The European Union (EU) and China have made headlines with their latest joint climate statement ahead of COP30. While the agreement emphasizes clean energy and green technology, it stops short of committing to reducing coal use—a decision that has left many environmental groups concerned. Still, the partnership reflects a shift in global climate diplomacy, especially with U.S. leadership appearing uncertain.
Let’s break down the statement, its implications, and the key challenges ahead.
Clean Tech, Not Coal Cuts: What the Climate Statement Promised
At the EU-China Summit in Beijing on July 24, 2025, leaders from both sides released a joint press statement. The focus was on reinforcing their partnership in addressing climate change while promoting clean technologies like solar, hydropower, electric vehicles (EVs), and battery storage. The statement marked the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement and the 50th year of diplomatic relations between the two powers.
Key commitments include:
- Supporting the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement as the backbone of global climate cooperation.
- Turning climate targets into real-world outcomes through systematic policies.
- Submit updated 2035 climate goals (NDCs) before COP30, covering all sectors and greenhouse gases.
- Expanding global renewable energy access and sharing green technologies, especially with developing countries.
- Boosting adaptation support to help nations respond to climate threats.
- Collaborating on areas like methane reduction, carbon markets, and low-carbon technology.
Yet, coal was left unaddressed. Despite growing pressure from environmental advocates, the statement made no mention of cutting coal use, a major source of global emissions.

A United Push for Renewable Energy
The EU and China’s climate focus now leans heavily toward clean technology development and cooperation. This includes:
- Solar panel production and installation.
- Scaling up EV adoption with better batteries and charging infrastructure.
- Building large-scale battery storage systems for better grid reliability.
These technologies could significantly lower emissions and make clean energy more affordable and accessible worldwide. Both China and the EU have strong manufacturing bases, positioning them as global leaders in the green tech race.
Their cooperation could be especially useful for developing countries struggling with the high costs of clean energy. If done right, this tech-sharing strategy could support global decarbonization and improve climate equity.
China’s Medog Dam: Climate Win or Ecological Fallout?
One of the most ambitious pieces in China’s green energy puzzle is the Medog Dam project in Tibet. With an estimated cost of $137 billion, the dam will become the largest hydropower station in the world. Once completed, it will generate around 300 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity annually, which could replace energy from hundreds of coal plants.
This scale of clean power is a major boost to China’s goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2060.
However, the project has drawn criticism for its environmental and geopolitical risks:
- Built in a fragile ecosystem, near the Yarlung Tsangpo Grand Canyon, the dam could harm biodiversity, impact river flows, and disrupt agriculture downstream.
- Local communities face displacement, raising humanitarian concerns.
- The dam’s location near the India-China border adds fuel to regional tensions, especially over shared water resources.
Environmental experts have also raised alarms about the lack of transparency around impact studies. While the project promises millions of tons of emissions savings, its ecological footprint could offset the climate gains if not managed responsibly.
Carbon markets and clean-tech exports offer hope for climate progress. But without firm commitments to end coal dependency and without stronger oversight of mega-projects, the climate gains may fall short. This balancing act between energy security and environmental integrity is one of the key challenges that the EU and China must address moving forward.
Is China Exporting Clean? And at What Cost?
China is stepping up its global presence as a major exporter of clean technologies. Today, it leads the world in the production of solar panels, electric vehicles (EVs), and batteries.
As per reports,
- This surge in clean-tech exports is expected to reduce global emissions by as much as 2.5 billion tons by 2030—equivalent to removing 500 million cars from the world’s roads.
- It saved 4Gt as the cumulative lifetime savings from just 2024 exports.

This boom is doing two things simultaneously. It supports climate action globally by offering countries affordable green alternatives, and it boosts China’s economy and expands its geopolitical influence, especially in emerging and developing markets.
However, there’s one more side of the leaf which isn’t so green. The environmental costs of producing these technologies can be significant. Mining and manufacturing components like lithium and rare earth elements often lead to high emissions.
If these upstream processes are not cleaned up, China could end up exporting “dirty green” solutions that undermine the broader climate goals. Life-cycle emissions, i.e., from raw material extraction to final product delivery, must be included when evaluating the real impact of these exports.
Thus, China needs to decarbonize its supply chains and ensure the climate benefits of its clean-tech exports are genuine and lasting.
Impact of EU-China Collaboration on Carbon Markets
One of the most promising outcomes of the EU-China climate statement is the potential impact on international carbon markets. As more countries introduce emissions caps, the demand for carbon credits is expected to surge. Analysts estimate that the carbon market could grow to $100 billion by 2030.
