Connect with us

Published

on

The European Green Deal is a pact that looks to improve the well-being and health of citizens and future generations by providing a range of basic necessities, such as fresh air, clean water, healthy soil, healthy and affordable food, cleaner energy, future-proof jobs, and much more.  

It bases much of this on the European Union (EU) becoming greener. Recently, the European Commission released a series of new rules focused on corporate responsibility that aims to strengthen the path toward its carbon-neutral goal. 

How will these changes affect life in the EU? We review the upcoming EU rules on green claims and greenwashing and what they mean. 

What Is the European Green Deal policy?

The European Union (EU) and European Parliament recognize that climate change and environmental degradation threaten all life in Europe and worldwide. To help get past these challenges and improve the chances of a clean, safe world for future generations, all 27 EU Member States agreed to the European Green Deal 

This environmental agreement will help convert the EU into a modern, resource-efficient, and competitive economy by ensuring: 

  • A reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions by 55% of 1990 levels by 2030 
  • Zero greenhouse gas emissions (GHG emissions) by 2050 
  • Economic growth becomes decoupled from resource use 
  • No person or place is left behind economically or ecologically 
  • EU’s energy independence 
  • Job creation and growth 
  • An improvement in the overall health and well-being of EU citizens 

Financing for the European Green Deal will come from dipping into one-third of the 1.8 trillion euro ($2.022 trillion) investments from the NextGenerationEU Recovery Plan and the EU’s seven-year budget. 

What Is the New EU Environmental Legislation?

Newly proposed legislation for the European Green Deal focuses heavily on green claims. Green claims are any claim an organization makes that it’s taking action to combat GHG emissions and to help slow climate change 

Currently, EU laws don’t regulate environmental claims, which leads to inconsistencies with regard to the handling of these claims among Member States. 

The changes would also better define green claims. They would be defined as: “any message or representation, which is not mandatory under Union law or national law, including text, pictorial, graphic or symbolic representation, in any form, including labels, brand names, company names or product names, in the context of a commercial communication, which states or implies that a product or trader has a positive or no impact on the environment or is less damaging to the environment than other products or traders, respectively, or has improved their impact over time.” 

This is all in an attempt to prevent greenwashing — when an organization focuses more on marketing itself as environmentally friendly than minimizing its environmental impact. 

Let’s review the main proposed changes. 

Rules for Methodology

To help ensure all green claims are valid and harmonious across the EU, EU Member States must validate environmental claims through science-based methodologies 

Accepted methodologies are expected to have to follow these basic guidelines: 

  • They must be based on widely recognized scientific evidence and state-of-the-art technical knowledge and account for relevant international standards. Claims are not allowed if no recognized scientific method exists or there’s insufficient evidence to assess environmental impacts and aspects. 
  • They must assess environmental impact throughout the product’s life cycle. 
  • They must account for the composition of products, the materials they use when producing products, the amount of emissions created during production, the use of the product, and the product’s durability, reparability, and end-of-life aspects. 
  • They must assess if achieving positive environmental impacts, aspects, or performance significantly increases any other negative environmental impact. 
  • They must be third-party accessible with a reasonable access fee, if applicable. 
  • They require regular review from a third party that can account for technical and scientific progress and the development of relevant international standards. 

Rules on Green Claims

Green Energy Claims Image of Smoking Factory Plantsource

So, what will be considered valid green claims under these proposed rules? While nothing is official yet, the green claims directives will be as follows: 

  • They can only make environmental claims substantiated through an approved methodology that meets specific criteria, which we’ll cover later.  
  • They cannot make positive environmental claims if a product has a positive and negative environmental impact. They may publicize the positive claim, but they must also communicate the negative impact clearly and understandably. 
  • They must make the information on the assessment on which the environmental claim is based available 

With regard to the final bullet point, the information on the assessment that should be made available includes: 

  • Information about the product or activities of the trader subject to the claim; Environmental aspects, environmental impacts, or environmental performance the claim covers 
  • Methodology used 
  • Underlying studies or calculations they used to analyze, measure, and monitor the claim’s environmental impact 
  • A brief explanation of how they improved environmental performance via a weblink, QR code, or equivalent 

There also needs to be a review of the accuracy of their environmental claims every five years at minimum. 

Rules on Comparative Environmental Claims

Organizations can make comparative environmental claims as a part of marketing efforts, but experts anticipate the new rules to crack down on such claims. Some of the proposals include: 

  • Organizations must utilize the identical methodology as the products or traders they compare themselves to. 
  • Organizations must generate or source the data to substantiate comparative claims equivalently to ensure comparability. 
  • Organizations must account for the most significant stages along the value chain for all products and traders compared. 

Rules on Forward-Looking Claims

Organizations may also claim anticipated environmental benefits under the newly proposed green claims directive. However, authorities would require these future-looking claims to follow specific guidelines, including: 

  • They must include commitments and milestones that they need to achieve within clearly specified time frames. 
  • They must indicate a baseline year for all targets, the desired result compared to the baseline year, and the target year to achieve the claim. For example, they might say something like, “We commit to making a 50% reduction in emissions by 2035 compared to our 1990 levels.” 
  • They cannot include previously achieved targets. 

Rules on Enforcement

source

The proposed rules will also include how they will expose non-compliant organizations. In the proposed rules, public authorities would require Member States to perform compliance monitoring: 

  • As part of their regular checks 
  • In cases where they have sufficient reason to believe an environmental claim may infringe upon the rules 
  • If complaints arise 

If an organization makes non-compliant environmental claims, the proposed rule changes would require it to fix the issues quickly. Once the organization receives a non-compliance notification, it would have 10 business days to respond with substantiation.   

