Microsoft has teamed up with Vaulted Deep to eliminate millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO₂), one of the largest deals made in the sector. They will use a special carbon removal technology that injects organic waste deep underground. This infrastructure approach seeks to store carbon permanently while also addressing waste management issues throughout the United States.
Let’s examine in depth how this technology offers a promising solution in tackling carbon emissions and what the details are involved in the partnership.
Beneath the Surface: Vaulted Deep’s Carbon Capture Tech
Vaulted Deep captures CO₂ by redirecting organic waste away from disposal methods. This includes landfilling, incineration, or land application. The waste is injected deep underground into basalt rock formations, where it breaks down slowly.
Carbon minerals form during this process and trap carbon for thousands of years. This effectively removes it from the atmosphere permanently.
To date, Vaulted has removed nearly 18,000 tonnes of CO₂ and diverted more than 69,000 tonnes of organic waste from surface disposal. Their carbon removal methodology is certified by the carbon registry Isometric.
The certification promises over 1,000 years of carbon storage durability. It ensures that every carbon credit issued stands for a scientifically validated tonne of permanent CO₂ removal.
For every tonne of CO₂ the company sequesters, it releases just 0.05 tonnes of CO₂. This efficiency rate, verified by Isometric, is among the best in the industry.
The company’s technology has been operating safely since 2008 and is approved and permitted in multiple U.S. states. For example, in Los Angeles, Vaulted has processed about 20% of the city’s biosolids for over 15 years. In Kansas, Vaulted oversees 75% of biosolids for Derby.
The company also works with local farmers to handle extra manure. This manure often causes nutrient runoff and odor. Plus, it helps sequester carbon underground.
Economic and Environmental Impact of Vaulted’s Technology
Vaulted’s Great Plains site in Kansas illustrates the combined environmental and economic benefits of this approach. Within its first 18 months, the facility created 18 full-time local jobs and generated more than $5 million in economic investment.
Vaulted’s technology turns tough organic waste into a resource for carbon capture. This process cuts down greenhouse gas emissions from regular waste management. At the same time, it helps solve environmental issues such as nutrient pollution and unpleasant odors associated with organic waste.
According to industry estimates, the U.S. produces about 200 million tons of organic waste every year. This includes food scraps, yard clippings, and paper products. Sadly, most of this waste ends up in landfills. Only around one-third is turned into useful compost or energy.
Reducing organic waste is important to protect the environment. This is a big opportunity to help fight climate change, and where Vaulted Deep technology comes in. Vaulted is looking for new waste partners in different sectors to expand its reach and boost carbon removal efforts.
Power Partnership: Microsoft’s Drive to Scale Impact
Microsoft’s recent investment supports Vaulted Deep in scaling operations with an ambitious goal to remove approximately 4.9 million tonnes of CO₂ over the next 12 years. The partnership will aim to expand site capabilities. It will also build new relationships with waste suppliers from agriculture, municipalities, and manufacturing.
Brian Marrs, Senior Director of Energy and Carbon Removal at Microsoft, noted:
“Vaulted Deep provides a differentiated, scalable approach to permanent carbon removal with low technology risk. Its work delivers immediate climate benefits while stimulating local economies and addresses long-standing environmental challenges that communities face every day. We support this solution as part of our broader effort to accelerate durable, high-integrity carbon removal.”
Microsoft’s Growing Commitment to Carbon Removal
Microsoft is working hard to grow its carbon dioxide removal options. The ech giant aims to be carbon negative by 2030. In 2024, the company secured long-term deals for almost 22 million metric tons of carbon removal credits. This amount surpasses the total from all prior years combined.
Their CDR contracts include various technologies. These include biochar, direct air capture, soil carbon sequestration, and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS).
One of the biggest CDR deals Microsoft made is made Exomad Green. This agreement is the largest biochar carbon removal deal ever. It will last for over a decade. The plan aims to sequester at least 1.24 million tons of CO₂. They will do this by turning crop waste and woody debris into stable charcoal-like carbon.
Moreover, Microsoft signed a record contract with Fidelis’ company AtmosClear. They will remove 6.75 million metric tons of CO₂ over 15 years. This will use BECCS technology.
Microsoft also works with Carbon Direct, a science-based carbon management group. Together, they set strict quality standards for carbon removals. They released the 2025 Criteria for High-Quality Carbon Dioxide Removal. This sets clear standards for various removal methods. The focus is on durability, social and environmental benefits, and transparency.
Microsoft follows a “do our best and remove the rest” approach. This means they aim for strong emissions cuts while also backing new, trustworthy carbon removal methods. The company is tackling rising energy demands from AI. It is investing a lot in carbon offset and removal to meet its net-zero goals.
