide marketing services for a term of three months. None of the owners, members, directors, or employees of New Era Publishing Inc. and/or CarbonCredits.com currently hold, or have any beneficial ownership in, any shares, stocks, or options of the companies mentioned.
This article is informational only and is solely for use by prospective investors in determining whether to seek additional information. It does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Examples that we provide of share price increases pertaining to a particular issuer from one referenced date to another represent arbitrarily chosen time periods and are no indication whatsoever of future stock prices for that issuer and are of no predictive value.
Our stock profiles are intended to highlight certain companies for your further investigation; they are not stock recommendations or an offer or sale of the referenced securities. The securities issued by the companies we profile should be considered high-risk; if you do invest despite these warnings, you may lose your entire investment. Please do your own research before investing, including reviewing the companies’ SEDAR+ and SEC filings, press releases, and risk disclosures.
It is our policy that information contained in this profile was provided by the company, extracted from SEDAR+ and SEC filings, company websites, and other publicly available sources. We believe the sources and information are accurate and reliable but we cannot guarantee them.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT AND FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
Certain statements contained in this news release may constitute “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Forward-looking information generally can be identified by words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “plan,” and similar expressions suggesting future outcomes or events. Forward-looking information is based on current expectations of management; however, it is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated.
These factors include, without limitation, statements relating to the Company’s exploration and development plans, the potential of its mineral projects, financing activities, regulatory approvals, market conditions, and future objectives. Forward-looking information involves numerous risks and uncertainties and actual results might differ materially from results suggested in any forward-looking information. These risks and uncertainties include, among other things, market volatility, the state of financial markets for the Company’s securities, fluctuations in commodity prices, operational challenges, and changes in business plans.
Forward-looking information is based on several key expectations and assumptions, including, without limitation, that the Company will continue with its stated business objectives and will be able to raise additional capital as required. Although management of the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated, or intended.
There can be no assurance that such forward-looking information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. Additional information about risks and uncertainties is contained in the Company’s management’s discussion and analysis and annual information form for the year ended December 31, 2025, copies of which are available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.
The forward-looking information contained herein is expressly qualified in its entirety by this cautionary statement. Forward-looking information reflects management’s current beliefs and is based on information currently available to the Company. The forward-looking information is made as of the date of this news release, and the Company assumes no obligation to update or revise such information to reflect new events or circumstances except as may be required by applicable law.
Disclosure: Owners, members, directors, and employees of carboncredits.com have/may have stock or option positions in any of the companies mentioned: None.
Carboncredits.com receives compensation for this publication and has a business relationship with any company whose stock(s) is/are mentioned in this article.
Additional disclosure: This communication serves the sole purpose of adding value to the research process and is for information only. Please do your own due diligence. Every investment in securities mentioned in publications of carboncredits.com involves risks that could lead to a total loss of the invested capital.
Disclosure: Owners, members, directors, and employees of carboncredits.com have/may have stock or option positions in any of the companies mentioned: None.
Carboncredits.com receives compensation for this publication and has a business relationship with any company whose stock(s) is/are mentioned in this article.
Additional disclosure: This communication serves the sole purpose of adding value to the research process and is for information only. Please do your own due diligence. Every investment in securities mentioned in publications of carboncredits.com involves risks that could lead to a total loss of the invested capital.
