Carbon tends to sit at the forefront of climate considerations, but there’s another important, interconnected piece of the sustainability puzzle that often gets overlooked: water.
Globally, 4 billion people face severe water scarcity for at least one month out of every year, according to the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH).
Like with global warming, human activities have had a major impact on water systems. Not only are we often using too much water, but issues like land use change and rising temperatures also stress freshwater ecosystems and the water cycle.
If we ignore these issues, more water systems will be permanently damaged. That likely means more people will live with insufficient access to clean water, agricultural production will become more difficult and expensive, and many businesses will face economic risks, like supply chain delays and shortages.
Fortunately, there are ways to reduce water risks and even improve water systems.
One option is to purchase water credits. Similar to how carbon credits emerged as a solution for offsetting hard-to-avoid greenhouse gas emissions, water credits provide a market-based solution for conserving and restoring water systems.
Here, we’ll take a deeper dive into:
- What are Water Credits?
- How do Water Credit Projects Work?
- Water Credit Project Types and Examples
- Benefits of Water Credits
- Why Individuals and Businesses Should Buy Water Credits
What Are Water Credits?
If you’re familiar with carbon credits, you already get the gist of water credits.
Similar to how one carbon credit represents one metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent avoided or removed from the atmosphere, one water credit represents 1,000 gallons of natural freshwater flow that has been improved or restored.
Water credit projects involve protecting, restoring, or conserving water flows to ultimately help natural systems like rivers, wetlands, and aquifers, along with the communities that rely on them.

Source: Bonneville Environmental Foundation
For example, leading project developer Bonneville Environmental Foundation (BEF) issues Water Restoration Certificates® that are third-party verified, namely by Watercourse Engineering or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. All BEF WRC® projects are also tracked and registered on S&P Global’s Markit registry to avoid double-counting.
Other water credit programs exist, but BEF WRCs® are arguably the most established market-based solution for addressing your water footprint.
Terrapass offers BEF WRC® certificates that support projects like the Middle Deschutes River Flow Restoration project in Oregon, which in turn helps support a healthy ecosystem for local wildlife and communities.
Buy BEF WRCs® through Terrapass today.
How Do Water Credit Projects Work?
Water credit projects work similarly to carbon credit projects in terms of directing financing toward initiatives that support the restoration of natural freshwater flows and ecosystems.
Water restoration project developers like BEF work with farmers, conservation groups, and local irrigation districts to identify these opportunities and manage the projects. Water restoration projects also meet additionality requirements, meaning that without the funding from water credits, the projects would not be possible.
For example, funding might go towards the cost and effort of securing legal agreements that help restore river flows. This is necessary to help overcome challenges like “use it or lose it” water rights policies in the Western U.S. By maintaining a water source for ecological purposes, water rights holders can maintain their water rights while addressing old and inefficient requirements like the obligation to use all of their allotted water.
Note that since water issues are largely regional, best practice is to purchase credits from water restoration projects that help relieve water stress in the same basins where you’re using water. However, water credit projects are mostly concentrated in the Western U.S. where water stress is more severe, so matching projects to your location isn’t always possible. If that’s the case, buying a mixed portfolio of water credits can still compensate for your impact, it just might not directly address water issues in the areas you operate.
Water Credit Timing
Each water credit directly translates to 1,000 gallons of natural freshwater improved or restored over an 18-month cycle.
Note that while these projects might provide long-lasting water benefits, along with other associated environmental and social benefits, best practice is for buyers to only count water credits against their water footprint for the year in which these certificates are purchased.
To address your water footprint for multiple years, buyers can purchase water credits for each year they want to balance their water impact, similar to how you would purchase carbon credits corresponding to each year’s emissions.
Also note that water credits have vintages, which refer to the primary year when the water restoration took place. Like with carbon credits, best practice for water credits is to buy ones with recent vintages — generally within the last five years, but ideally within the past three. However, you don’t have to match vintages with the year of your own water consumption, as you’re still funding water improvements that help balance your own footprint.
Water Credit Project Types and Examples
BEF WRC® projects fall into one of three main categories:
- Restoring Flows: These projects often involve legal transactions like water rights transfers and partnerships with local groups to help keep water flowing in rivers and streams, rather than overly diverted, like for inefficient agricultural practices.