Carbon Credits and Market Boom: The CDR Opportunity
The market for carbon dioxide removal is growing fast. Governments and businesses are pushing for net-zero emissions targets. Durable carbon removal methods are gaining interest, and Vaulted Deep’s underground storage is one example. These methods have a lasting impact.
Analysts say the durable CDR credit market will grow at a rate of 38% each year from 2025 to 2035. By 2035, it could reach around $14 billion. Other research forecasts the broader CDR industry could generate between $650 million and $3 billion by 2034.
This growth shows that more people want verified carbon credits. These credits promise permanent removal and follow strict environmental standards.
Microsoft and other big companies are investing in carbon removal technologies. These include direct air capture and reforestation, but solutions that use natural waste streams are seen as very promising.
Challenges in Scaling and the Road Ahead for CDR
Although promising, carbon removal at scale comes with challenges. Infrastructure investments are significant. Monitoring carbon permanence for centuries needs advanced technology and clear reporting. Moreover, collecting organic waste from different sources is tricky. It also involves transporting it to sequestration sites.
However, Vaulted Deep’s proven track record and ongoing expansion provide a positive blueprint for growth. Partnering with big companies like Microsoft gives them the cash and market access to speed up deployment.
In response to the CarbonCredits team queries, Bryan Epps, Head of Commercialization at Vaulted, shared the following:
Q: Given that Vaulted Deep’s process involves injecting organic waste deep underground for carbon sequestration, how do you ensure the long-term monitoring and verification of carbon permanence over the 1,000+ year timescale you mention, and how might this scalability model differ as you expand to new U.S. sites under the Microsoft agreement?
A: “Vaulted Deep’s permanence is independently verified by Isometric, our third-party carbon registry and MRV partner. Isometric’s Biomass Geological Storage protocol is purpose-built to evaluate geologic storage durability, and it requires rigorous site-specific modeling and lifecycle emissions accounting for every tonne of removal.
All of Vaulted’s sites are engineered for long-term containment based on each area’s unique geology, drawing on decades of best practices from industrial underground injection.
As we scale under the Microsoft agreement, these protocols carry forward. Each new site undergoes its own geologic validation, regulatory review, and third-party audit to ensure durable, verifiable sequestration.
Across all site types, Vaulted mitigates key risks to permanence (e.g., wellbore failure, migration through confining layers, methane re-emissions) through conservative injection design, site-specific modeling, and continuous subsurface monitoring.”
Q: Microsoft’s investment supports the removal of nearly 4.9 million tonnes of CO2 over 12 years—what are the key challenges Vaulted Deep anticipates in integrating your carbon removal solution across diverse waste streams from municipalities, industry, and agriculture, and how do you see this infrastructure-based approach complementing emerging technologies like direct air capture in the broader carbon removal ecosystem?
A: “Vaulted’s model is built around flexible waste management infrastructure. Our patented slurry injection technology can accept a wide range of organic wastes—from biosolids and manure to paper sludge and ag residues—many of which are too wet, contaminated, or variable for most other BiCRS or BECCS systems to handle.
The core challenge is ensuring each stream meets our standards for safety, flowability, and carbon density. To manage that, we’ve developed a rigorous waste qualification protocol, informed by real-world R&D at our Kansas site. Every waste stream is tested and optimized for injection performance, emissions profile, and net carbon value. This allows us to expand across industries and geographies while keeping MRV and environmental safety fully intact.
Our infrastructure-based approach doesn’t compete with direct air capture; it complements it. Vaulted addresses a different part of the problem: capturing and permanently storing biogenic carbon that’s already circulating in the economy, while eliminating pollutants in the process.
As the CDR ecosystem matures, we’ll need a portfolio of solutions: some pulling carbon from the atmosphere, others preventing it from ever reaching it. Our work focuses on the latter, with the added benefit of solving urgent waste and contaminant challenges for communities today.”
By combining climate impact with economic benefits for local communities, Vaulted Deep is positioned to be a key player in building an effective, durable carbon removal infrastructure in the United States.
FURTHER READING: Carbon Removal in 2025: Are You Investing in the Right Climate Credits?
The post Microsoft (MSFT Stock) and Vaulted Deep Team Up to Unlock Almost 5M Ton of Carbon Removal from Organic Waste appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Most businesses that decide to act on their net-zero targets reach the same point of friction. Buying carbon credits has meant tracking down brokers, sitting through sales calls, and requesting a quote just to learn a price, sometimes with limited proof of what you are buying.
The earnings calls that quietly reframed climate from sustainability question to operating risk.
Three earnings calls in the last 18 months tell the story without any help from a press release.
Hershey, May 2024: cocoa price exposure compresses margin, and the company attributes part of the cost shock to West African weather. Olam, July 2024: coffee climate exposure quantified in the annual report. JBS, January 2025: supply chain climate disclosures expanded materially in response to investor pressure and regulatory expectation. None of these companies issued the announcement as climate news. They issued it as financial news. The climate-linked supply chain risk did not arrive with a sustainability framing; it arrived as a P&L line.