This creates a major opportunity. Companies involved in verifiable clean projects could benefit by generating and trading carbon credits. In turn, these credits can support global decarbonization, especially in hard-to-abate sectors. A stronger and well-functioning carbon trading system could accelerate the pace of emissions reductions worldwide.
However, carbon markets are only effective if they are transparent and based on actual, verified reductions in emissions. Strict rules and enforcement are necessary to prevent greenwashing and to ensure the system does not simply shift emissions from one place to another.
Without trust, data accuracy, and mutual accountability, the effectiveness of carbon markets will remain limited. Both the EU and China must ensure that any expansion of the carbon credit system is built on strong governance and integrity.
- ALSO READ: China’s First-Ever Sovereign Green Bond Hits Global Market: Will It Power Its Net Zero Ambitions?
The post EU-China Joint Climate Deal Focuses on Clean Tech, Skips Coal Commitments appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain
Carbon Footprint
How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living
Americans are paying more for insurance, electricity, taxes, and home repairs every year. What many people may not realize is that climate change is already one of the drivers behind those rising costs.
For many households, climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It is becoming a cost-of-living issue. While climate impacts like melting glaciers and shrinking polar ice can feel distant from everyday life, the financial effects are already showing up in monthly budgets across the country.
Today, a larger share of household income is consumed by fixed costs such as housing, insurance, utilities, and healthcare. (3) Climate change and climate inaction are adding pressure to many of those expenses through higher disaster recovery costs, rising energy demand, infrastructure repairs, and increased insurance risk.
The goal of this article is to help connect climate change to the everyday financial realities people already experience. Regardless of where someone stands on climate policy, it is important to recognize that climate change is already increasing costs for households, businesses, and taxpayers across the United States.
More conservative estimates indicate that the average household has experienced an increase of about $400 per year from observed climate change, while less conservative estimates suggest an increase of $900.(1) Those in more disaster-prone regions of the country face disproportionate costs, with some households experiencing climate-related costs averaging $1,300 per year.(1) Another study found that climate adaptation costs driven by climate change have already consumed over 3% of personal income in the U.S. since 2015.(9) By the end of the century, housing units could spend an additional $5,600 on adaptation costs.(1)
Whether we realize it or not, Americans are already paying for climate change through higher insurance premiums, energy costs, taxes, and infrastructure repairs. These growing expenses are often referred to as climate adaptation costs.
Without meaningful climate action, these costs are expected to continue rising. Choosing not to invest in climate action is also choosing to spend more on climate adaptation.
Here are a few ways climate change is already increasing the cost of living:
- Higher insurance costs from more frequent and severe storms
- Higher energy use during longer and hotter summers
- Higher electricity rates tied to storm recovery and grid upgrades
- Higher government spending and taxpayer-funded disaster recovery costs
The real debate is not whether climate change costs money. Americans are already paying for it. The question is where we want those costs to go. Should we invest more in climate action to help reduce future climate adaptation costs, or continue paying growing recovery and adaptation expenses in everyday life?
How Climate Change Is Increasing Insurance Costs
There is one industry that closely tracks the financial impact of natural disasters: insurance. Insurance companies are focused on assessing risk, estimating damages, and collecting enough revenue to cover losses and remain financially stable.
Comparing the 20-year periods 1980–1999 and 2000–2019, climate-related disasters increased 83% globally from 3,656 events to 6,681 events. The average time between billion-dollar disasters dropped from 82 days during the 1980s to 16 days during the last 10 years, and in 2025 the average time between disasters fell to just 10 days. (6)
According to the reinsurance firm Munich Re, total economic losses from natural disasters in 2024 exceeded $320 billion globally, nearly 40% higher than the decade-long annual average. Average annual inflation-adjusted costs more than quadrupled from $22.6 billion per year in the 1980s to $102 billion per year in the 2010s. Costs increased further to an average of $153.2 billion annually during 2020–2024, representing another 50% increase over the 2010s. (6)
In the United States, billion-dollar weather and climate disasters have also increased significantly. The average number of billion-dollar disasters per year has grown from roughly three annually during the 1980s to 19 annually over the last decade. In 2023 and 2024, the U.S. recorded 28 and 27 billion-dollar disasters respectively, both setting new records. (6)
The growing impact of climate change is one reason insurance costs continue to rise. “There are two things that drive insurance loss costs, which is the frequency of events and how much they cost,” said Robert Passmore, assistant vice president of personal lines at the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. “So, as these events become more frequent, that’s definitely going to have an impact.” (8)
After adjusting for inflation, insurance costs have steadily increased over time. From 2000 to 2020, insurance costs consistently grew faster than the Consumer Price Index due to rising rebuilding costs and weather-related losses.(3) Between 2020 and 2023 alone, the average home insurance premium increased from $75 to $360 due to climate change impacts, with disaster-prone regions experiencing especially steep increases.(1) Since 2015, homeowners in some regions affected by more extreme weather have seen home insurance costs increased by nearly 57%.(1) Some insurers have also limited or stopped offering coverage in high-risk areas.(7)
For many families, rising insurance costs are no longer occasional financial burdens. They are becoming recurring monthly expenses tied directly to growing climate risk.
