Published

2 years ago

January 24, 2024

Alice Rush

Are you looking for high-quality carbon offsets to address your harmful emissions? This guide will help you understand what’s offsetting all about, its benefits, and know what would be the best place to source the offsets.

High quality carbon offsets not only help individuals and businesses reduce their carbon footprint, but they can also have a positive impact on local communities and biodiversity. By supporting projects that focus on renewable energy, reforestation, and sustainable agriculture, carbon offsets can contribute to the development of clean technologies and create employment opportunities.

Additionally, investing in high-quality offsets provides a transparent and credible way to offset emissions, ensuring that the generated funds are effectively used for environmental conservation and social benefits.

Understanding Carbon Offsets

Carbon offsets are a way for your or your company or organization to voluntarily compensate for your carbon emissions. They allow you to invest in projects that reduce or remove an equivalent amount of CO₂ from the air.

The main goal of this voluntary carbon market (VCM) mechanism is to balance out the emissions produced in one place by supporting carbon reduction or removal activities somewhere else. They’re often used as complementary strategy to address emissions that are challenging to eliminate completely.

When the reductions are verified, you then receive carbon offset credits. Each credit represents one metric ton of CO₂ that has been either avoided or removed from the atmosphere.

By using these offsets, you can essentially cancel out your emissions. The idea is that the positive environmental impact of the offset project counterbalances the negative impact of the entity’s own carbon footprint.

Projections show that the VCM has to increase 15x and reach $50 billion by 2030 to achieve the Paris climate goals.

projected growth of carbon offset demand

It’s important to note that while carbon offsets can be a valuable tool in the fight against climate change, they’re not a substitute for directly reducing emissions at the source. The primary goal should always be to minimize carbon footprints through sustainable practices and technologies.

READ MORE: How Do Carbon Offset Credits Work?

Why Choose High-Quality Carbon Offsets

Choosing high-quality carbon offsets is crucial for several reasons, as it ensures the effectiveness and integrity of offsetting efforts. And as the number of these credits issued to increase massively, you have to be more vigilant about the quality of the offsets you buy.

Choosing reputable projects with rigorous verification processes ensures that the claimed reductions are genuine. The high-quality offsets they produce make sure that the reductions are not counted more than once.

Moreover, the best carbon offsets go beyond just reducing emissions; they also bring about environmental and social benefits.

For example, reforestation projects can enhance biodiversity and provide livelihoods for local communities. Choosing high-quality offsets from these initiatives allows you or your company to contribute to broader sustainability goals beyond just carbon mitigation.

There’s a catch though: you need to assure that the seller or provider of the offsets is credible.

Assessing the Credibility of Carbon Offset Providers

Weighing credibility involves looking at various factors such as the provider’s track record, transparency, adherence to standards, and the quality of their offset projects.

There are various standards and certifications that can guide you to the best place to buy high quality carbon offsets. These primarily include the Gold Standard, the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) of Verra, American Carbon Registry, Climate Action Reserve, and Plan Vivo.

Verra’s VCS – focuses on GHG reduction attributes and doesn’t require projects to have additional environmental or social benefits.
Gold Standard (GS) – created by the WWF, focuses on projects that provide lasting social, economic, and environmental benefits.
Climate Action Reserve (CAR) – a certification body or registry for the North American carbon credit market.
American Carbon Registry (ACR) – the regulatory body of the California cap-and-trade offset credit market.
Plan Vivo – focuses on projects that support local communities and smallholders in developing nations.

Choosing offsets from projects that adhere to these recognized standards provides assurance of their quality.

READ MORE: Who Certifies Carbon Credits?

Remember that the ultimate goal of carbon offset credits is to reduce the amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere. Each carbon credit certification gives the owner the right to emit one ton of CO₂ or other greenhouse gasses.

A carbon offset credit becomes certified only by going through the specified processes or procedures set by the certifying standards. This is what separates a high-quality and real carbon credit from other credits swarming the market.

An example of a carbon credit certification process by Verra’s VCS program is shown below.

Verra VCS carbon credit certification process

Another thing to keep in mind is the provider’s project documentation practice. This refers to the detailed information and documentation associated with carbon offset projects. This includes project plans, methodologies, emission reduction calculations, and other relevant documentation.