You are probably reading this article because you suspect the same thing is happening to your business. This piece walks through what is showing up on which earnings calls, how procurement and finance leaders are quantifying the exposure, and what serious corporates are doing about it before the regulator asks.
Where climate risk has already appeared in earnings
The pattern is consistent across resource-intensive sectors. A weather event compresses supply, the price spikes, the cost flows through the income statement, and the analyst on the call asks whether the event is anomalous or structural. Increasingly, the honest answer is the second one.
Cocoa is the cleanest example. The 2023 to 2024 West African harvest fell sharply on the back of erratic rainfall and disease. Cocoa futures more than tripled. Companies with concentrated West African sourcing absorbed the cost; companies with diversified sourcing absorbed less. The exposure was not climate as ESG topic. It was climate as cost of goods.
Coffee follows the same pattern. Brazilian and Vietnamese harvests have moved on weather more sharply across the last several seasons. Roasters with long-tenor supplier relationships and origin diversification have managed the volatility; roasters with spot-market exposure have not. Wheat, sugar, palm oil, beef: the same dynamic in different commodities, a pattern the IPCC AR6 Working Group II report projects will intensify across agricultural systems through mid-century.
What this means: climate risk is no longer a footnote in the 10-K. It is a line item the CFO has to explain on the call.
The three commodity exposures that hit margin first
For most companies with material Scope 3 exposure, three exposures dominate the near-term P&L risk.
- Concentrated single-origin sourcing in a climate-vulnerable region. If your tier-one supply for any material commodity sits in one geography, you have a concentration risk that climate amplifies. Diversification across origins is the obvious hedge, but it takes years to build and requires relationships you cannot acquire by tender.
- Supplier financial fragility under climate stress. Smallholder farmers, who supply a large share of the global cocoa, coffee, and palm oil market, do not carry the balance sheets to absorb yield shocks. When yields collapse, they exit. When they exit, your supply base shrinks, and the surviving suppliers raise prices. The risk is structural, not cyclical.
- Logistics and storage exposure to extreme weather. Hurricane disruptions to Gulf shipping, drought-driven Panama Canal restrictions, flooding in European inland waterways: each of these has moved input costs in the last three years, a pattern documented in Munich Re’s natural catastrophe data. The exposure shows up as a one-quarter event in the financial press but accumulates over time on the cost line.
TCFD and ISSB disclosure changes
The disclosure architecture has now caught up with the risk. The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, whose recommendations are now embedded in the ISSB’s IFRS S2 climate standard, requires companies to disclose climate-related risks across physical and transition categories, with quantification where possible.
For physical risk specifically (the climate-linked supply chain risk you are reading about), the disclosure must address both acute exposures (extreme weather events) and chronic exposures (gradual changes in temperature, precipitation, and growing seasons). The disclosure must address the time horizon over which the risk is material, the parts of the value chain exposed, and the financial impact under different scenarios.
The CSRD imposes similar requirements under European law, with double materiality (both financial and impact materiality) embedded in the assessment. The practical effect: your auditors and your investor relations team now need a defensible answer to the climate-linked supply chain risk question, and the answer needs to be quantified.
What procurement and finance can do now
Three actions matter near-term.
Map your exposure. Most companies do not have a clear view of which tier-one and tier-two suppliers sit in which climate-vulnerable geographies. Without the map, you cannot quantify the risk, and without the quantification, you cannot disclose it credibly. The map is the foundation, and World Resources Institute climate risk research provides useful public tooling to start.
Diversify and deepen, in that order. Diversification across origins reduces concentration risk, but the deeper move is to invest in the resilience of the suppliers you already have. Regenerative practices, agroforestry, soil health interventions: these reduce yield volatility under climate stress and protect your input cost trajectory.
Embed the climate spend inside procurement, not outside it. Treating climate risk as a sustainability cost line subordinates it to the ESG budget. Treating it as a procurement and resilience investment puts it in the budget that matters, which is the cost-of-goods budget that the CFO defends quarterly.
Nature-based supply chain investments are the asset class designed for exactly this purpose. They sit inside the value chain, they reduce climate-linked supply risk, they generate verifiable Scope 3 reductions, and they produce the documentation an auditor and a regulator can both test.
If you are quantifying climate-linked supply chain risk in advance of the next earnings cycle or the next disclosure period, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help you map your exposure and structure a Dual-Value Model response that addresses reduction, resilience, and disclosure-readiness in a single program. Schedule a consultation.
More and more small and medium-sized businesses are hearing the same question from their larger customers: What is your carbon footprint? That question now travels down entire supply chains, and it arrives next to tender requirements, certification criteria, and rising customer expectations.
-
Climate Change1 year 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”
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
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 Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits