Meta and Microsoft have entered into long-term agreements to purchase carbon credits from a forestry project in Washington State’s Olympic Peninsula. These deals aim to support climate-smart forest management practices and contribute to the companies’ sustainability goals.
A Forest with a Mission
The project aims to shift 68,000 acres of forestland on the Olympic Peninsula to climate-smart management. This area near Olympic National Park is managed by EFM. It is supported by Climate Asset Management (CAM), a partnership of HSBC Asset Management and Pollination.
The initiative focuses on Improved Forest Management (IFM) practices. These include:
- Lengthening tree rotation periods,
- Reducing logging impact, and
- Promoting selective harvesting.
These methods aim to increase carbon storage, enhance biodiversity, and support local communities. James Bullen, Head of Asset Management at CAM, remarked:
“Blending timber income, conservation easements, and carbon credits can simultaneously de-risk and enhance returns…The Olympic Rainforest shows how corporates can mobilize capital at scale for high-integrity climate outcomes that complement, not replace, emissions reductions.”
For Microsoft and Meta, this initiative is a move forward for their carbon reduction and climate goals. Together, they’ll purchase almost 1.4 million carbon credits from the said reforestation project.
Meta’s Commitment to Net-Zero Emissions
Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is working toward an ambitious climate target: to achieve net-zero emissions across its entire value chain by 2030. This means the company plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions from not only its operations, such as data centers and offices, but also from its suppliers and users’ activities, referred to as Scope 3 emissions, shown below.
Meta GHG Emissions 2023

To meet this goal, Meta is focusing on energy efficiency, renewable energy, and carbon removal. As of 2020, Meta has already achieved net-zero emissions for its own operations and runs all its global facilities on 100% renewable energy. However, its larger challenge lies in addressing emissions from suppliers, product use, and transportation—areas that are harder to control directly.
The company’s recent 10-year agreement with EFM, which will provide 676,000 nature-based carbon removal credits by 2035, is part of its broader climate strategy. These credits will help offset unavoidable emissions while supporting reforestation and biodiversity restoration.
Meta also supports other high-quality carbon removal projects, such as direct air capture and soil carbon storage. By investing in nature-based solutions, Meta aims to balance its environmental impact while setting a strong example for digital platforms worldwide.
Microsoft’s Path to Becoming Carbon Negative
Microsoft has set one of the boldest climate goals in the tech sector: to become carbon negative by 2030. This means that the company plans not only to reduce its own emissions but also to remove more carbon from the atmosphere than it emits.

In addition, by 2050, Microsoft aims to remove all the carbon it has emitted either directly or through electricity use since it was founded in 1975.
To achieve this, Microsoft is taking a three-part approach: reducing its emissions, removing carbon through innovative solutions, and supporting high-integrity carbon offset projects.
As part of this strategy, Microsoft signed a multi-year agreement with EFM to purchase up to 700,000 carbon removal credits from the Olympic Rainforest project. These credits come from improved forest management practices that help store more carbon and support local ecosystems.
Beyond this agreement, Microsoft has committed $1 billion to its Climate Innovation Fund. This fund invests in early-stage technologies and nature-based solutions like reforestation, soil carbon enhancement, and ocean-based removal.
One of its key investments includes EFM Fund IV, which aims to raise $300 million for climate-smart forestry across the U.S. With this investment, Microsoft could access an additional 2.3 million carbon credits—further strengthening its long-term carbon removal portfolio and advancing global climate solutions.
Why Forests Matter for Climate Action
Forests play a critical role in fighting climate change. They act as carbon sinks, meaning they absorb more carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere than they release. Trees store this carbon in their trunks, branches, leaves, and roots. When forests are managed well, they can remove large amounts of CO₂ every year, helping to slow global warming.
Globally, forests absorb about one-third of the CO₂ released from burning fossil fuels each year. That makes them one of the most effective natural tools we have for reducing greenhouse gases. Projects like the Olympic Rainforest help by stopping deforestation. They also remove CO₂ by boosting forest growth and restoring land.
Forests become very useful when managed with “climate-smart” practices. These practices balance carbon removal, conservation, and sustainable timber use.
As major companies like Meta and Microsoft and governments seek to meet climate targets, forestry-based carbon removal is gaining more attention. High-quality forest carbon credits can be a reliable part of long-term climate plans. This is true when they are monitored and verified correctly. That’s why big companies are putting money into nature-based solutions.
The latest market data shows that credits generated by IFM projects are getting more interest and value from corporations. Their trading volume increased three times as seen below.

Benefits of Climate-Smart Forestry
The project’s climate-smart forestry practices are expected to deliver multiple benefits:
- Carbon Removal. Over one million tonnes of carbon emissions are projected to be removed over the next decade.
- Biodiversity Enhancement. The project aims to restore habitats for endangered species and support wild salmon restoration.
- Community Engagement. Partnerships with the Quileute and Hoh locals focus on wildlife restoration and cultural harvesting.
- Economic Opportunities. The initiative supports sustainable timber growth and creates diverse, healthy habitats for wildlife and recreation.
Carbon Credits Get a Corporate Upgrade
These long-term carbon credit agreements reflect a shift in corporate procurement strategies. Companies are moving from spot carbon credit purchases to long-term offtake agreements, signaling a new era where carbon credits serve as strategic assets. This approach provides price certainty and supports the development of high-integrity carbon markets.
Climate Asset Management, managing over $1 billion in investor commitments, illustrates this evolution through its Natural Capital Fund and Nature-Based Carbon Fund. These funds offer exposure to real-asset carbon strategies that combine financial returns with measurable climate, biodiversity, and community impacts.
Meta and Microsoft’s long-term carbon credit deals with the Olympic Rainforest project represent significant steps toward their respective climate goals. By investing in climate-smart forestry practices, these companies are contributing to carbon removal efforts, biodiversity conservation, and community engagement. These agreements also highlight the growing importance of high-integrity carbon credits in corporate sustainability strategies.
The post Meta and Microsoft Secured Long-Term Carbon Credit Deals to Support Olympic Rainforest 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 Gases9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change9 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

