The Rockefeller Foundation has launched a pioneering initiative that aims to accelerate the shift from coal-fired power generation to clean energy in developing countries. The Foundation’s Coal to Clean Credit Initiative (CCCI) is an innovative plan.
CCCI uses carbon credits to help retire old coal plants. Then, it replaces them with renewable energy sources. This work helps cut greenhouse gas emissions while supporting economic growth and boosting public health in vulnerable communities.
Introducing the Coal to Clean Credit Initiative (CCCI)
The CCCI aims to give financial rewards. This helps coal-fired power plant owners close their plants sooner than expected. It also encourages a shift to renewable energy.
The centerpiece of the initiative is a new type of carbon credit called “transition credits.” Credits are created when a coal plant shuts down early. It is replaced by clean energy sources like solar, wind, and energy storage systems. CCCI matters because:

These transition credits can be sold to companies or organizations. They help offset emissions, just like traditional carbon credits. The money from selling these credits can help replace coal plants with clean energy. It can also support workers and communities impacted by the closures.
Dr. Joseph Curtin, Managing Director for Power and Climate at The Rockefeller Foundation, remarked:
“Today’s progress update demonstrates that we are closer than ever to unlocking new benefits to people with credits that will help communities transition to clean, affordable energy. We are now focused on scaling this initiative and bringing dozens of such transactions to the market by 2030.”
Verra, a global nonprofit that certifies carbon credits, has approved the method for creating transition credits. This is a key development in the initiative. This official approval is an important step as it gives clear rules and protections.
The approved rules help ensure that the credits are high quality and provide real environmental and social benefits. The approved method aims to create jobs, improve energy access, and protect workers’ rights and local communities.
According to Mandy Rambharos, CEO of Verra,
“We need to rethink the very systems that are hurting people and the planet. Our new methodology empowers energy providers to make that shift in a way that doesn’t leave workers or communities behind and doesn’t inadvertently exacerbate energy poverty.”
Pilot Project: Transitioning the SLTEC Plant in the Philippines
The first real test of the CCCI is in the Philippines. ACEN Corporation, part of the Ayala Group, is retiring its 246 MW South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation (SLTEC) coal plant. Originally slated to close in 2040, ACEN plans to retire the plant by 2030 using the CCCI framework.
- To fully replace SLTEC’s power output, ACEN aims to build 1,000 megawatts (MW) of solar, 250 MW of wind, and 1,000 MW of battery storage.
These clean energy sources will offer reliable and affordable electricity. They will also help reduce harmful air pollution in the region.
This transition is especially important in Batangas, where the SLTEC plant is located. The area’s population density is 31% higher than the national average, and unemployment levels are among the highest in the country.
Closing the plant and switching to renewable energy should create new permanent jobs. It will also improve local air quality. This change may reduce health problems linked to pollution. Over 726,000 people live within 20 kilometers of the plant, making the project’s public health impact significant.
ACEN is teaming up with several organizations to support this transition. Partners include GenZero, Keppel, and Mitsubishi Corporation via its subsidiary, Diamond Generating Asia. These partners will work together to ensure the project delivers both environmental and social benefits.
Scaling Up: Targeting 60 Coal Plant Transitions by 2030
The Rockefeller Foundation will expand the CCCI, building on its pilot project in the Philippines. They aim to support 60 coal plant transitions by 2030. This effort will focus on emerging markets, especially in the Asia-Pacific region.
The Foundation believes this could lead to $110 billion in investments. It may also create 29,000 permanent jobs, prevent 9,900 premature deaths each year, and cut down 640,000 lost workdays annually thanks to improved air quality.
The initiative could create about $21 billion in economic benefits. It could also help consumers in emerging economies save up to $8.3 billion each year on power costs. These figures come from early estimates by Catalyst Advisors.
Renewable energy technologies, like solar and wind, are now cheaper than coal in many markets. This is possible when they are paired with energy storage, says the International Energy Agency (IEA).
To ensure the integrity and effectiveness of the transition credits, the Rockefeller Foundation has awarded a $600,000 grant to the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM Limited). This funding will help set high standards for transition credits. It will also make sure that Indigenous Peoples and local communities are included in designing and implementing future projects.
Addressing Coal Dependence in Emerging Economies
Coal-fired power remains a significant challenge for global climate efforts. Its carbon emissions rose by 0.9% (135 Mt CO₂) in 2024.

The IEA reports that coal made up about 36% of global electricity in 2023. Many emerging economies still depend on coal to meet rising energy needs. This is happening even with global pressure to reduce coal use.
Programs like the Rockefeller Foundation’s CCCI help connect climate goals with economic needs in developing countries. The initiative offers a clear plan to close coal plants early. It replaces them with clean energy sources, which reduces greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, it protects jobs and supports communities. It also ensures reliable access to electricity.
A 2023 BloombergNEF report says emerging markets need more than $2.6 trillion for clean energy by 2050. This investment is crucial to meet global climate goals, especially net zero. Using innovative methods like transition credits can help unlock capital. This approach could be crucial for speeding up decarbonization.

The CCCI works alongside other global initiatives. One example is the Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETP). These agreements offer financial and technical help to countries like Indonesia, South Africa, and Vietnam. They support these coal-heavy nations as they shift to clean energy.
A Model for the Future
The Rockefeller Foundation’s initiative highlights how philanthropy, private companies, governments, and financial markets can collaborate. They aim to address a tough challenge in the global energy transition: retiring coal plants early.
The CCCI combines verified transition credits, strong social protections, and clear economic benefits. This makes it a model for coal-dependent regions around the world to follow.
As more countries seek to decarbonize and meet their climate commitments, initiatives like this will likely play a growing role in shaping a cleaner, healthier, and more sustainable future.
The post Rockefeller Foundation’s Carbon Credit Initiative: Turning 60 Coal Plants Into Clean Energy Gold 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.
![]()
-
Climate Change9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases9 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