Transparent and comprehensive project documentation is vital for assessing the integrity of offset projects. It allows you and other stakeholders, including third-party verifiers, to understand how emissions reductions are achieved, measured, and verified.

Reputable carbon offset projects undergo third-party verification by independent organizations. This process adds an extra layer of credibility and transparency, assuring you that the claimed emissions reductions are accurate. It confirms that providers are delivering on their promises to help mitigate climate change.

RELATED: Who Verifies Carbon Credits?

So always look for projects certified by recognized standards and certification bodies – it’s non-negotiable.

Here are the top carbon offset certification and standard bodies to consider.

Researching Carbon Offset Projects

Finding the right carbon project for your offsetting needs involves a range of factors, including project types, geographic considerations, project longevity, and other relevant aspects. It may not be that easy and quick given the plethora of projects available today. But, here’s how you can find the right offsetting partner.

Different projects may have varying impacts based on their geographic location. For example, reforestation projects in one region may have different ecological and social implications compared to a renewable energy project in another. Considering the geographic context is important for understanding the broader environmental and social implications of offset projects.

BlueSource, now Anew, is widely known for providing offset credits from improved forest management practices, carbon capture, and other projects. It covers the U.S. Canada and Europe, with an environmental commodities portfolio across five continents.

Under its core project development expertise, forestry, Anew follows these steps for a project to be eligible for offset crediting:

Anew forestry carbon project development Finite Carbon is another big name in the field of forest improvement projects. With the developer’s wide coverage, their projects cover major forest type from the Appalachians to coastal Alaska.

Another provider, C-Quest Capital (CQC), creates high impact carbon offsets through three platforms: cleaner cooking, efficient lighting, and sustainable energy. It aims to transform the lives of families in poorer communities worldwide.

You also have to consider project longevity, which refers to the sustainability and durability of carbon offset projects over time. This involves assessing how well a project can maintain its emissions reductions or removals over an extended period.

Longevity is crucial to ensuring that the offsetting efforts have a lasting impact on reducing carbon emissions. Factors such as ongoing maintenance, community engagement, and adaptability to changing conditions contribute to the overall project longevity.

But before you pick a carbon offset provider, there are some things you have to keep in mind first. You need to calculate and verify your carbon footprint and learn the things to avoid so you’ll emerge successfully.

Calculating and Verifying Carbon Footprint

Quantifying your carbon footprint involves assessing emissions from various sources, such as energy consumption, transportation, and manufacturing. The role of the verification process is to ensure the accuracy and reliability of your calculated emissions data.

Measuring emissions is a critical step in calculating your carbon footprint. This involves quantifying the amount of greenhouse gasses such as CO₂ released into the atmosphere by certain activities.

Different methodologies and tools are used for measuring emissions from different sources, and accuracy is critical for reliable calculation. This step often involves using emission factors, direct measurements, or modeling techniques.

The more complex your organization or company’s activities are, the harder it is to identify the sources of emissions. But most often, it involves the following three emissions scopes.

Scope 123 emissions

Here are also the common types of emissions sources under each scope that can help guide you identify them.

emissions sources per scope After calculating your carbon footprint, the next step is to choose appropriate offsets to compensate for the identified emissions. This is when you can now select carbon offset projects that align with your values and goals.

Go here if you want to know more about how to comprehensively calculate your carbon emissions, with specific examples provided.

Apart from considering the major things when assessing providers of high-quality carbon offsets, you also have to watch for the common pitfalls. Identifying and understanding these pitfalls is crucial for making informed decisions and ensuring that your offsetting efforts are effective.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

First red flag is lack of transparency. It refers to situations where carbon offset projects don’t provide clear and comprehensive information about their activities.

Without sufficient information, it becomes challenging to verify the legitimacy of emissions reductions, project methodologies, and the overall impact of the offsets. Transparency, especially among intermediaries in the VCM, is critical.

Next, pay attention to additionality – it’s a key concept defining a high quality carbon offset. It ensures that the emissions reductions achieved by a project are additional to what would have occurred without the funding.

Concerns about additionality arise when there’s doubt about whether the supported project is genuinely making a positive environmental impact. Forest carbon offsets have been the target of scrutiny over additionality since last year.

READ MORE: Do Deforestation Projects Really Reduce Carbon?

