In a major move to reduce dependence on Chinese imports, South Korea’s LG Energy Solution (LGES) has reportedly secured a $4.3 billion deal to supply Tesla with lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries for energy storage systems. As the U.S. ramps up tariffs on Chinese goods, the agreement marks a strategic pivot for Tesla, which has heavily relied on China for its battery needs.
Reuters disclosed that neither company has confirmed the deal publicly, but a source familiar with the matter said that the LFP batteries will be produced at LGES’s Michigan factory, which recently began production.
The contract, among LGES’s largest to date, will run from August 2027 through July 2030, with an option to extend for up to seven additional years and increase volumes based on future discussions.
LG Energy Solution’s (LGES) Power Shift: From EVs to Energy Storage
CNBC reported that LG Energy Solution had earlier disclosed a $4.3 billion contract to supply LFP batteries globally over three years, but did not name Tesla as the customer or clarify whether the batteries would be used for electric vehicles or energy storage systems (ESS). However, growing signals point to Tesla’s booming energy business as the likely focus.
With EV demand slowing, LGES has shifted gears toward energy storage. The company is betting on a surge in demand fueled by the rapid expansion of AI data centers and renewable energy installations.
Liz Lee, Associate Director at Counterpoint Research, confirmed to CNBC that the deal is expected to be closely linked to LGES’s Michigan facility, which now serves as its first North American ESS battery manufacturing hub.
This strategic shift comes as LGES considers repurposing some of its U.S. EV battery lines for ESS production in response to weakening EV market dynamics.

Strong Q2 2025
The company recently posted solid second-quarter earnings for 2025, even without North American production incentives. The company reported revenue of KRW 5.6 trillion, down 11.2% from the previous quarter. However, operating profit surged 31.4% to KRW 492.2 billion, with an 8.8% margin. Notably, North American incentives contributed KRW 490.8 billion to the operating profit.
CFO Chang Sil Lee stated,
“In the second quarter, we secured stable EV battery sales and also started production at our new ESS battery facility in North America. However, constrained customer purchase sentiment, coupled with the reflection of metal price decline to our average selling price (ASP), affected our quarterly revenue.”
Moving forward, LGES anticipates a short-term slowdown in EV demand due to new tariffs and cost pressures on automakers. Yet, the company remains optimistic about mid- to long-term growth, driven by advances in autonomous driving and energy storage.
To adapt to this shift, it is focusing on maximizing output at existing production lines, particularly for ESS batteries. It plans to expand its annual production capacity for ESS to 17 GWh by year-end. The company also aims to reduce fixed costs by scaling back investments while securing a competitive supply chain.
Sustainability Goals
Beyond profits, the company is committed to achieving carbon neutrality across its value chain by 2050. One major step involves converting 100% of its power use across all global sites to renewable energy by 2030.
LGES is also working on creating a closed-loop battery ecosystem. With millions of tons of used EV batteries piling up, the company is actively exploring ways to reuse them for energy storage and recycle production waste. These initiatives aim to minimize environmental harm while securing critical raw materials.

- READ MORE: The Battery Shift: How Energy Storage Is Reshaping the Metals Market with LFPs Taking Charge
Tesla’s Push for U.S.-Made Batteries Gains Momentum
The global battery market is shifting rapidly, driven by policy changes like the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and similar initiatives in Europe and the UK. These regulations are encouraging companies to diversify supply chains and reduce reliance on Chinese suppliers. For LG Energy Solution (LGES), this creates a clear advantage. With operational plants in Michigan and an upcoming facility in Arizona, LGES is well-positioned to meet growing U.S. demand while staying aligned with evolving trade rules.
China has long dominated the lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery space, but LGES is emerging as one of the few manufacturers building significant LFP production capacity on American soil. Its Michigan plant began operations in May, and the Arizona plant is set to further strengthen its U.S. presence.
CEO Elon Musk reinforced the importance of this shift, noting that energy demand is booming despite ongoing tariff and supply chain pressures.
He said during the company’s latest earnings call,
“Not many people realize just how massive battery demand has become.”
While Tesla plans to open its own LFP cell manufacturing facility in Nevada by the end of the year, it’s expected to cover only a fraction of the company’s overall battery needs. That’s where LGES comes in.
Its new U.S.-based capacity provides Tesla with a critical, non-Chinese alternative. The partnership aligns perfectly with Tesla’s goal to localize its battery supply chain—offering both strategic location and advanced manufacturing capability.
Battery Demand Powers Growth Outlook
Tesla’s energy generation and storage division, which includes its Megapack and Powerwall products, continues to play a growing role in its business. Despite overall revenue falling 12% in Q2 2025 to $22.5 billion, the energy segment generated more than $2.8 billion. However, this was a 7% year-over-year drop due to pricing pressure and supply chain challenges.
Still, the segment stands out as a growth area amid softening EV sales. Tesla has stressed that battery demand is growing at an unprecedented pace, making partnerships like the one with LGES essential to scaling operations.

The Rise of Solid-State Batteries
As lithium-ion battery innovation continues, solid-state batteries are emerging as the next frontier in battery technology. These advanced batteries utilize solid ceramic or polymer electrolytes, providing enhanced safety, higher energy density, and longer lifespan.
The global solid-state battery market is expected to grow from $0.26 billion in 2025 to $1.77 billion by 2031, with a projected CAGR of 37.5%, according to MarketsandMarkets.
Solid-State Battery Market Size

Solid-state batteries are ideal for electric vehicles, medical devices, and industrial sensors due to their resistance to leakage and thermal runaway. Primary solid-state batteries, commonly used in smart packaging, RFID tags, and medical patches, will likely dominate the market in the short term.
North America is set to lead in both research and commercialization. U.S. companies like Solid Power, QuantumScape, Sakuu Corporation, and Excellatron are spearheading innovation, with Mercedes-Benz and Factorial Energy collaborating on a technology that could offer EVs over 600 miles of range on a single charge.

Other major players like ProLogium (Taiwan), Ilika (UK), and Blue Solutions (France) are also advancing the global rollout of solid-state battery technologies, signaling a strong future for energy storage innovation.
The LGES-Tesla deal signals a major shift in the energy market. As EV demand slows and energy storage rises, resilient, tariff-friendly supply chains and advanced battery tech are taking center stage. With new U.S. plants and strong sustainability goals, LGES is emerging as a key player in powering Tesla’s energy growth amid global trade and policy shifts.
The post Is Tesla (TSLA) Securing U.S. Battery Independence with $4.3 B LG Energy Solution Deal? 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

