Ferrari has signed a ten-year agreement with Shell to purchase renewable electricity. The deal will provide 650 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of clean power through 2034. This is enough to cover nearly half of the energy needs at Ferrari’s main production plant in Maranello, Italy.
The plant uses around 130 GWh of electricity each year. The remaining electricity will be supplied through additional renewable energy and certificates.
The agreement is part of Ferrari’s plan to reduce carbon emissions and shift toward cleaner energy in its operations. Davide Abate, Chief Industrial Officer at Ferrari, remarked:
“This agreement represents a further step forward in our journey towards decarbonizing the Maranello plant. The collaboration with Shell Energy Italia to supply renewable energy represents a concrete contribution to our goal of reducing Scope 1 and 2 emissions by at least 90% in absolute terms by 2030.”
For Shell, the deal demonstrates its growing role in supplying green power to large industrial customers. The oil giant is also increasing the scale of its renewable power generation. The electricity for Ferrari will come from a dedicated solar plant located in Italy, which improves supply reliability.
Gianluca Formenti, CEO of Shell Energy Italia, noted:
“In line with our strategy of producing more energy with fewer emissions, this agreement is a tangible example of our commitment to providing energy solutions to support our customers and partners in achieving their decarbonization goals.”
What are the Key Features of the Deal?
The PPA, or power purchase agreement, will deliver renewable electricity for ten years. Shell will provide most of the energy directly from a dedicated plant. The remainder will come from renewable energy certificates (RECs). These certificates allow Ferrari to claim that its energy consumption is backed by clean power, even if the electricity does not flow directly from the plant.
This combination ensures that Ferrari’s operations in Italy rely heavily on renewable sources. By securing long-term renewable energy, the luxury carmaker reduces its exposure to volatile energy prices.
The PPA includes fixed-pricing elements. This helps Ferrari avoid sudden jumps in energy costs. It also strengthens its ability to meet climate targets for carbon emissions.
The deal covers:
- 650 GWh of electricity from renewable sources over 10 years.
- Nearly 50% of Ferrari’s energy needs at Maranello.
- Additional RECs and green power to cover the remaining electricity use.
Ferrari’s Carbon Reduction Goals and Renewable Energy Strategy
Ferrari has committed to reducing Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions by 90% by 2030. Scope 1 emissions come from Ferrari’s direct activities. This includes heating, production equipment, and company vehicles. Scope 2 emissions come from purchased electricity. Below are the ways the company uses to achieve its 2030 carbon neutrality goal.
The automaker reported several thousand metric tons of CO₂-equivalent emissions from operations in recent years. Progress has already begun as energy systems switch to cleaner power.
Switching to renewable electricity helps Ferrari cut Scope 2 emissions. The company has also invested in efficiency measures to reduce energy use across its facilities.
Moreover, it aims to streamline operations. They want to keep producing high-performance cars while using less energy overall. The company says some efficiency projects can reduce factory electricity use by 10–15% over time.
In recent years, Ferrari has been working on its energy mix. In 2024, it shut down a gas-fired trigeneration plant at Maranello. This plant had generated electricity, heat, and cooling from natural gas. By closing it, Ferrari reduced fossil fuel use and emissions.
However, the chart below shows that while Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions show a gradual reduction, the total emissions show a steady increase. This is mostly due to growth in the company’s value chain activities.
Scope 3 emissions—mainly from the supply chain, purchased goods, and product use—are the dominant source, over 90%, and consistently drive the company’s total footprint.
Fueling Renewable Energy Expansion
The Italian luxury sports carmaker is expanding its use of solar energy. It plans to increase photovoltaic (PV) capacity to around 10 megawatts peak (MWp) by 2030. Solar panels are installed on factory rooftops and other company-owned spaces. These panels already cover part of the factory’s daytime electricity consumption.
The company also partnered with Enel X to create a Renewable Energy Community (REC). This community lets nearby businesses, residents, and public institutions use clean power from Ferrari’s solar installations. It helps spread the benefits of renewable energy beyond Ferrari itself. The community has dozens of participants and supports local energy independence.
