Spotify, the world’s largest audio streaming platform, recently shared its financial results for the first quarter of 2025. Alongside its business growth, the company continues to make progress on its environmental goals.
This article reviews Spotify’s recent financial performance and highlights its actions to reduce carbon emissions toward net zero and tackle climate change.
Spotify Hits the High Notes in Q1 2025
Spotify delivered solid results in the first three months of 2025. The company’s revenue grew 15% year-over-year, reaching €4.190 billion (~$4.52 billion USD).
Subscription revenue made up most of this amount, rising 16% to €3.771 billion. Meanwhile, ad-supported revenue grew 8% to €419 million. This marks steady growth in both user subscriptions and the advertising business.
The platform now has 678 million monthly active users (MAUs), up 10% from a year ago. Of these, 268 million are premium subscribers, showing a 12% increase. Spotify’s growth is driven by higher user engagement, expanding content offerings, and stronger advertiser demand.
Spotify also saw an improvement in profitability. Its gross margin rose to 31.6%, up from 27.6% last year. The company reported €509 million in operating income, a 203% increase from the previous year. Spotify credited efficiency efforts and lower marketing costs for this positive shift.
Looking ahead, Spotify forecasts MAUs to reach 689 million and premium subscribers to hit 273 million by the end of Q2 2025. The company expects Q2 revenue to be about €4.1 billion (~$4.43 billion USD) and aims for continued margin improvement.
Spotify’s Net Zero and Climate Goals
While Spotify is focused on business growth, it also works to reduce its environmental footprint. The company has set a target to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2030. This commitment covers emissions from Spotify’s operations (Scope 1 and 2) and its value chain (Scope 3).
Spotify’s climate strategy has three main parts: reducing emissions, using renewable energy, and supporting carbon removal.
Turning Down the Carbon Volume
Spotify tracks its emissions each year. In 2024, its total GHG emissions were 195,027 metric tons of CO₂ equivalent (MTCO₂e).
About 98% of these emissions came from its value chain — mostly from cloud services, advertising, marketing, and commuting. Only 2% came from direct operations like office energy use.
To reduce emissions, Spotify focuses on:
- Optimizing its use of cloud computing services to lower energy demand
- Reducing the impact of corporate travel and in-person events
- Engaging suppliers to encourage lower-carbon practices
- Improving energy efficiency at offices and data centers
Spotify aims to cut its Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions by 50% by 2030 compared to a 2020 baseline.
For example, Spotify is working closely with major cloud providers to ensure their data centers use renewable energy. Streaming services rely heavily on data centers, so making this shift is key to cutting overall emissions.
Spotify also encourages advertising and content partners to measure and reduce their own footprints, helping reduce indirect impacts.
Streaming on Sunshine: 100% Renewables
The streaming giant powers 100% of its direct operations with renewable electricity. This means all offices, owned equipment, and data center activities under Spotify’s control use renewable energy. The company buys renewable energy credits (RECs) to match its electricity consumption in all locations.
Spotify also pushes for more renewable energy in the cloud services it uses. For instance, by working with cloud providers that are shifting toward wind and solar power, Spotify ensures that the infrastructure behind music streaming stays green.
In addition to electricity, Spotify continues to assess ways to lower emissions from heating, cooling, and commuting at its offices worldwide. Its goal is to use energy smartly at every level of the business.
Balancing the Beat with Carbon Removal
Even with the best efforts to cut emissions, Spotify knows that some emissions are hard to eliminate. To balance these unavoidable emissions, the company supports high-quality carbon removal projects. This is a key part of Spotify’s strategy of reaching net zero.
The streaming firm has bought verified carbon credits to offset part of its footprint, but it’s now focusing on carbon removals rather than offsets. The company carefully selects carbon removal projects that meet strict standards for durability, transparency, and independent verification.
Spotify invests in a mix of nature-based and technology-based carbon removal methods. The variety of these projects includes reforestation and afforestation projects that plant and maintain forests to absorb CO₂ from the air.
Additionally, Spotify looks for carbon removal projects that bring co-benefits. These include protecting biodiversity, supporting local communities, and improving air and water quality. This aligns with Spotify’s broader values around social impact and equity.
Keeping It Transparent: Reporting and Accountability
Spotify follows leading climate reporting frameworks. It aligns its disclosures with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol and uses third-party verification for its emissions data. The company also reports through CDP (formerly Carbon Disclosure Project) and supports the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi).
Spotify’s annual Equity and Impact Report shares updates on climate goals, emissions data, and progress on key actions. Transparency is a central part of the company’s sustainability approach.
The Climate Champions Network
Spotify runs an internal Climate Champions network made up of employees who help reduce the company’s impact on the environment. These Climate Champions work in different ways. Some join formal working groups and leadership circles, while others are part of smaller project teams that create and lead grassroots projects.
Their main goal is to encourage their coworkers to make choices that are better for the climate. Climate Champions from different parts of the company meet regularly to share ideas, experiences, and tips that help everyone improve their climate efforts.
Encore: Profits and Planet in Harmony
Spotify acknowledges challenges in reaching net zero. Much of its emissions come from areas it does not directly control, such as cloud providers and advertising partners. Reducing these Scope 3 emissions requires strong collaboration across the value chain.
Another challenge is measuring the emissions tied to users streaming audio content. While user listening itself has a small footprint, the data storage and transfer behind it can be energy-intensive. Spotify is exploring ways to better understand and lower these indirect impacts.
Looking forward, Spotify will continue to:
- Engage suppliers and partners to improve sustainability practices
- Invest in new carbon removal technologies and scale nature-based projects
- Increase renewable energy use throughout its cloud supply chain
- Develop better tools to track and manage emissions from streaming activity
- Share regular updates on progress toward its 2030 net-zero goal
Spotify’s Q1 2025 results show strong financial performance, with rising users, revenue, and profitability. At the same time, the company stays committed to cutting carbon emissions and advancing climate action. By focusing on clean energy, reducing value chain emissions, and supporting carbon removal, Spotify aims to align its business with a sustainable future.
The post Spotify Strikes a Chord: Big Q1 Gains and Bigger Climate Goals 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