The European Union (EU) is considering a new plan to help meet its 2040 climate goal. According to sources, the European Commission may allow countries to use international carbon credits under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. This would be a big change from the EU’s current rule, which says climate targets must be met using domestic actions only.
Countdown to 2040: Can the EU Hit Its Green Target in Time?
The European Commission has proposed a target to cut EU greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2040 compared to 1990 levels. This goal is part of the EU’s plan to become “climate neutral” or net-zero zero by 2050.

Achieving the 2040 climate targets entails substantial financial commitments. The EU estimates a need for around €660 billion annually in energy investments during the 2031-2050 period. This represents about 3.2% of the EU’s GDP.
However, the official proposal for the 2040 goal has been delayed.
One reason for the delay is the growing political debate. Some governments and lawmakers worry that the green policies may hurt industries, especially with rising global competition and trade issues like U.S. tariffs. Because of this, the Commission is now exploring more flexible options to reach the 2040 goal.
One option is the use of international carbon credits.
Reuters reports that sources say the Commission is thinking about a new idea. They might let EU countries use international carbon credits to help meet part of the 2040 target. This would mean that countries could support CO2-reduction projects in other parts of the world—such as forest restoration in Brazil—and count those emissions savings toward their EU goals.
This would be a major shift for the EU. Until now, the EU’s climate targets have focused only on domestic efforts. International credits were banned from the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) after 2020 due to problems in the past.
What Are International Carbon Credits?
A carbon credit is a certificate that shows one tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2) has been reduced or removed from the atmosphere. These credits can be created by projects such as planting trees, using cleaner energy, or capturing emissions. Countries or companies can buy these credits to offset their own emissions.
Under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, countries can trade these credits internationally. This helps fund climate projects in developing countries and allows other countries to meet their climate goals in a more flexible way. These projects include initiatives like reforestation, renewable energy installations, and methane capture.
EU’s Past Experience with Carbon Credits
Between 2008 and 2020, the EU allowed companies to use international credits under the ETS. Over 1.6 billion credits were used. Many of these credits came from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) systems under the Kyoto Protocol.
However, this system had problems. Many projects failed to deliver the promised emissions cuts. Some even led to fraud. Moreover, the many cheap credits lowered the carbon price in the EU. This made it easier for companies to pollute. This slowed down progress on cutting emissions inside the EU.
Because of these issues, the EU stopped accepting international credits after 2020. The current rules for the EU ETS focus only on domestic actions.
According to the European Environment Agency (EEA), the following would be the forecasted trend of the supply and demand of EU carbon credits until 2030.

Given the 2040 climate goals, the EC is thinking about bringing back international carbon credits. This would offer more flexibility in meeting emission reduction targets.
Article 6 Explained: A Second Chance for Global Offsets
The Paris Agreement introduced a new system under Article 6 to improve the way international carbon credits (ITMOs) work. This system includes rules to avoid double counting, ensure credits are real, and improve transparency.

Supporters of Article 6 say it can help developing countries get more climate funding. If the EU uses these credits again, it could also help poorer countries develop greener economies.
Critics, however, warn that the Article 6 system is still not strong enough. Some carbon credit projects may still overestimate emissions savings or fail to remove carbon in a permanent way. There are also concerns that switching back to international offsets may reduce the pressure on the EU to cut emissions at home.
The Contradicting Views from Experts
Some experts and groups are urging caution. Linda Kalcher from Strategic Perspectives said international credits have faced many issues. These include fraud and poor environmental benefits.
Others, like Andrei Marcu of the ERCST think-tank, believe that developing countries would welcome the move. These countries often need more climate finance and would benefit from EU support for local carbon projects.
Carbon Market Watch, an environmental group, warned that using carbon credits and removals instead of real domestic reductions could weaken the EU’s climate ambition. They particularly noted that:
“Carbon Market Watch warns that reckless reliance on Article 6 credits and carbon removals is not a replacement for domestic emissions reductions commitments.”
The EU’s climate laws and scientific advisors have strongly supported domestic emissions cuts. The European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change has said the EU should cut 90–95% of emissions by 2040 through domestic action only.
Buying credits from other countries may help meet targets on paper. However, experts say it does not reduce pollution inside the EU. They warn that it could slow the shift away from fossil fuels and delay investments in clean energy and green jobs within Europe.
What’s Next: Will the EU Go Global on Carbon Trading?
The European Commission says it is still aiming for a 90% cut by 2040, but it is also listening to calls for more flexibility. EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra said the 90% cut is the “starting point” and plans to propose the final target before summer.
Any target must be approved by EU countries and the European Parliament. This means more talks and possibly changes before anything is final.
If the EU decides to include international carbon credits in its 2040 plan, it would mark a big policy shift. The decision could impact how the world sees the EU’s climate leadership and how the global carbon credit market develops in the future.
The post International Carbon Credits Back on the Table? EU’s Climate Goal Gets a Twist 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