Ferrari has invested in energy-efficient transformers and storage systems. These upgrades improve the efficiency of electricity use and reduce energy waste. Combined with the new PPA, Ferrari’s approach is designed to achieve both emissions reduction and cost stability.
Offsetting the Unavoidable: Ferrari’s Carbon Credit Strategy
Ferrari tackles residual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. They support certified carbon avoidance projects by buying carbon avoidance credits. By using this method with direct emission cuts, the company reached carbon neutrality for Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions in 2021, 2022, and 2023 across all its operations.
In 2024, Ferrari cancelled 77,691 metric tons of CO₂-equivalent carbon credits. These credits came from the Sustainability Community Project in Canada. They were certified by the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) – Verra. This project combines over 800 carbon-reduction micro-projects from SMEs, municipalities, and NGOs. It includes more than 1,000 buildings in Quebec.
The goal is to reach up to 10,000 customer facilities in a sustainable community. The GHG reductions come from activities such as improved energy efficiency, waste diversion, and fuel switching.
Also, Ferrari partners with ClimateSeed. This ensures that the projects follow strict environmental, social, and financial standards. The company hasn’t developed its own GHG removal or storage projects yet. However, it adjusts its carbon credit purchases each year. This helps offset unavoidable emissions and meet its carbon neutrality goals.
Industry Implications: Luxury Cars Join the Clean Energy Race
This deal reflects a growing trend among manufacturers in Europe. Companies are signing long-term renewable energy deals. This helps them cut emissions and stabilize energy costs.
For automakers, energy use is becoming an important part of environmental responsibility. Reducing emissions is not just about electric or hybrid cars. It also depends on how factories are powered.
Other car manufacturers are also pursuing renewable energy. BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Porsche have all made deals to source clean power for major facilities. Ferrari’s agreement shows that luxury car makers are now also integrating renewable energy into their main operations.
Driving Forward: A Sustainable Shift for Ferrari
Ferrari’s renewable energy agreement with Shell is expected to have a lasting impact on its operations. It ensures a stable supply of clean energy and supports broader climate goals. It also ensures alignment between how Ferrari builds cars and the electric models it plans to sell in the future.
The partnership also strengthens Shell’s position in providing renewable solutions to industrial clients. It shows that legacy energy companies can play a role in helping others transition to cleaner power.
As Italy and other European countries aim to increase renewable energy use, long-term agreements like this one may become more common. Companies can benefit from cost predictability, emission reductions, and support for their sustainability goals.
The post Ferrari and Shell Sign Renewable Energy Deal, Powering Ferrari’s Carbon Neutrality by 2030 Goal appeared first on Carbon Credits.
For most businesses, the emissions that matter most sit outside their own walls. Scope 3 emissions, everything generated across your value chain, from the suppliers who make your inputs to the customers who use your products, typically make up the majority of a company’s total carbon footprint. Under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), those value-chain emissions now have to be measured and disclosed with a rigour that spend-based estimates alone struggle to satisfy. This guide sets out how to improve Scope 3 data accuracy for CSRD: the calculation methods open to you, how to move from estimates to verified supplier data, and how to govern that data so it holds up to audit.
A carbon credit is a commitment that extends well into the future. The tonne of CO₂ compensated for today from a nature-based carbon project must remain out of the atmosphere for good, which means the forest behind the credit has to remain standing long after the transaction is complete. For any buyer, this raises a defining question: What ensures that the forest endures?
What replaced the cheap REDD credit on the boardroom slide deck, and why procurement is leading the rewrite.
Three years ago, a corporate slide showing a portfolio of cheap REDD+ credits could carry a board meeting. The number was big, the price was low, and the press release wrote itself. Today, that same slide gets sent back with questions. The questions are uncomfortable, the answers are unclear, and your general counsel is suddenly in the room.
Conventional carbon offsets are not dead. The voluntary carbon market retired 202 million tonnes in 2025, and the Morgan Stanley Institute for Sustainable Investing survey published in January 2026 confirmed that interest from corporate buyers remains substantial. What changed is the credibility threshold. The integrity floor has risen, the disclosure scrutiny has tightened, and the buyer profile has shifted. This article tracks what changed, what sophisticated buyers now ask before signing, and what serious corporates are putting on the board slide instead.
