With the global energy transition looming large, many have been setting their sights on materials critical to the energy transition, such as copper, lithium, or uranium.
Nickel is yet another mineral on that list, albeit one that seems to have largely flown under most investors’ radars thus far.
It’s understandable why that’s been the case – after all, the primary use for mined nickel has long been industrial, with over three-quarters of global nickel demand being for things like alloy production or electroplating.

However, there’s one avenue of “green” demand for nickel that’s been slowly yet steadily driving up consumption – and that’s electric vehicle (EV) batteries.
- Last year, the average battery EV sold contained 25.3 kilograms of nickel – and that number has been going up year over year
Nickel is one of the key components of the lithium-ion batteries that power EVs worldwide, thanks to its unique physical and chemical properties.
In order to be used in an electric vehicle, nickel must first be refined to extremely high purities, creating what’s known as “battery grade” nickel. Following this, it then needs to be dissolved in sulphuric acid to create nickel sulphate, which can then be used to produce battery cathodes.
Nickel’s high energy density, which allows it to hold more charge for less weight, makes high-nickel battery chemistries more desirable in EV batteries. While the first iterations of the lithium-ion battery used equal proportions of nickel with manganese and cobalt, modern ones use as much nickel as manganese and cobalt combined.
And as technology continues to progress, it’s expected that the ratio will rise to as much as 80% nickel, or even more.
That’s why nickel is now on the critical minerals list of several countries including the US, the EU, and Japan.
- RELATED: Top 3 Nickel Stocks for 2024
The Lights Are Green for Nickel.
EV manufacturers are adding more and more nickel to their batteries each year in order to increase the efficiency and range of their vehicles.
- EVs sold in 2023 contained 8% more nickel, on average, than those sold a year previous
Combine that with the fact that EV sales are expected to continue growing at a breakneck pace, and what you end up with is very healthy outlook for long-term nickel demand.
Below you can see two charts created by the International Energy Agency. The one on the left forecasts nickel demand growth out to 2050 based on currently existing climate pledges, while the one on the right shows the same but in a more aggressive net zero scenario:

You can see that, regardless of which scenario we consider, nickel demand is expected to more than double over the next decade – the only question is how fast we get there.
Even in the conservative case where no more climate pledges are made in the coming years, as in the chart on the left, EV and cleantech demand for nickel is still expected to massively drive nickel’s demand growth.
- Last year, total nickel demand amounted to 3.1 million tonnes, of which 478,000 came from EVs and cleantech. This latter portion is expected to grow to 2 million tonnes of nickel demand by 2030 and 3.4 million tonnes by 2040 in the base case – and it could easily be more, if governments around the world pursue additional climate targets
While all scenarios do see nickel consumption plateauing and falling off slightly towards the tail end of 2050 due to forecast lower demand for nickel-rich battery chemistries, there’s still a 9x increase in nickel demand for EV batteries and other cleantech even in the conservative case.
Simply put, the future for nickel looks tremendous.

However, the recent price performance of nickel seems to tell a different story:
And that’s because of the other half of the picture: nickel supply.
But There’s a Supply Jam . . .
Despite how strong the demand outlook for nickel looks, there’s no escaping the fact that right now, supply far outstrips demand.
And there’s exactly one factor we can point to for this: Indonesia.

In the past ten years, Indonesia has accelerated the pace of nickel mine development domestically, thanks to heavy Chinese investment.
- In 2014, Indonesia produced just 7% of the world’s nickel, with just two nickel smelters. 10 years later in 2023, Indonesia now accounts for just over 50% of global production, with 43 operational smelters and another 52 on the way
Indonesia received $7.3 billion in foreign investment from China’s Belt and Road Initiative in 2023, the largest of any participating country. 90% of the nickel smelters in Indonesia were built by Chinese companies, and most of the mines are Chinese owned as well.
Thanks to the extensive Chinese involvement, the lower labor costs and environmental standards for nickel mines in Indonesia have also led to lower production costs. Nickel from Indonesian mines is cheaper to produce than it is on other countries like Australia or Canada.
This breakneck growth of Indonesian production, during a weak price environment where other producers have scaled back, has contributed to Indonesia’s rise to prominence as the top global nickel producer.

It’s expected that the nickel market will see a surplus of 36,000 tonnes this year, according to a recent report from Macquarie. And it’s unlikely that the nickel market will balance out until after 2025.
Further Down the Road, the Outlook Looks Rosy
Despite how the supply and demand balance looks right now, however, it’s not expected to stay that way as we near the end of the decade.

As the chart above shows, based on current announced mine supply, the nickel market is expected to enter a supply deficit shortly after 2025 – and this shortfall is expected to widen considerably in the decade following, even in the conservative scenario (the solid line).
In other words, even though the current low nickel price environment is discouraging investment, it’ll also create more opportunities down the road thanks to the eventual supply-demand gap that will widen due to the current lack of interest in nickel mining.
Furthermore, as you might recall, in order to be used in EV batteries nickel needs to be further processed into nickel sulphate, which is something not all raw nickel refineries are built to do.

The supply shortfall for nickel sulphate is expected to see an even wider gap than for mined nickel. That said, processing facilities for nickel sulphate can be built on the order of 18-24 months – much quicker than a mine, which is often a years-long process that can get bogged down in studies and permitting.
Even so, the sheer amount of additional nickel sulphate supply required represents yet another opportunity in the nickel markets.
In the near term, it’s likely that nickel prices will continue to stay weak as supply continues to outpace demand. As we near the end of the decade and the push towards net zero continues to accelerate, however, the projected supply-demand gap might just leave the nickel market in significantly different shape than how it looks now.
The post The Ultimate Guide to Nickel 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 Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change10 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

