A Strategic Investment Analysis
As we edge closer towards a more sustainable world, the demand for nickel is skyrocketing. Nickel’s inherent properties such as strength, ductility, and resistance to heat and corrosion make it indispensable across various industries, notably the production of stainless steel.
But more importantly, nickel plays a pivotal role in the makeup of the lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles (EVs). With its key role in clean energy transition, as well as general industrial use, nickel was added to the U.S. government’s critical minerals list in 2022.
This list is the result of the Energy Act of 2020, which defined critical minerals as those:
“essential to the economic or national security of the United States; have a supply chain that is vulnerable to disruption; and serve an essential function in the manufacturing of a product, the absence of which would have significant consequences for the economic or national security of the U.S.”
There’s a lot to chew on there, but in simple terms: critical minerals are those that the U.S. can’t function without, or those that the U.S. depends too much on antagonistic foreign powers for.
It’s not just the U.S., either – several other countries have their own critical minerals lists, such as Canada, the EU, South Korea, and Japan – and they all have nickel on them.

But despite a brief spike in early 2022 when the Russian invasion of Ukraine drove prices up on fears of a potential supply disruption, nickel prices have stayed fairly stable over most of the past decade, generally trading in the band between $10,000-$20,000.
Though nickel is indeed crucial to our net zero future, a healthy surplus of mine supply combined with a global slump in steel demand have offset the strong growth of the EV market (shown below), leading to nickel’s current weak price environment.

Still, though the near-term outlook for nickel isn’t strong, the green transition is expected to widen the gap between supply and demand.
International Energy Agency (IEA) Forecast
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has forecasted that at the current pace of development, nickel demand will outstrip supply by roughly 25% in 2030, yielding a more positive long-term nickel prices outlook.
In the meantime, here’s a close look at the top three nickel stocks that are poised to capitalize on this growing demand, with a focus on their production capabilities, market positioning, and forward-looking strategies.
1. Vale S.A. (NYSE: VALE) Market Cap: US$48 Billion
As the world’s second largest producer of nickel in 2023, Vale stands out with operations spanning Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, and New Caledonia.
- Notably, the company’s Long Harbour nickel processing plant in Canada set a benchmark in low-carbon nickel production, emitting about a third of the industry’s average CO2 levels.
Last year, Vale produced 164,900 tonnes of nickel, 8% lower than the year previous but in line with guidance due to ongoing development at some of its mines.
This scale, combined with its commitment to sustainability, positions Vale robustly in the face of escalating demand, especially from the EV battery sector. The company’s strategy to expand nickel output while adhering to environmental standards makes it a compelling choice for investors focusing on sustainable growth.
The main drawback with Vale lies in the fact that the company is a diversified miner that also produces iron ore and copper. In particular, nickel only represented 8.8% of the company’s operating revenue in 2023.
Still, this inclusion of other business segments isn’t necessarily a bad thing, as it does help lower the risk of the company as an investment. Those looking for a more conservative pick that still retains exposure to the growth of the nickel market can definitely consider Vale as a pick for their portfolios.

2. Glencore plc (LON: GLEN | OTC: GLNCY) Market Cap: US$70 Billion
Next on our list is the world’s third-largest producer of nickel, UK-based Glencore. Like Vale, Glencore is a diversified miner that operates in several different markets.
Last year, Glencore produced 97,600 tonnes of nickel. While that only accounted for a modest 4.2% of Glencore’s total revenue for 2023, one thing that sets Glencore apart from Vale is that it’s significantly more diversified than the latter, with an energy segment on top of its metals and minerals segment.
Glencore’s broad mandate combined with its size make it a relatively safe investment, and the company has done very well since the post-COVID market lows. The company has also received positive attention for its very aggressive emissions reduction targets that include a 25% reduction in Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions by the end of 2030 and a 50% reduction by year-end 2035 against a 2019 baseline.
Many major companies still refuse to even report Scope 3 emissions, let alone set near-term emissions reduction targets for them, so Glencore is definitely ahead of the curve with their climate action plan.
Last but not least, Glencore’s primary listing on the London Stock Exchange makes it easier for Europe-based investors looking for nickel exposure, though the company also has foreign ordinary shares and ADRs listed on the U.S. OTC market.

3. Canada Nickel Company (TSXV: CNC | OTC: CNIKF) Market Cap: US$160 Million
Finally, our last company is one for aggressive investors with a healthy appetite for risk, who are looking for more direct exposure to the growth of the nickel market compared to the diversified miners mentioned above.