What boards used to buy, and why it stopped working
The 2020 to 2022 model was simple: buy a large tranche of avoidance credits at low single-digit prices, retire them against the company footprint, announce the carbon-neutral claim, and move on. Most of those credits came from REDD+ projects, renewable energy installations in countries where the renewable energy was already economic, or methane projects with thin documentation.
Several things broke that model. Academic research published in 2023, including a widely cited Science paper, found that the majority of REDD+ credits issued under the most common methodologies did not represent additional reductions when tested against rigorous counterfactuals. The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative published its Claims Code of Practice, which sets requirements for what companies can credibly claim from credit use. The European Union finalised its Green Claims Directive, restricting how companies can describe products as climate-neutral. France’s Décret 2022-539 already restricts carbon neutrality advertising. California’s AB 1305 imposes disclosure requirements on any company making net-zero or carbon-neutral claims while doing business in the state.
The collective effect: the cheap credit no longer buys the announcement, and the announcement now carries litigation risk.
The integrity reset: ICVCM, VCMI, and what changed
The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market published the Core Carbon Principles in 2023 and began assessing methodologies against them in 2024. The first methodologies received the CCP label later that year. The point of the label is to give corporate buyers a defensible quality screen they can cite in disclosure.
The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative complements this on the demand side. Its Claims Code of Practice defines what a buyer can say (Silver, Gold, or Platinum claims, with associated requirements) based on the quality of credits used and the underlying decarbonisation strategy. Together, CCP and VCMI build a quality stack: CCP on the supply, VCMI on the claim, with the science-based target sitting underneath both.
The reset is not a ban on offsets. It is a ratchet. Credits that meet the new bar continue to clear; credits that do not, do not. The Morgan Stanley survey found that 61% of current buyers like the CCP label concept but that supply of labelled credits remains limited. That supply constraint is now visible in pricing.
What sophisticated buyers ask before they sign
The questions on the procurement scorecard have changed. A 2022 buyer might have asked about price, vintage, and project type. A 2026 buyer asks five different questions before any of those.
- What does the counterfactual look like, and who validated it.
- What is the permanence regime, and what is the buffer pool exposure.
- What is the leakage risk, and how is it mitigated.
- What rating has the project received from the independent ratings agencies (Sylvera, BeZero, Calyx Global), and what was the rationale.
- What is the documentation discipline that survives an audit four years from now when the procurement team that signed the contract has moved on.
If the vendor cannot answer those five questions on a first call, the conversation ends. Conversely, if the vendor can answer them with documented specificity, the conversation often expands beyond a single transaction toward a multi-year engagement.
Where this leaves your near-term commitments
You probably have near-term commitments that pre-date the integrity reset. Public targets to be carbon neutral by 2025 or 2030. Product-level claims that ran in last year’s marketing. Disclosed reduction trajectories that assumed continued access to cheap credits.
You have three workable paths. The first is to re-baseline your strategy, replacing the most exposed credits with higher-quality alternatives and adjusting the public language to match what you can defend. The second is to shift the underlying spend from offsetting outside your value chain to investing inside your value chain, where reductions count against Scope 3 directly and the audit trail is cleaner. The third is to keep the strategy and absorb the risk, which is increasingly the most expensive option once you price in litigation, restatement, and reputational exposure.
Most serious buyers are choosing the second path. It moves the carbon spend from a compliance cost to a procurement and resilience investment, and it removes the central failure point of the legacy model: the disconnect between where the emissions occurred and where the reductions sat. Nature-based supply chain investments, structured under the GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard and aligned to the SBTi FLAG Guidance, are the asset class that fits this brief. They generate inventory-grade reductions, they produce audit-grade documentation, and they survive the new claim restrictions because the carbon math sits inside the value chain that the disclosure already covers.
If you are reassessing a carbon strategy under the new integrity bar, or rebuilding a board narrative that has to survive a more skeptical audience, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help. The Dual-Value Model gives you a defensible alternative to legacy offset purchases, with the documentation and operational integration that survives the procurement scorecard and the audit. Schedule a consultation.
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases11 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 Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测