Connect with us

Published

on

Lithium Market Insight 2025: Price Recovery, EV Demand, and the Future of Extraction – Exclusive Interview

The lithium market is undergoing significant changes as demand for electric vehicles (EVs) and energy storage solutions continues to rise. This soft, silvery-white metal remains at the center of the global clean energy transition. 

Let’s uncover the major market trends according to experts and significant insights shared by the head of a lithium extraction company in an exclusive interview. 

Lithium Market Trends from CERAWeek 2025

At CERAWeek 2025, industry experts highlighted key trends shaping the lithium market. Experts noted that while lithium demand remains high due to EVs and energy storage systems, the market has seen volatility. 

Lithium prices in China fell from $76,000 per ton in early 2023 to about $23,000 per ton by year’s end. This drop raised worries about supply chain stability.

One of the most pressing concerns is the lack of a strong domestic lithium supply chain in the United States. Experts say that 77% of graphite for lithium-ion batteries comes from China. Overall, 53% of the US’s graphite imports since 2023 are from China. This highlights the need to diversify supply. 

graphite from China to US
Source: S&P Global
  • Battery production drives lithium demand. In 2023, global lithium consumption hit 180,000 tons. This marks a 27% rise from last year.

S&P Global Market Intelligence and Commodity Insights predict that lithium supplies will remain in surplus until 2032. However, as of Q4 2024, the U.S. still relies heavily on imports, with most of its lithium coming from Chile and Argentina.

lithium imports 2024
Source: S&P Global

Industry leaders at the conference stressed the importance of new extraction technologies to meet future demand. An expert noted that lithium-metal batteries are 10x more powerful than lithium-ion batteries. This could change the game. They highlighted how waste lithium metal from industry could help build a circular supply chain.

Scalability remains a significant challenge, however. Companies are putting money into resource validation projects. They’re also expanding lithium extraction facilities to produce 20,000 tons each year.

The focus is now on producing lithium at a large scale. The aim is for sustainable sourcing methods to keep the lithium market stable in the long run. These insights reinforce the need for technological advancements, government support, and recycling initiatives to build a more resilient lithium industry.

This is where the unique technology of a company promising to optimize lithium production and make it eco-friendly comes in. 

François-Michel Colomar, Head of International Development at Adionics, shares insights on lithium extraction. He discusses challenges and opportunities, pricing trends, and how new technologies shape the industry’s future.  

What Factors Drive the 2025 Lithium Market Recovery?

After a turbulent 2024, the lithium market is showing early signs of recovery in 2025. Colomar attributes this rebound to the increasing demand from EV manufacturers and energy storage providers. 

François-Michel Colomar: “As global policies push for electrification and clean energy adoption, the need for lithium continues to grow. Furthermore, advancements in extraction technologies, such as Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE), are improving efficiency and reducing environmental impact. These technological improvements, combined with increased investments in domestic lithium production, are helping stabilize the market.”

Despite past price corrections, Colomar remains optimistic about sustained growth, driven by ongoing investments in sustainable lithium production.

Lithium Price Projections and Market Forces

Looking ahead, lithium prices are expected to climb to between around $15,000 and $20,000 per ton by 2028. Colomar provided insights into what key market forces will contribute to this growth. 

François-Michel Colomar: “The projected price increase of lithium is largely driven by the rising demand for EV batteries and energy storage solutions. Global lithium consumption is expected to surpass supply in the coming years, putting upward pressure on prices. 

He also highlights the role of efficient and sustainable extraction technologies in stabilizing the market while meeting increasing demand. The push for local lithium production and recycling initiatives will be crucial in reducing reliance on traditional mining operations.

The Role of New Extraction Technologies

Innovative extraction technologies are revolutionizing the lithium industry, offering more sustainable and cost-effective alternatives to traditional methods. One such advancement is DLE, which allows for selective lithium extraction with minimal environmental impact.

François-Michel Colomar: “Unlike traditional lithium mining, which relies on evaporation ponds and hard rock mining, DLE offers a more efficient and environmentally friendly alternative. It allows for higher lithium recovery rates, reduces water usage, and minimizes ecological disruption. At Adionics, our technology achieves lithium recoveries of up to 98%, making it a game-changer in sustainable lithium production.”

Adionics’ Position in the Lithium Industry

Adionics is playing a key role in advancing sustainable lithium production and battery recycling. Its technology enables the extraction of high-purity lithium from battery black mass, addressing a major challenge in the recycling process. 

