Denmark has made history with the largest government procurement of durable carbon dioxide removal (CDR), totaling almost $24 million (Dkr 166 million). The Danish Energy Agency has awarded contracts to three companies for new CCS (CO2 Capture and Storage) projects, marking the completion of the fund for negative emissions (NECCS fund).
These projects will ensure the capture and storage of 160,350 tonnes of CO2 annually from 2026 to 2032. This is equivalent to the CO2 absorption of around 16,000 hectares of forest per year.
Denmark’s Carbon Capture Coup
The agreement, the second-largest of its kind globally, involves purchasing 1.1 million tons of durable carbon removal from three companies: BioCirc, Bioman ApS, and Carbon Capture Scotland. The largest CDR deal is between Microsoft and Ørsted, involving the purchase of 2.76 million metric tons of removal credits.
BioCirc CO2 ApS and Bioman ApS have secured contracts for CO2 capture and storage, while Carbon Capture Scotland Limited is expected to finalize its contract soon.
The successful bidding process indicates market interest in capturing and storing biogenic CO2 from biomass.
All three projects meet tender requirements and demonstrate the capacity for CO2 capture, transport, and storage. They are expected to advance and mature the CCS value chain in Denmark, with plans to store CO2 locally.
Each project has different support levels and will capture varying amounts of CO2. Together, they will capture and store 160,350 tonnes of biogenic CO2 annually starting from 2026 until the end of the contract period in 2032. Support will be provided upon confirmation of permanent underground storage of the captured CO2.
The NECCS fund, established as part of the Danish Financial Act of 2022, is designed to support negative emissions via CCS technology. Unlike capturing and storing fossil CO2, which merely reduces emissions, capturing and storing biogenic CO2 from sources like biomass results in negative emissions.
That’s because the CO2 was originally absorbed from the air by plants, effectively removing CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it underground.
The fund aims to facilitate the capture and storage of biogenic CO2, thus contributing to overall CO2 reduction efforts. While three contracts have been awarded from the NECCS fund, not all allocated funds have been used. There are also currently no plans for further bidding rounds.
Danish Decarbonization Drive Toward Net Zero
This move is part of Denmark’s net zero strategies, which originally aimed at reaching net zero emissions by 2050. But the new Danish government set forth ambitious climate change targets. It has set a world-leading goal of a 70% emission reduction by 2030 and net zero by 2045.
Additionally, they plan to reduce CO2 emissions nationally by 110% by 2050, surpassing 1990 levels and reaching a negative emission rate. The Danish Parliament also decided to phase out oil and gas extraction in the North Sea by 2050.
To support these objectives, the government intends to implement an emission levy on the agriculture sector and impose a tax on air travel, similar to measures adopted in Germany and Sweden.
Denmark has seen a consistent decline in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with the electricity generation sector leading the way. The sector has reduced its emissions by ⅔ between 1990 and 2019, largely due to the increased use of renewables. This has resulted in Denmark having one of the lowest emission intensities among OECD countries.

Over the past decade, Denmark has also reduced its energy intensity by a quarter, indicating a shift towards a more energy-efficient economy. Renewable energy sources, particularly biofuels, and wind power, play a significant role in Denmark’s energy mix. It contributes to its relatively high share of the total energy supply from renewables.
Despite these achievements, Denmark still faces challenges related to demand-based emissions. While production-based emissions have consistently declined over the past fifteen years, demand-based emissions remain significant.
However, Denmark’s efforts to reduce its energy intensity and increase renewable energy use demonstrate its commitment to transitioning towards net zero.
Denmark’s Roadmap to Net Zero
According to BCG’s new decarbonization roadmap for the Nordic nations, Denmark can reach its net zero goal through this pathway:

To achieve its climate targets, Denmark must address four challenging sectors:
- Public electricity and heat production must transition to fossil-free sources.
- The transport sector needs to adopt greener practices.
- Agriculture must strive to become carbon neutral.
- The industry sector must work towards becoming emission-free.

CCS technology can help Denmark’s industrial sector in reducing carbon emissions, which can contribute to a 34% reduction in the country’s total emissions. Other measures include enhancing fuel efficiency in engines, optimizing processes, and reducing energy consumption from equipment.
Moreover, using bio-based materials has the potential to abate 0.8 Mt CO2e emissions by 2050. Notably, implementing carbon capture and storage for about 50% of cement emissions are crucial steps toward achieving Denmark’s climate goals.
The NECCS announcement coincides with recent agreements among 5 northern European countries for the transport and storage of CO2 in the North Sea. Denmark’s proactive approach to carbon reduction includes previous agreements with Belgium, the Netherlands, and France to facilitate cross-border CO2 transport and storage.
All these initiatives are part of the Danish government’s CCS plan to ramp up the process for capture and storage. Under this proposed plan, Denmark earmarked EUR 3.6B (Dkr 27B) for CCUS tenders.
Denmark is charting an impressive course towards achieving net zero emissions through a combination of innovation, investment, and collaboration. With groundbreaking carbon capture projects like the NECCS fund and ambitious climate targets, Denmark is largely contributing to the global effort of combatting climate change.
The post Denmark Made Largest Government CDR Purchase of Almost $24 Million 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 Gases9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change9 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