Example — Jordan River Flow Restoration: This project uses Environmental Water Transactions (EWTs) to help secure more water flowing from the Jordan River into the Great Salt Lake in Utah, which helps address the critical shrinking of this lake.
- Restoring Natural Systems: While similar to restoring flows, this project category focuses more on physical interventions to help restore freshwater systems like rivers and wetlands to their natural state, thereby increasing freshwater and potentially providing co-benefits like cleaner water.
Example — Pine Tree Brook Dam Removal: This project removes dams in the Pine Tree Brook in the Boston area to support the movement of local trout and improve water quality. For example, one of the dams on this brook was previously put in place to create a local ice rink, but that was no longer needed due to the 1950s construction of a nearby ice rink facility that does not rely on this water source. So, removing it helped return the brook to more of its natural order.
- Improving Efficiency: Some water credit projects focus more on conservation and efficient water use, which can thereby help retain or restore water in natural systems.
Example — Mason Lane Headgate: In Arizona, the Mason Lane Ditch diverts a tributary of the Verde River to irrigate agricultural land. This project funds the replacement of an inefficient headgate system with a modern, automated one to enable more precise control of the diverted water.
Benefits of Water Credits
In addition to directly supporting freshwater restoration, water credits provide a wide range of co-benefits, such as supporting:
- Groundwater conservation: Projects that minimize groundwater usage not only can improve water volume but also provide benefits like stabilization of river beds. That helps to avoid problems like sinking land and enables water systems to maintain natural filtration capabilities.
- Biodiversity: Water restoration projects often support biodiversity, like providing a healthier habitat for local fish and bird populations. That can provide associated environmental and economic benefits, like supporting pollinators and keeping local fisheries well-stocked.
One example of biodiversity co-benefits can be seen in the Merced County Seasonal Wetland Habitat project, which aims to provide an annual spring habitat for migratory birds in central California.
You can support projects like these by buying BEF WRCs® through Terrapass today.

- Recreation: Maintaining freshwater ecosystems helps provide communities with recreational opportunities, such as fishing, boating, and hiking. That can correlate with economic opportunities for these areas, while also supporting the health of local populations.
- Agricultural economies: The funding from water credits can directly support farmers and ranchers, providing an important income stream that can help mitigate issues like crop shortages. Long term, water credits can also support a more stable water supply that sustains these agricultural businesses season after season, even amidst increasing floods and droughts caused by climate change.
- Community empowerment: Water credits often involve working with tribal groups and other local communities. The economic, ecological, and recreational benefits can help protect these communities’ cultures and rights.
- Lower emissions: While water credits are separate from carbon credits, there can be interconnected benefits. For example, more efficient irrigation systems can use less water and energy. More reliable water supplies can also reduce the need for high-emitting fertilizers.
Why Individuals and Businesses Should Buy Water Credits
Water risk sometimes gets overshadowed by carbon emissions risk, but it’s important for both individuals and businesses to consider their water footprints. Buying water credits enables you to account for the impact of your water usage while supporting a broad range of environmental, economic, and social benefits.
In particular, consider the following:
For Individuals
You likely use far more water than you assume, particularly when accounting for indirect usage, like the water that went into making the jeans you bought. One survey from American Water found that most Americans think they use less than 100 gallons of water per day, when really total usage adds up to over 2,000 gallons daily, based on data from Water Footprint Network.
While it’s important to be mindful of your water usage, we’re all inevitably going to use water throughout our daily lives. So, purchasing water credits helps you take responsibility for the impact of this water usage while funding projects that have a wide range of co-benefits you may value.
For Businesses
Just as many companies acknowledge climate risk and commit to addressing greenhouse gas emissions, water scarcity and overuse can have direct economic effects on businesses, along with creating risks like reputational damage. By 2050, 31% of global GDP is projected to be exposed to high water stress, according to the World Resources Institute.
So, buying water credits can address your company’s direct water footprint and contribute to solving water scarcity and quality issues that can harm your operations going forward. Meanwhile, businesses can potentially increase goodwill with customers, employees, and the local communities where they operate by supporting water credit projects that have meaningful co-benefits.