Canada Nickel is a junior nickel miner based out of – you guessed it, Canada. While this may not seem like it warrants a special mention, it’s worth noting that the U.S. imports over 40% of its nickel from its northern neighbour. This makes Canada an extremely attractive jurisdiction for nickel producers, as a major buying market is only a short hop across the border.
The Crawford Nickel Project
The company has done an excellent job of consolidating nickel projects in the historically prolific Timmins mining camp in Ontario, one of the largest gold mining districts in the world. While nickel has traditionally been mined primarily as a by-product in the area, Timmins has struck proverbial gold with its flagship Crawford Nickel Project.
- Right now, Crawford is actually the world’s second nickel operation by reserve size. Based on its bankable feasibility study, it’s projected to be the third largest nickel mine in the world in terms of annual production once it’s built.
Currently, Canada Nickel is still finishing the funding and permitting process for Crawford. The final decision on whether or not to build the mine is expected to happen mid next year, with first production expected by year-end 2027 if all goes according to plan.
Though Canada Nickel has acquired a number of other projects in the area, Crawford is definitely the main draw here. It’s expected to be a low-cost mine with robust economics and a lengthy 41-year mine life. The company’s novel approach to carbon storage, integrated into its mine plan, would also make Crawford not just a low-carbon-emission mine, but actually net carbon negative over its lifetime.
As good as all this sounds, however, it’s important to remember that as a junior miner that isn’t even producing any nickel yet, Canada Nickel is a highly speculative investment that should only be considered by investors with high risk tolerance.
While a number of major companies already have their eyes on Canada Nickel, with big names like Agnico Eagle, Samsung, and Anglo American taking significant ownership stakes, there’s no guarantee that Canada Nickel will be able to secure the funding and permits necessary to build a mine at Crawford, or that the company will succeed even if they do.
Still, if you’re looking for an investment with pure play exposure to nickel and have the right risk profile, Canada Nickel is one company you don’t want to miss.

A Brief Note on Norilsk Nickel (Nornickel)
Now, those of you who’ve looked at the companies above might be wondering something: why wasn’t the world’s largest nickel producer, Norilsk Nickel a.k.a. Nornickel, included?
Unfortunately, despite its attractiveness as the world’s largest nickel producer that’s also the closest thing you can get to a pure play major, there’s one major issue with Nornickel: it’s a Russian company.
Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Nornickel was one of several companies sanctioned by the West, leading to the stock getting delisted from both the American as well as the London stock markets.
As of June 2024, Nornickel is still listed on the Moscow Exchange. However, given that the Russian government has restricted foreign investors in “unfriendly” countries from buying and selling securities on the Moscow Exchange, the company is inaccessible to the average investor for the foreseeable future.
Nickel’s Importance in a Zero Emissions World
The global transition towards renewable energy and the exponential growth of the EV market are key drivers for demand growth for nickel. And lets not forget about lithium’s importance in “lithium ion” batteries along with nickel for new EVs. LiFT Power ($LIFFF), a fast developing North American lithium junior, is worth a look here to understand how it plays out https://carboncredits.com/liftpower-lift/.

The companies listed above aren’t just mining firms – they’re also strategic players in the global shift towards sustainable energy. Investing in these stocks offers potential exposure to a critical resource that powers both today’s industries and tomorrow’s technologies.
Each company’s focus on expanding production capabilities while maintaining environmental and ethical standards provides a strong foundation for growth.
As the net zero transition continues accelerating the pace of EV adoption and hence the growth of the nickel market, make sure you keep your eyes on these three companies.
The post Top 3 Nickel Stocks for 2024 appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
SBTi Net-Zero Standard V2: What the Revision Means for Every Business
Key takeaways
- SBTi is the default reference point for corporate climate action: 51% of Fortune Global 500 companies now hold net-zero targets, up from 8% in 2020, and over 11,000 organizations worldwide have SBTi-validated targets.
- Net Zero Standard V2 redefines climate leadership as reducing emissions and mitigating ongoing emissions, not reduction alone.
- The new standard adds flexibility through five-year cycles, a “best efforts” standard, and an Asset Transition Method for companies whose path to net-zero doesn’t fit a straight-line trajectory.
- Voluntary carbon credits are formally recognized for the first time, with reduction and removal credits accepted from 2027, and removals required from 2035.
- Companies with 2030 targets keep using V1 for their current cycle and move to V2 in 2028; companies without targets can start using V2 on February 1, 2027.
Why every business needs to understand the SBTi Net-Zero Standard revision
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has become the default reference point for credible corporate climate action. Net-zero targets are now held by 51% of Fortune Global 500 (FG500) companies, up dramatically from just 8% in 2020, and more than 11,000 organizations worldwide have set SBTi-validated targets.
