Gold prices climbed to new highs on Monday, with December futures reaching a record $4,014.60 per ounce. The yellow metal stayed strong as investors sought safety amid global uncertainty and a prolonged U.S. government shutdown.
Goldman Sachs raised its December 2026 gold price forecast from $4,300 to $4,900 per ounce, citing steady central bank purchases and renewed investor interest in gold-backed ETFs. Spot gold has surged 52% so far this year, supported by a weaker U.S. dollar and rising geopolitical tensions.

But first, let’s take a closer look at gold ETFs — what they are and why so many investors are turning to them.
What Are Gold ETFs and Why Are They Popular?
Gold Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) mirror the market price of physical gold without requiring investors to hold the metal themselves. Each ETF unit typically represents one gram of 99.5% pure gold, traded on stock exchanges just like shares.
Key features of gold ETFs include:
- Backed by physical gold stored in secure vaults
- Real-time pricing and easy trading through Demat accounts
- No storage or making charges
- Lower transaction costs and high liquidity
- Transparent pricing that tracks the spot gold rate
Central Banks and ETFs Fuel the Gold Price Rush
Reports say that China’s central bank has played a major role in driving gold demand. In September, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) added to its gold reserves for the 11th month in a row, increasing holdings to 74.06 million troy ounces from 74.02 million in August. The value of these reserves also jumped to $283.29 billion, up from $253.84 billion the previous month.
Goldman Sachs expects central banks to keep buying gold, with around 80 tonnes forecast for 2025 and 70 tonnes for 2026, as emerging economies continue to diversify away from the U.S. dollar.
At the same time, strong inflows into gold ETFs are supporting the rally, giving investors an easier and safer way to gain exposure to rising gold prices.
Top Gold ETFs to Watch: IAU, GLD, and GDX
Gold ETFs provide a practical, cost-effective, and transparent way to invest in gold, avoiding the hassle of storage, insurance, and purity verification.
iShares Gold Trust (IAU)
IAU is one of the largest gold ETFs with around $72.7 billion in market capitalization. Each share represents roughly 0.01 ounces of gold, making it affordable for small investors. With a low expense ratio of 0.25%, IAU offers cost-effective access to physical gold.
However, it does not follow a specific ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) framework since it directly holds bullion. Any sustainability impact stems from the gold mining and refining practices behind the physical gold it stores.

SPDR Gold Shares (GLD)
GLD is the world’s largest gold ETF, managing about $129 billion in assets. Each share equals one-tenth of an ounce of gold, stored in vaults in London, New York, and Zurich, backed by custodians like JPMorgan Chase and HSBC. It is known for its high liquidity and tight spreads.
SPDR Gold Shares has removed many barriers to investing in gold, such as buying, storing, and insuring it. The fund provides direct exposure to physical gold, minus expenses, without relying on derivatives that carry extra credit risk.
It allows investors to easily access the gold market and include it in their portfolios, offering a strategic way to diversify risk due to gold’s low or negative correlation with other assets.
Like IAU, GLD does not integrate ESG criteria but depends on the ethical and environmental practices of gold suppliers and refiners.

VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX)
GDX differs from IAU and GLD as it invests in leading gold mining companies instead of holding physical gold. Managing around $22.54 billion in assets, GDX tracks major miners such as Newmont and Barrick Gold.
The fund provides leveraged exposure to gold prices through miner performance. Since it involves mining operations, ESG factors play a more direct role covering carbon reduction, responsible sourcing, labor safety, and community development.

Sustainability Perspective: Physical Gold vs. Gold Miners
Physical gold ETFs like IAU and GLD mainly reflect the sustainability impact of gold mining through their bullion holdings. They don’t actively engage in ESG initiatives. In contrast, GDX connects investors directly to mining companies that can influence sustainability outcomes through operational decisions.
Investors focused on responsible investing should assess the ESG performance of individual mining companies within funds like GDX. This approach allows for more transparency and accountability in evaluating how sustainable practices affect returns and risk exposure.
Gold’s Shine Isn’t Fading Anytime Soon: A Smart Safe-Haven Investment
It’s now clear that the gold price is hitting record highs due to central banks buying more, strong ETF inflows, and ongoing global uncertainty. Because of this, ETFs like IAU, GLD, and GDX give investors different ways to invest in gold, depending on their needs for liquidity, cost, and even sustainability.
At the same time, the market is watching for possible Federal Reserve rate cuts and dealing with economic uncertainty. Gold’s appeal as a safe-haven asset remains strong. And Goldman Sachs’ higher forecast adds to investor confidence — the gold story is far from over.

Also, institutional investors are increasingly using gold ETFs to balance portfolios and protect against stock market swings. Experts recommend investing gradually and diversifying, especially after gold’s sharp price jump. Long-term investors like these ETFs because they are affordable, simple, and easy to manage.
Plus, rising interest in gold is encouraging some investors to explore other commodity ETFs, such as silver and industrial metals, to spread their risk.
In short, gold ETFs are a favorite in 2025 for their simplicity, transparency, and ability to protect against inflation and market ups and downs. Both retail and institutional investors see them as a safe and reliable way to invest in uncertain times.
- READ MORE: Gold Price Today Surges to All-Time High at $3,671 as Miners Push ESG and Carbon Reduction Goals
The post Top Gold ETFs to Watch Now as Gold Prices Break $4,000 — IAU, GLD, and GDX Lead the Pack appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
The real cost of 1 tonne of CO2: Translating carbon into hectares
Every business carbon footprint report ends with a number, the amount of carbon emissions produced by the business, less the amount of carbon reduced and offset, given in tonnes of CO₂. Many of the people who sign off on that number, including those who paid for it, cannot picture what it represents on the ground. A tonne is a unit of mass. CO₂ is invisible. The link between the amount offset in the report and a real piece of restored forest somewhere in the world is almost never indicated.
![]()
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.
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases10 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 Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