Lastly, you should be aware of double counting. It happens when the same emissions reductions are claimed by multiple entities, leading to an overestimation of the overall impact.

This could arise where there’s insufficient oversight in the carbon offset market. For instance, you could have bought high-quality carbon offsets from a reforestation project but the developer sold them to another buyer. Those same offsets are double-counted.

Thus, robust accounting and adherence to established standards are crucial to avoid double counting. Addressing this and the other pitfalls is essential for you to be confident that the carbon offsets you support are of high quality.

Conclusion

In the realm of climate action, the quest for high-quality carbon offsets takes center stage. They offer you and other climate conscious entities a powerful tool to mitigate your carbon footprint. And as the demand for these offsets continues to surge, it becomes important to understand their role in fostering environmental and social benefits.

By choosing reputable projects and assessing the credibility of offset providers through recognized standards, you can ensure the quality of the offset credits. Ultimately, the journey towards high-quality carbon offsets propels us together closer to achieving the ambitious Paris Agreement climate goals.

The post How to Find High-Quality Carbon Offsets appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Carbon Footprint

Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain

Published

5 days ago

May 20, 2026

Alice Rush

“…Protecting nature makes our business more resilient…”

Julie Brown, Chief Financial Officer, GSK, and Co-Chair, A4S CFO Leadership Network (Europe)

Tweet

For companies with land, water, food, fiber, or commodity exposure, the supply chain may be the most practical place to turn nature from a risk into an operating asset.

Your supply chain already has a nature strategy. It may be undocumented. It may live in procurement files, supplier contracts, commodity maps, and one spreadsheet nobody opens without coffee. But it exists.

If your business depends on farms, forests, water, soil, packaging, rubber, timber, fibers, minerals, or food ingredients, nature is part of your operating system. The question is whether you manage that system with intent, or discover it during a disruption, audit, or difficult board question.

That is why more companies are asking how to find Nature-Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain. Do not begin by shopping for offsets. Begin by asking where nature already affects cost, continuity, emissions, regulatory exposure, and supplier resilience.

What Nature-Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain Means

The European Commission defines nature-based solutions as approaches inspired and supported by nature that are cost-effective, deliver environmental, social, and economic benefits, and help build resilience. They should also benefit biodiversity and support ecosystem services.

In supply-chain terms, that becomes practical. Nature-based solutions in your supply chain can include agroforestry in cocoa, coffee, rubber, or palm supply chains. They can include soil health programs for food ingredients, watershed restoration near water-intensive operations, mangrove restoration linked to coastal sourcing regions, and avoided deforestation in forest-linked commodities.

The key test is business relevance. If your procurement team relies on a landscape, watershed, crop, or supplier base, that is where opportunity may sit. The best projects do not hover outside the business like a framed certificate. They plug into the system that already produces your revenue.

Why the Boardroom Should Care

For many companies, the largest climate and nature exposure sits outside direct operations. The GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard gives companies a method to account for and report value-chain emissions across sectors. Purchased goods, land use, transport, supplier energy, and product use can make direct emissions look like the visible tip of a very large iceberg.

The Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures notes that many nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities arise upstream and downstream. That is why nature-based supply chain investments matter to boards. You are managing supply security, audit readiness, investor confidence, and regulatory preparedness.

For companies exposed to EU markets, this also connects to rules and expectations such as CSRD, CSDDD, EUDR, and SBTi FLAG.

Step One: Map Where You Touch Land, Water, and Living Systems

Finding Nature-Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain starts with mapping, not marketing.

Begin with procurement and Scope 3 data. Which categories carry high spend, high emissions, or high sourcing risk? Which suppliers depend on agriculture, forestry, mining, water-intensive processing, or land conversion? Which regions face water stress, heat, flood risk, soil degradation, deforestation, or biodiversity pressure?

The Science Based Targets Network uses a clear process for companies: assess, prioritize, set targets, act, and track. That sequence keeps companies from treating nature as a mood board. You identify where the business has exposure, then decide where intervention can create measurable value.

Step Two: Look for Operational Value Before Carbon Value

This is the center of CCC’s Dual-Value Model. A nature-based supply chain investment should do useful work for the business before anyone counts the carbon.

Agroforestry may improve farmer resilience, shade crops, protect soil, and reduce pressure on forests. Watershed restoration may reduce water risk for beverage, textile, or manufacturing sites. Soil health programs may improve the stability of agricultural inputs.