However, SBTi’s influence extends well beyond the companies formally participating in the program. Every business in the value chain of an SBTi participant will have to reduce its own carbon emissions, and businesses that aren’t SBTi participants themselves still look to the program for guidance on climate action.
In short, SBTi gives every business a credible blueprint for climate action, and companies that follow its principles can pursue climate action with confidence, whether or not they’re formally part of the program.
How will the Net Zero Standard revision affect business climate action?
SBTi participation is expected to grow. Despite strong target-setting participation among the F500, only 17% of companies use the SBTi Net Zero Standard V1 beyond target setting, largely because its rules have been seen as too rigid to apply in practice. Much of the Net Zero Standard revision has focused on creating more flexibility to enable higher participation. Medium and small businesses will also increasingly feel pressure for climate action, since SBTi mandates that its participants reduce carbon emissions across their value chains.
Net Zero Standard V2 also redefines climate leadership: leading climate action now means reducing emissions and mitigating ongoing emissions. Reducing your own emissions while ignoring the emissions you continue to release along the way is no longer considered leadership. Supporting voluntary carbon projects with high-integrity carbon credits is now backed by the leading authority on corporate climate action.
What lessons shaped the Net Zero Standard V2 revision?
The revision reflects a few learnings about what actually drives climate progress, and how SBTi built those lessons into the new standard.
| Net Zero Standard V1 Learnings | Net Zero Standard V2 Implementation |
|---|---|
| Making real short-term progress is more important and more difficult than making big long-term promises | Focus on short-term climate progress |
| Every company has a different path to net zero that doesn’t always fit generalized net-zero rules | Create asset transition plans based on each company’s unique asset lifecycles and capital planning |
| We need to mitigate our ongoing emissions to keep global carbon emissions in check | Reduce global carbon emissions by financing voluntary carbon projects with high-integrity carbon credits |
What are the key changes between the old and new Net Zero Standard?
Both versions of the standard are grounded in net-zero by 2050. However, the old standard treated climate leadership as simply reducing emissions, expected a long-term commitment to net zero, based emission reduction targets on generalized net-zero goals, revoked status from companies that fell behind on targets, and ignored voluntary carbon projects entirely.
The new standard treats climate leadership as reducing emissions and mitigating ongoing emissions. It shifts the focus to short-term progress through five-year cycles, and it bases emission reduction targets on both the net-zero goal and a company’s own asset decarbonization plan. A new Asset Transition Method lets companies set decarbonization targets through asset plans with committed, verifiable steps; an ambitious but achievable path based on a company’s starting point, financial resources, and technology, with multiple pathways to reflect the unique opportunities and constraints of different industries and companies.
Crucially, the new standard moves to a “best efforts” basis that creates real flexibility on progress against targets. Businesses that miss their targets can keep their status if they’ve used “every lever” within their control, and minimum progress rules will be set out in the SBTi Assurance Manual.
Finally, the new standard formally uses voluntary carbon projects to mitigate ongoing emissions. From 2027 through 2034, this mitigation is recognized, and both carbon reduction and removal credits are accepted. From 2035 forward, mitigation with carbon removal credits becomes required, with durability matching between the removal and the emission it offsets.
| Old Net Zero Standard | New Net Zero Standard |
|---|---|
| Grounded in net-zero by 2050 | Grounded in net-zero by 2050 |
| Climate leadership is reducing emissions | Climate leadership is reducing emissions and mitigating ongoing emissions |
| Make a long-term commitment to net-zero | Focus on short-term progress in 5-year cycles |
| Emission reduction targets are based on net-zero goal |
|
| Businesses who fall behind targets lose status |
|
| Ignores voluntary carbon projects |
|
When does the new Net Zero Standard take effect?
Companies with existing 2030 targets should continue using the old Net Zero Standard for their current cycle, and start using the new Net Zero Standard in 2028 to set targets for the next cycle (2030–2035).
Companies that don’t yet have targets can use the new Net Zero Standard starting February 1, 2027.
What are SBTi’s Category A and Category B companies?
The new Net Zero Standard splits companies into two categories, with different requirements attached to each.
Category A covers large companies from all countries and medium-sized companies from high-income countries. A company from any country qualifies if it meets at least one of: net turnover of €450 million or more, or 1,000 or more full-time employees. A company from a high-income country qualifies if its Scope 1 and 2 emissions are 10,000 tCO2e or more, or if it meets at least two of: balance sheet of €25 million or more, net turnover of €50 million or more, or 250 or more full-time employees.