Buying water credits can also align with other standards and certifications that many businesses value. Some examples include:
- WRI’s Volumetric Water Benefit (VWB) Accounting 2.0: Water credit projects can potentially align with this VWB accounting standard, and Bonneville Environmental Foundation was one of WRI’s partners involved in creating it. Still, consider looking into the details of this accounting standard and project specifics to determine alignment.
- UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Depending on the specific project, there can be benefits that align with multiple SDGs. For example, a project might align with SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation, while also supporting local economic development that aligns with SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities.
- LEED Certification: Water credits can be matched to a building’s annual water usage and counted toward this green building certification.
- 1% for the Planet: BEF is an environmental partner of 1% for the Planet, so buying BEF WRCs® can qualify a company for membership.
- B Corp: Buying water credits can also count toward earning B Corp certification.
Ready to Support Water Restoration?
Terrapass makes it easy for you to balance your water footprint while supporting sustainable ecosystems and community development.
You can directly purchase BEF WRCs® through Terrapass today or reach out to speak with one of our sustainability experts who can help you build a custom portfolio of carbon credits and water credits that align with your sustainability goals.
Talk to a Sustainability Expert
The post The 2026 Complete Guide to Water Credits (WRCs) appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
Industries with the biggest nature footprints and what their decarbonisation looks like
A corporate carbon footprint is never just an accounting figure. It maps onto real ecosystems. Before a product leaves the factory gate, something on the ground has already paid the cost. A forest has been converted. A river has been depleted. A patch of savannah that was once home to dozens of species now grows a single crop in every direction.
![]()
Carbon Footprint
Apple, Amazon Lead 60+ Firms to Ease Global Carbon Reporting Rules
More than 60 global companies, including Apple, Amazon, BYD, Salesforce, Mars, and Schneider Electric, are pushing back against proposed changes to global emissions reporting rules. The group is calling for more flexibility under the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol), the most widely used framework for measuring corporate carbon footprints.
The companies submitted a joint statement asking that new requirements, especially those affecting Scope 2 emissions, remain optional rather than mandatory. Their letter stated:
“To drive critical climate progress, it’s imperative that we get this revision right. We strongly urge the GHGP to improve upon the existing guidance, but not stymie critical electricity decarbonization investments by mandating a change that fundamentally threatens participation in this voluntary market, which acts as the linchpin in decarbonization across nearly all sectors of the economy. The revised guidance must encourage more clean energy procurement and enable more impactful corporate action, not unintentionally discourage it.”
The debate comes at a critical time. Corporate climate disclosures now influence trillions of dollars in capital flows, while stricter reporting rules are being introduced across major economies.
The Rulebook for Carbon: What the GHG Protocol Is and Why It’s Being Updated
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol is the world’s most widely used system for measuring corporate emissions. It is used by over 90% of companies that report greenhouse gas data globally, making it the foundation of most climate disclosures.
It divides emissions into three categories:
- Scope 1: Direct emissions from operations
- Scope 2: Emissions from purchased electricity
- Scope 3: Emissions across the value chain

The current Scope 2 rules were introduced in 2015, but energy markets have changed since then. Renewable energy has expanded, and companies now play a major role in funding clean power.
Corporate buyers have already supported more than 100 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy capacity globally through voluntary purchases. This shows how influential the current system has been.
The GHG Protocol is now updating its rules to improve accuracy and transparency. The revision process includes input from more than 45 experts across industry, government, and academia, reflecting its global importance.
Scope 2 Shake-Up: The Battle Over Real-Time Carbon Tracking
The proposed update would shift how companies report electricity emissions. Instead of using flexible systems like renewable energy certificates (RECs), companies would need to match their electricity use with clean energy that is:
- Generated at the same time, and
- Located in the same grid region.
This is known as “24/7” or hourly or real-time matching. It aims to reflect the actual impact of electricity use on the grid. Companies, including Apple and Amazon, say this shift could create challenges.

According to industry feedback, stricter rules could raise energy costs and limit access to renewable energy in some regions. It can also slow corporate investment in new clean energy projects.
The concern is that many markets do not yet have enough renewable supply for real-time matching. Infrastructure for tracking hourly emissions is also still developing.
This creates a key tension. The new rules could improve accuracy and reduce greenwashing. But they may also make it harder for companies to scale clean energy quickly.