Carbon and sustainability value can still be created. In some cases, the project may support Scope 3 insetting. In others, it may generate verified carbon credits. Sometimes the main value may be resilience, readiness, and better supplier data.

The IPCC has found that ecosystem-based adaptation can reduce climate risks to people, biodiversity, and ecosystem services, with multiple co-benefits, while also warning that effectiveness declines as warming increases. That is a sober argument for acting early.

Step Three: Separate Insetting, Offsetting, and Resilience

Nature-based solutions in your supply chain are not automatically carbon credits. They are not automatically Scope 3 reductions either.

An insetting opportunity usually sits inside or close to your value chain. It may support Scope 3 reporting if the accounting rules, project boundaries, supplier connection, and data quality are strong enough.

An offsetting opportunity usually involves verified credits outside your value chain. High-quality credits can still play a role for residual emissions, but they should not distract from direct reductions or credible value-chain work.

A resilience opportunity may deliver business value even if you cannot claim a Scope 3 reduction immediately. That may include water security, supplier capacity, land restoration, biodiversity protection, or regulatory readiness.

Gold Standard’s Scope 3 value-chain guidance focuses on reporting emissions reductions from interventions in purchased goods and services. Verra’s Scope 3 Standard Program is being developed to certify value-chain interventions and issue units for companies’ emissions accounting. The direction is clear: stronger evidence, tighter boundaries, and more disciplined claims.

Step Four: Design for Audit-Readiness From the Beginning

Weak data is where promising nature projects go to become expensive anecdotes.

Before public claims are made, you need to know the baseline. What would have happened without the project? Who owns or manages the land? Which suppliers are involved? How will outcomes be measured? How will leakage, permanence, and double counting be addressed?

The GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard gives companies methods to quantify, report, and track land emissions, CO2 removals, and related metrics. This matters because land projects are rarely neat. Farms change practices. Suppliers shift volumes. Weather changes outcomes.

What Recent Corporate Examples Show

Recent case studies show that supply-chain nature work is becoming more serious, and more scrutinized.

Reuters has reported on insetting to reduce emissions within supply chains, including examples linked to Reckitt, Danone, Nestlé, Earthworm Foundation, and Nature-based Insights. The same article highlights familiar problems: measurement, double counting, supplier incentives, and credibility.

Reuters has also reported on companies using the Science Based Targets Network process to examine nature impacts. GSK, Holcim, and Kering were among the first companies with validated science-based targets for nature.

The Financial Times has covered the promise and difficulty of soil carbon in corporate supply chains, including a PepsiCo example in India where yields reportedly increased while greenhouse gas emissions fell. The lesson is that carbon, soil, biodiversity, farmer economics, and measurement need to be handled together.

A Practical Screening Checklist

A supply-chain nature-based solution deserves deeper review when you can answer yes to most of these questions:

Does it sit in or near a material supply-chain hotspot?
Does it address a real business risk?
Can you connect it to supplier behavior, land management, or sourcing practices?
Can the outcomes be measured?
Are the claim boundaries clear?
Does it support Scope 3 strategy, SBTi FLAG, CSRD, CSDDD, EUDR, or investor reporting needs?
Are permanence, leakage, land rights, and community issues addressed?

Build the Asset, Then Make the Claim

Finding Nature-Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain is about identifying where your business already depends on living systems, then designing interventions that make those systems more resilient, measurable, and commercially useful.

For companies with material Scope 3 exposure, the right project can support supplier resilience, emissions strategy, regulatory readiness, and credible climate communication. The wrong project can become a glossy story with a weak audit trail.

Carbon Credit Capital helps companies design nature-based carbon and sustainability assets that embed directly into corporate supply chains. Through CCC’s Dual-Value Model, you can assess where sustainability investment may support operational resilience, Scope 3 insetting eligibility, regulatory readiness, and high-quality carbon or sustainability value.

Schedule your consultation with the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital to explore how nature-based supply chain investments can support your next stage of climate strategy.

Sources

Carbon Footprint

How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living

Published

6 days ago

May 19, 2026

Alice Rush

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

A light bulb, a pen, a calculator and some copper euro cent coins lie on top of an electricity bill

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

Published

1 week ago

May 18, 2026

Alice Rush

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.