Colomar emphasized their unique position in the broader lithium and battery recycling landscape.

François-Michel Colomar: “By providing a domestic alternative to overseas processing, we are strengthening the local supply chain and reducing dependence on newly mined lithium. Our approach supports a truly circular economy, ensuring that lithium resources are efficiently reused.”

Impact of EV Demand on Lithium Supply and Pricing

With global EV sales projected to reach 54.7 million units by 2030, the demand for lithium is expected to soar. Colomar predicts that this surge will create supply chain pressures, potentially leading to price fluctuations.

global EV - electric vehicle sales

François-Michel Colomar: “The rapid expansion of the EV market will undoubtedly put pressure on lithium supply chains. While increased production capacity and improved extraction methods will help balance supply and demand, the industry must also focus on recycling to supplement primary lithium sources. We anticipate some price volatility, but long-term trends indicate continued growth in lithium prices as demand outpaces supply.”

However, advancements in extraction technologies and recycling capabilities will help mitigate these challenges.

The Importance of Lithium Recycling

Recycling lithium is crucial in addressing supply chain constraints and reducing environmental impacts. Tofanni highlighted this while detailing how their technology helps in this way.

François-Michel Colomar: “With demand projected to exceed supply by 2029, recycling offers a way to recover valuable materials and reduce reliance on newly mined lithium. Adionics’ technology allows for high-purity lithium extraction from recycled batteries without producing toxic waste. This advancement is crucial in creating a closed-loop system where lithium can be reused efficiently.”

Balancing Rapid Lithium Production with Sustainability

The lithium industry faces the challenge of balancing rapid production with sustainable practices. Colomar emphasizes the need for efficient extraction technologies that minimize environmental harm.

François-Michel Colomar: “Sustainability must be a top priority. Technologies like DLE provide a solution by allowing for high lithium recovery rates without the negative environmental impact of traditional mining.”

Adionics’ lithium extraction process boosts recovery rates and purity. It also cuts water use and removes toxic by-products. These innovations enable the industry to scale up production while maintaining environmental responsibility.

Future Trends in the Lithium and Battery Industry

Looking beyond 2030, Colomar foresees major shifts in the lithium and battery industries. 

François-Michel Colomar: “First, we expect a greater emphasis on recycling and circular economy practices. Second, advancements in battery technology, such as solid-state batteries, could reduce reliance on lithium-ion cells. Lastly, the industry will see increased efforts to localize lithium supply chains, reducing geopolitical risks and ensuring stable access to this critical mineral.”

Adionics is at the forefront of these changes, driving innovation in lithium extraction and recycling. 

Lithium’s Role in the Clean Energy Transition

Lithium remains a key enabler of the clean energy transition, powering EVs and energy storage systems. As the world moves toward net-zero emissions, lithium demand will continue to grow.

François-Michel Colomar highlights the importance of integrating sustainable extraction and recycling methods to ensure a reliable lithium supply. By investing in innovative technologies, the industry can support the global shift to clean energy while minimizing environmental impacts.

The 2025 lithium market presents both challenges and opportunities. Rising demand, evolving extraction technologies, and a growing focus on sustainability will shape the industry’s future.

The post Lithium Market Insight 2025: Price Recovery, EV Demand, and the Future of Extraction – Exclusive Interview appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain

Published

on

“…Protecting nature makes our business more resilient…”

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

  1. European Commission: Nature-based solutions
  2. GHG Protocol: Corporate Value Chain Scope 3 Standard
  3. TNFD: Guidance on value chains
  4. European Commission: Corporate Sustainability Reporting
  5. European Commission: Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence
  6. European Commission: Regulation on Deforestation-free Products
  7. SBTi: Forest, Land and Agriculture FLAG
  8. Science Based Targets Network: Take Action
  9. IPCC AR6 WGII Summary for Policymakers
  10. Gold Standard: Scope 3 Value Chain Interventions Guidance
  11. Verra: Scope 3 Standard Program
  12. GHG Protocol: Land Sector and Removals Standard
  13. Reuters: Can insetting stack the cards towards more sustainable supply chains?
  14. Reuters: Three companies put their impacts on nature under a microscope
  15. Financial Times: The dubious climate gains of turning soil into a carbon sink

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living

Published

on

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:

  1. Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
  2. Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
  3. 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.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Carbon credit project stewardship: what happens after credit issuance

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com