The outcome will shape how companies measure emissions, invest in renewables, and meet net-zero targets in the years ahead.
Why More Than 60 Companies Oppose the Changes
The companies argue that stricter rules could slow climate progress rather than accelerate it. Their main concern is cost and feasibility. Many regions still lack enough renewable energy to support real-time matching. For global companies, aligning energy use across different grids is complex.
In their joint statement, the group warned that mandatory changes could:
- Increase electricity prices,
- Reduce participation in voluntary clean energy markets, and
- Slow investment in renewable energy projects.
They argue that current market-based systems, such as RECs, have helped scale clean energy quickly over the past decade. Removing flexibility could weaken that momentum.
This reflects a broader tension between accuracy and scalability in climate reporting.
Big Tech Pushback: Apple and Amazon’s Climate Progress
Despite their push for flexibility, both companies have made measurable progress on emissions reduction.
Apple reports that it has reduced its total greenhouse gas emissions by more than 60% compared to 2015 levels, even as revenue grew significantly. The company is targeting carbon neutrality across its entire value chain by 2030. It also reported that supplier renewable energy use helped avoid over 26 million metric tons of CO₂ emissions in 2025 alone.

In addition, about 30% of materials used in Apple products in 2025 were recycled, showing a shift toward circular manufacturing.
Amazon has also set a net-zero target for 2040 under its Climate Pledge. The company is one of the world’s largest corporate buyers of renewable energy and continues to invest heavily in clean power, logistics electrification, and low-carbon infrastructure.

Both companies argue that flexible accounting frameworks have supported these investments at scale.
The Bigger Challenge: Scope 3 and Digital Emissions
The debate over Scope 2 reporting is only part of a larger issue. For most large companies, Scope 3 emissions account for more than 70% of total emissions. These include supply chains, product use, and outsourced services.
In the technology sector, emissions are rising due to:
- Data centers,
- Cloud computing, and
- Artificial intelligence workloads.
Global data centers already consume about 415–460 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity per year, equal to roughly 1.5%–2% of global power demand. This figure is expected to increase sharply. The International Energy Agency estimates that data center electricity demand could double by 2030, driven largely by AI.
This creates a major reporting challenge. Even with cleaner electricity, total emissions can rise as digital demand grows.
Climate Reporting Rules Are Tightening Globally
The pushback comes as climate disclosure requirements are expanding and becoming more standardized across major economies. What was once voluntary ESG reporting is steadily shifting toward mandatory, audit-ready climate transparency.
In the European Union, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is now active. It requires large companies and, later, listed SMEs, to share detailed sustainability data. This data must match the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). This includes granular reporting on emissions across Scope 1, 2, and increasingly Scope 3 value chains.
In the United States, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) aims for mandatory climate-related disclosures for public companies. This includes governance, risk exposure, and emissions reporting. However, some parts of the rule face legal and political scrutiny.
The United Kingdom has included climate disclosure through TCFD requirements. Now, it is moving toward ISSB-based global standards to make comparisons easier. Similarly, Canada is progressing with ISSB-aligned mandatory reporting frameworks for large public issuers.
In Asia, momentum is also accelerating. Japan is introducing the Sustainability Standards Board of Japan (SSBJ) rules that match ISSB standards. Meanwhile, China is tightening ESG disclosure rules for listed companies through updates from its securities regulators. Singapore has also mandated climate reporting for listed companies, with phased Scope 3 expansion.
A clear trend is forming across jurisdictions: climate disclosure is aligning with ISSB global standards. There’s a growing focus on assurance, comparability, and transparency in value-chain emissions.
This regulatory tightening raises the bar significantly for corporations. The challenge is clear. Companies must:
- Align with multiple evolving disclosure regimes,
- Ensure emissions data is verifiable and auditable, and
- Expand reporting across complex global supply chains.
Balancing operational growth with compliance is becoming increasingly complex as climate regulation converges and intensifies worldwide.
A Turning Point for Global Carbon Accounting
The outcome of this debate could shape global carbon accounting standards for years.
If stricter rules are adopted, emissions reporting will become more precise. This could improve transparency and reduce greenwashing risks. However, it may also increase compliance costs and limit flexibility.