Category B covers small companies from all countries and medium-sized companies from lower-income countries.
How do Scope 1 targets work under Net Zero Standard V2?
Scope 1 targets aim to transition companies to net-zero direct emissions by 2050 or sooner, and companies can choose from three approaches.
- Absolute emissions reduction follows a straight-line emissions trajectory from the target base year to the net-zero year.
- Emissions intensity reduction lets companies follow sector-specific pathways designed to reflect the reduction opportunities available in sectors like steel, cement, or chemicals.
- Asset transition is designed for companies whose capital stock turnover doesn’t follow a linear or sector pathway. These companies design a transition plan to operate existing assets efficiently and replace them with low-carbon assets, using predetermined milestones.
How do Scope 2 targets work under Net Zero Standard V2?
Scope 2 targets address emissions from purchased electricity through three pathways:
- Reducing electricity consumption,
- Reducing grid consumption by installing onsite or direct-line offsite clean energy generation, and
- Cleaning up the regional grid using market-based tools like PPAs, RECs, and GOs that drive clean energy development.
V2 introduces a dual Scope 2 framework requiring two separate targets, with an overall goal of 100% low-carbon electricity by 2040.
The location-based target addresses the carbon intensity of a company’s physical power use, and requires companies to show that their grid consumption is falling and/or that their physical grid use is getting cleaner; in other words, that their market-based solutions are actually making the grid cleaner.
The market-based (or zero-carbon electricity) target tracks a company’s use of low-carbon power generation contracts and Energy Attribute Certificates. It requires geographical matching of these certificates with electricity consumption based on deliverability regions (grid regions); annual matching is allowed, though hourly matching is encouraged. Category A companies with large electricity loads must report the percentage of their Scope 2 electricity consumption matched with low-carbon attributes on an hourly basis, and there’s an optional recognition framework for companies that meet hourly matching thresholds.
How do Scope 3 targets work under Net Zero Standard V2?
Scope 3 targets share the same 2050-or-sooner net-zero goal, but companies set near-term targets only for material emissions sources in their value chain and areas where they have real influence. Long-term Scope 3 targets are generally not required.
Limited, justified exclusions are allowed for near-term targets, including categories that individually account for less than 5% of total Scope 3 emissions, and activities where a company lacks practical influence, like leased assets it doesn’t operationally control, or the processing of sold products. Optional exclusions are also available in specific categories.
Companies can choose from three approaches to near-term Scope 3 targets:
- An overarching emissions reduction target, which follows a linear contraction of emissions from the base year to residual emissions of 10% or less by 2050 or sooner;
- An overarching supplier/customer alignment target, benchmarked against a growing share of tier 1 suppliers and customers reaching net-zero by 2050 or sooner; or
- A category- or activity-specific target, tailored for companies with concentrated emissions in particular Scope 3 categories or high-emitting activities.
What is “ongoing emissions mitigation” under the new SBTi standard?
This is one of the most significant additions in Net Zero Standard V2. Accelerated climate contributions are needed to help the world achieve climate objectives, limit temperature overshoot, mitigate transition risks, and support the scale-up of climate solutions, and V2 formally recognizes that. Ongoing emissions mitigation runs as a parallel track to companies also reducing their own emissions.
The framework is initially voluntary, with recognition available at three contribution levels to encourage early action.
- Engaged companies address more than 1% of total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.
- Advanced companies address more than 10% of total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, including 100% of Scope 1 and 2 emissions.
- Leadership companies address 100% of total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions with a contribution budget of $80/tCO2e.
Carbon credits used for this purpose have to meet certain quality standards. They must be ex-post (issued after the mitigation has actually occurred), independently third-party-assured, emissions reductions or removals, measured in tCO2e, that occur within five years prior to the reporting year. They must be sourced from outside the company’s own value chain. Further minimum criteria will be set to align with high-integrity frameworks, with additional details on the recognition program expected in the second half of 2026.
Starting in 2035, carbon removals become mandatory for Category A companies. From that point, the carbon removal coverage requirement rises linearly from 1% of Scope 1–3 emissions to 100% by a company’s net-zero year. Within that, 10% of long-lived GHG emissions must specifically be covered by durable removals, also rising linearly to 100% by the net-zero year.
How must companies neutralize residual emissions?
At a company’s net-zero target year and thereafter, it must reduce its Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions to zero or to residual levels, and neutralize all residual emissions using eligible carbon removals. Those removals have to meet two conditions: they must occur within the same reporting period as the residual emissions they’re neutralizing, and long-lived GHGs must be neutralized with long-lived removals, matching the durability of the removal to the atmospheric lifetime of the emission being addressed.