How Rising Temperatures Increase Household Energy Costs

The financial impacts of climate change extend beyond insurance. Rising temperatures are also changing how much energy Americans use and how utilities plan for future electricity demand.
Between 1950 and 2010, per capita electricity use increased 10-fold, though usage has flattened or slightly declined since 2012 due to more efficient appliances and LED lighting. (3) A significant share of increased energy demand comes from cooling needs associated with higher temperatures.
Over the last 20 years, the United States has experienced increasing Cooling Degree Days (CDD) and decreasing Heating Degree Days (HDD). Nearly all counties have become warmer over the past three decades, with some areas experiencing several hundred additional cooling degree days, equivalent to roughly one additional degree of warmth on most days. (1) This trend reflects a warming climate where air conditioning demand is increasing while heating demand generally declines. (4)
As temperatures continue rising, households are expected to spend more on cooling than they save on heating. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that by 2050, national Heating Degree Days will be 11% lower while Cooling Degree Days will be 28% higher than 2021 levels. Cooling demand is projected to rise 2.5 times faster than heating demand declines. (5)
These projections come from energy and infrastructure experts planning for future electricity demand and grid capacity needs. Utilities and grid operators are already preparing for higher peak summer electricity loads caused by rising temperatures. (5)
Longer and hotter summers also affect how homes and buildings are designed. Buildings constructed for past climate conditions may require upgrades such as larger air conditioning systems, stronger insulation, and improved ventilation to remain comfortable and energy efficient in the future. (10)
For many households, this means higher monthly utility bills and potentially higher long-term home improvement costs as temperatures continue to rise.
How Climate Change Affects Electricity Rates
On an inflation-adjusted basis, average U.S. residential electricity rates are slightly lower today than they were 50 years ago. (2) However, climate-related damage to utility infrastructure is creating new upward pressure on electricity costs.
Electric utilities rely heavily on above-ground poles, wires, transformers, and substations that can be damaged by hurricanes, storms, floods, and wildfires. Repairing and upgrading this infrastructure often requires substantial investment.
As a result, utilities are increasing electricity rates in response to wildfire and hurricane events to fund infrastructure repairs and future mitigation efforts. (1) The average cumulative increase in per-household electricity expenditures due to climate-related price changes is approximately $30. (1)
While this increase may appear modest today, utility costs are expected to rise further as climate-related infrastructure damage becomes more frequent and severe.
How Climate Disasters Increase Government Spending and Taxes
Extreme weather events also damage public infrastructure, including roads, schools, bridges, airports, water systems, and emergency services infrastructure. Recovery and rebuilding costs are often funded through taxpayer dollars at the federal, state, and local levels.
The average annual government cost tied to climate-related disaster recovery is estimated at nearly $142 per household. (1) States that frequently experience hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, or flooding can face even higher public recovery costs.
These expenses affect taxpayers whether they personally experience a disaster or not. Climate-related recovery spending can increase pressure on public budgets, emergency management systems, and infrastructure funding nationwide.
Reducing Climate Costs Through Climate Action
While this article focuses on the growing financial costs associated with climate change, the issue is not only about money for many people. It is also about recognizing our environmental impact and taking responsibility for reducing it in order to help preserve a healthy planet for future generations.
While individuals alone cannot solve climate change, collective action can help reduce future climate adaptation costs over time.
For those interested in taking action, there are three important steps:
- Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
- Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
- Address remaining emissions by supporting verified carbon reduction projects through carbon credits.
Carbon credits are one of the most cost-effective tools available for climate action because they help fund projects that generate verified emission reductions at scale. Supporting global emission reduction efforts can help reduce the long-term impacts and costs associated with climate change.
Visit Terrapass to learn more about carbon footprints, carbon credits, and climate action solutions.
The post How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
Carbon credit project stewardship: what happens after credit issuance
A carbon credit purchase is not a transaction that closes at issuance. The credit may be retired, the certificate filed, and the reporting box ticked. But on the ground, in the forest, in the field, and in the community, the work continues. It endures for years. In many cases, for decades.
![]()
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