If the proposed changes remain optional, companies may continue using current accounting methods. This could support faster clean energy investment, but may leave gaps in reporting accuracy.
The new rules could take effect as early as next year, making this a near-term decision for global companies.
The push by Apple, Amazon, and other companies highlights a key tension in climate strategy. On one side is the need for accurate, real-time emissions reporting. On the other is the need for flexible systems that support large-scale clean energy investment.
As digital infrastructure expands and energy demand rises, how emissions are measured will matter as much as how they are reduced. The next phase of climate action will depend not just on targets—but on the systems used to track them.
The post Apple, Amazon Lead 60+ Firms to Ease Global Carbon Reporting Rules appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
Mastercard Beats 2025 Emissions Targets as Revenue Rises 16%, Breaking the Growth vs Carbon Trade-Off
Mastercard says it has exceeded its 2025 emissions reduction targets while continuing to grow its global business. The company reduced emissions across its operations even as revenue increased strongly in 2025.
The update comes from Mastercard’s official sustainability and technology disclosure published in 2026. It confirms progress toward its long-term goal of net-zero emissions by 2040, covering its full value chain.
The results are important for the financial technology sector. Digital payments depend heavily on data centers and cloud systems, which are energy-intensive and linked to rising global emissions.
Breaking the Pattern: Emissions Fall While Revenue Rises
In 2025, Mastercard surpassed its interim climate targets compared with a 2016 baseline. The company reported a 44% reduction in Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, beating its target of 38%. It also achieved a 46% reduction in Scope 3 emissions, far exceeding its 20% target.
At the same time, Mastercard recorded 16% revenue growth in 2025. This shows that emissions reductions continued even as the business expanded. Mastercard Chief Sustainability Officer Ellen Jackowski and Senior Vice President of Data and Governance Adam Tenzer wrote:
“These results reflect a comprehensive approach built on renewable energy investment and procurement, supply chain engagement, and embedding environmental sustainability into everyday business decisions.”
The company also reported a 1% year-on-year decline in total emissions, marking the third consecutive year of emissions reduction. This is important because digital payment networks usually grow with higher computing demand.
Mastercard says this trend reflects improved efficiency across its operations, better infrastructure use, and increased reliance on cleaner energy sources.

The Hidden Footprint: Why Data Centers Drive Mastercard’s Emissions
A large share of Mastercard’s emissions comes from its digital infrastructure. According to the company’s sustainability report, data centers account for about 60% of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions. Technology-related goods and services make up roughly one-third of Scope 3 emissions.
This reflects how modern financial systems operate. Digital payments, fraud detection, and AI-based analytics require a large-scale computing infrastructure.
Global data centers already consume about 415–460 TWh of electricity per year, equal to roughly 1.5%–2% of global electricity demand. This number is expected to rise as AI usage expands.
Mastercard’s challenge is similar to that of other digital companies. Higher transaction volume usually leads to greater computing needs. This can raise emissions unless we improve efficiency.
To manage this, the company is focusing on renewable energy procurement, hardware consolidation, and more efficient software systems.
Carbon-Aware Technology Becomes Core to Operations
Mastercard is integrating sustainability directly into its technology systems rather than treating it as a separate reporting function. Since 2023, the company has developed a patent-pending system that assigns a Sustainability Score to its technology infrastructure. This system measures environmental impact in real time.
It tracks factors such as:
- Energy use in kilowatt-hours,
- Regional carbon intensity of electricity,
- Server utilization rates,
- Hardware lifecycle efficiency, and
- Data processing location.
This allows engineers to design systems with lower carbon impact.
The company also uses carbon-aware software design. This means computing workloads can be adjusted to reduce energy use when carbon intensity is high in certain regions.
This approach reflects a wider trend in the technology and financial sectors. More companies are now including carbon tracking in their main infrastructure choices. They no longer see it just as a reporting task.
Powering Payments: Mastercard’s Net-Zero Playbook
Mastercard has committed to reaching net-zero emissions by 2040, covering Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 emissions across its value chain. The target is aligned with science-based climate pathways and includes operations, suppliers, and technology infrastructure.
To achieve this, the company is focusing on four main areas.
-
Increasing renewable energy use in operations
Mastercard already powers its global operations with 100% renewable electricity. This covers offices and data centers in multiple regions.