What is the SBTi implementation hierarchy?
Net Zero Standard V2 also lays out how companies should prioritize their actions for credible target delivery, in three tiers.
- Direct actions, at the activity level, are actions that reduce emissions at the source within a company’s own operations and value chain; things like efficiency improvements, fuel switching, and engaging suppliers and customers to reduce their emissions.
- Actions within shared systems, or activity pools that reduce the emissions of shared systems like electricity or gas grids. This includes market instruments that convey low-carbon attributes, such as PPAs, RECs, and GOs, all of which must meet minimum integrity criteria that SBTi will elaborate on in future guidance.
- Sector-level actions relate to the same type of activity occurring in a relevant geography or system, in a way that meaningfully reduces the emissions a company is responsible for.
How Terrapass helps businesses meet the new SBTi standard
As the rules around carbon credits become more rigorous, the quality of the credits behind them matters more than ever. Terrapass has expanded our global network of carbon projects: more project types, locations, prices, ICVCM CCPs, and UN SDGs, spanning super-pollutant destruction, nature-based solutions, and durable removals. We offer Green-e® Climate Certification and we only source from third-party-verified projects on ICVCM-Eligible registries.
We also help clients with impact beyond carbon: EACs, RECs, and GOs including Green-e® Certified credits that support leading renewable energy projects; water credits that support water restoration projects; and custom environmental product needs like RNG and SAF. Wherever your organization is on its sustainability journey, we help clients around the world address climate risk, advance their environmental and social goals, and get the most out of their sustainability budgets.
FAQ: SBTi Net-Zero Standard revision
What is the SBTi Net-Zero Standard?
It’s the framework the Science Based Targets initiative publishes for companies that want validated, credible net-zero targets tied to limiting global warming.
What is changing in the SBTi Net Zero Standard V2 revision?
The biggest changes are more flexibility (five-year cycles and a “best efforts” standard), a new Asset Transition Method for companies whose emissions don’t follow a straight-line path, and formal recognition of voluntary carbon credits for mitigating ongoing emissions.
When do companies need to switch to the new SBTi standard?
If your company already has 2030 targets, you keep using V1 for your current cycle and move to V2 in 2028. If you don’t have targets yet, you can start using V2 as of February 1, 2027.
Can companies use carbon credits to meet SBTi targets?
They can. Under V2, high-integrity carbon reduction and removal credits count toward mitigating ongoing emissions from 2027 through 2034. Starting in 2035, only removal credits count, and they need to be durability-matched to the emissions they offset.
What’s the difference between Category A and Category B companies under SBTi?
Category A is large companies everywhere plus medium-sized companies in high-income countries, based on thresholds like revenue, headcount, or emissions. Category B is small companies everywhere and medium-sized companies in lower-income countries.
What happens if a company misses its SBTi target?
Under the old standard, falling behind could cost a company its SBTi status. Under V2’s “best efforts” approach, a company can hold onto its status as long as it’s used every lever within its control, with minimum progress rules coming in the SBTi Assurance Manual.
Sources: This post is based on Terrapass’s internal analysis of the SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2.0. Facts and figures were checked against SBTi’s official V2.0 announcement, SBTi’s Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2.0 — Chapter 6: Ongoing Emissions Responsibility, Trellis’s coverage of the standard, Trellis’s reporting on Ongoing Emissions Recognition costs, Sylvera’s analysis of what comes next, Anthesis Group’s Fortune 500 net-zero commitments research, and Climate Impact Partners’ seventh annual FG500 analysis, as reported by CarbonUnits.com.
The post SBTi Net-Zero Standard V2: What the Revision Means for Every Business appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
How to improve Scope 3 data accuracy for CSRD
For most businesses, the emissions that matter most sit outside their own walls. Scope 3 emissions, everything generated across your value chain, from the suppliers who make your inputs to the customers who use your products, typically make up the majority of a company’s total carbon footprint. Under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), those value-chain emissions now have to be measured and disclosed with a rigour that spend-based estimates alone struggle to satisfy. This guide sets out how to improve Scope 3 data accuracy for CSRD: the calculation methods open to you, how to move from estimates to verified supplier data, and how to govern that data so it holds up to audit.
![]()
Carbon Footprint
How community stewardship makes carbon credits durable
A carbon credit is a commitment that extends well into the future. The tonne of CO₂ compensated for today from a nature-based carbon project must remain out of the atmosphere for good, which means the forest behind the credit has to remain standing long after the transaction is complete. For any buyer, this raises a defining question: What ensures that the forest endures?
![]()
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases11 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 Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