The company has also achieved a 46% reduction in total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions compared to its 2016 baseline. It continues to use renewable energy purchasing to maintain this progress.
In 2024, Mastercard procured over 112,000 MWh of renewable electricity, supporting lower emissions from its global operations.
-
Improving energy efficiency in data centers
Data centers account for about 60% of Mastercard’s Scope 1 and 2 emissions. To reduce this, Mastercard is upgrading servers, cutting unused computing capacity, and improving workload efficiency. It also uses real-time monitoring to reduce energy waste.
These improvements helped keep operational emissions stable in 2024, even as computing demand increased. Efficiency gains combined with renewable energy use supported this outcome.
-
Working with suppliers to reduce emissions
Around 75%–76% of Mastercard’s total emissions come from its value chain. This includes cloud providers, technology partners, and hardware suppliers.
To address this, Mastercard works with suppliers to set emissions targets and improve reporting. More than 70% of its suppliers now have their own climate reduction goals.
-
Upgrading and consolidating hardware systems
Mastercard is reducing emissions by improving its hardware systems. It decommissions unused servers, consolidates infrastructure, and shifts to more efficient cloud platforms.
Technology goods and services account for about one-third of Scope 3 emissions. By reducing unnecessary hardware and extending equipment life, Mastercard lowers both energy use and manufacturing-related emissions while maintaining system performance.
Renewable energy procurement is central to its strategy. It’s crucial for powering data centers, as they account for most of their operational emissions.
Mastercard works with suppliers because a large part of emissions comes from the value chain. This includes technology manufacturing and cloud services. By 2025, the company exceeded several short-term climate goals. This shows early progress on its long-term net-zero path.

ESG Pressure Hits Fintech: The New Rules of Digital Finance
Mastercard’s results come during a period of rising ESG pressure across the financial sector. Banks, payment networks, and fintech companies must now disclose emissions. This is especially true for Scope 3 emissions, which cover supply chain and digital infrastructure impacts.
Several global trends are shaping the industry:
- Growing regulatory focus on climate disclosure,
- Rising investor demand for ESG transparency,
- Expansion of digital payments and cloud computing, and
- Increased energy use from AI and data processing.
Data centers are becoming a major focus area because they link financial services to energy consumption. In Mastercard’s case, they are the largest source of operational emissions.
At the same time, financial institutions are expected to align with net-zero targets between 2040 and 2050. This depends on regional regulations and climate frameworks. Mastercard’s early progress places it ahead of many peers in meeting short-term emissions goals.
Decoupling Growth From Emissions
One of the most important signals from Mastercard’s 2025 results is the separation of business growth from emissions.
The company achieved 16% revenue growth while reducing total emissions by 1% year-on-year. This marks a continued pattern of emissions decline alongside business expansion.
Mastercard attributes this to improved system efficiency, renewable energy use, and better infrastructure management. In simple terms, the company is processing more transactions without a matching rise in emissions.
This trend is important because digital payment systems normally scale with computing demand. Without efficiency gains, emissions would typically rise with business growth.
Looking ahead, demand will continue to grow. Global payments revenue is projected to reach around $3.1 trillion by 2028, according to McKinsey & Company, growing at close to 10% annually.

Global data center electricity demand might double by 2030. This rise is mainly due to AI workloads, says the International Energy Agency. Mastercard’s results show that tech upgrades can lower the carbon impact of digital finance. This is true even as global usage rises.
The Takeaway: Fintech’s Proof That Growth and Emissions Can Split
Mastercard’s 2025 sustainability performance shows measurable progress toward its net-zero goal. At the same time, major challenges remain. Data centers continue to be the largest emissions source, and global digital activity is still expanding rapidly due to AI and cloud computing.
Mastercard’s approach shows how financial technology companies are adapting. Sustainability is no longer a separate goal. It is becoming part of how digital systems are designed and operated.
The next test will be whether these efficiency gains can continue to outpace the rapid growth of global digital payments and AI-driven financial systems.
The post Mastercard Beats 2025 Emissions Targets as Revenue Rises 16%, Breaking the Growth vs Carbon Trade-Off appeared first on Carbon Credits.
-
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
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
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”
-
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