If the organization doesn’t provide a timely or satisfactory answer, regulatory officials will require it to modify the offending claim or cease all communication of it immediately as consumer protection. The trader will have 30 business days to implement corrective actions. 

This enforcement aims to ensure all environmental labels and claims are credible and trustworthy, allowing consumers to make more educated purchasing decisions. 

What Are the Current EU Environmental Policies?

The current European Green Deal may not be as extensive as the proposed regulation changes. However, it still looks to take on climate change and help prevent the potential global existential crisis it causes.  

To help with this, the European Commission has adopted many climate-focused initiatives and policies, such as: 

  • Reducing car emissions by 55% by 2030 
  • Reducing van emissions by 50% by 2030 
  • Reducing all new-car emissions to 0% by 2035 
  • Performing energy-efficiency-improving renovations on 35 million buildings by 2030 
  • Reaching 40% renewable energy by 2030 
  • Reaching 36% to 39% energy efficiency by 2030 
  • Restoring Europe’s forests, soils, wetlands, and peatlands to increase carbon absorption to 310 megatonnes (Mt) 

What Is the New EU Sustainability Directive?

The EU requires large companies and all listed companies — listed micro-enterprises are excluded — to disclose what they view as risks and opportunities associated with social and environmental issues. They must also disclose their activities’ impact on people and the environment. 

This disclosure helps investors, civil society organizations, consumers, and other stakeholders evaluate companies’ sustainability performance as part of the European Green Deal. 

In January 2023, the new Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) was enacted. This new directive modernizes and strengthens the social and environmental information companies must report. A broader set of large companies and listed SMEs — approximately 50,000 companies — must now report on sustainability 

To be affected by this new reporting directive, a company must meet at least two of the three following criteria: employ 250-plus people, have assets totaling at least 20 million euros, and have turnover totaling at least 40 million euros.  

Companies will begin applying the new reporting rules in the 2024 financial year for reports published in 2025. Until then, the current Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) national law will remain in force, requiring affected organizations to report on environmental protection (Scope 3 emissions included), social responsibility, the treatment of employees, human rights, anti-bribery and anti-corruption, and company board diversity. 

Once the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) begins in 2024, corporations will have to report on all information in the current NFRD plus: 

  • Double materiality, including the company’s sustainability and climate risk, and the impact the company has on society and the environment 
  • Material-topic-selection process for stakeholders 
  • More forward-looking information, including organizational climate targets and its progress toward the targets 
  • Information regarding intangible items, including social, human, and intellectual matters 
  • Reports aligning with the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) and European Union’s Taxonomy Regulation 

Upcoming EU Rules on Green Claims Seek to Elevate Corporate Responsibility

Front of Building EU Climate Policiessource

To accelerate the battle against climate change and global warming, the EU continues updating policies and proposals to the existing European Green Deal. The latest proposals focus on empowering European organizations to improve their climate-neutral reporting and to make this a common practice among more European companies. 

These upcoming EU rules on green claims and greenwashing may help Europe get on track and remain on a path to help reverse climate change. You can also do your part to help this process by offsetting your carbon footprint by purchasing voluntary carbon credit from Terrapass. We offer a wide range of options for businesses and individuals 

Choose the right option for you, and start offsetting your carbon footprint today. 

Brought to you by terrapass.com
Featured image:

The post Upcoming EU Rules on Green Claims and What They Mean appeared first on Terrapass.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

U.S. Uranium Production Set to Rise as Anfield Energy Gains Velvet-Wood Approval

Published

on

The U.S. depends heavily on imported uranium to power its nuclear reactors, using about 50 million pounds each year while producing less than 1% at home. Boosting domestic uranium production is crucial for energy security and reducing reliance on foreign sources. In this context, Anfield Energy Inc. (NASDAQ: AEC; TSXV: AEC) is making progress with its Velvet-Wood uranium project in San Juan County, Utah.

The Utah Department of Oil, Gas, and Mining recently approved the project for construction. This allows Anfield to move quickly toward production.

Velvet-Wood Gains Green Light for Rapid Development

In May, Anfield Energy Inc. announced that the U.S. Department of the Interior approved its Velvet-Wood uranium project in San Juan County, Utah.

This project was the first mining initiative approved under a new fast-track permitting process by the U.S. Department of the Interior. This process, introduced after President Trump’s energy emergency declaration in January 2025, lets energy projects complete environmental reviews in just 14 days.

By selecting Velvet-Wood, federal agencies highlighted its importance for the domestic uranium and vanadium supply.

Notably, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said the Bureau of Land Management ensures safe and responsible extraction while protecting the environment.

With federal and state approvals in hand, Anfield plans to start mobilization immediately. The company expects to break ground within 30 days. They will:

  • reopen the mine portal
  • dewater the site
  • build surface facilities
  • develop a new mine incline.

These steps aim to bring Velvet-Wood into production quickly while keeping safety and environmental standards high.

Anfield Boots U.S. Energy Security with Domestic Production

Anfield acquired Velvet-Wood in 2015. The mine previously produced around 4 million pounds of uranium and 5 million pounds of vanadium from 1979 to 1984.

  • A preliminary economic assessment shows 4.6 million pounds of uranium at a grade of 0.29% eU3O8, plus additional inferred resources.

CEO Corey Dias said the approvals clear the way for building the mine and starting production. The company also plans to increase its reclamation bond with the Bureau of Land Management to meet federal land restoration rules.

Anfield’s project helps the U.S. reduce dependence on foreign minerals. The country imports uranium from Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan. Vanadium supply mainly comes from China, Russia, South Africa, and Brazil.

By producing uranium and vanadium domestically, Anfield enhances energy security and supports industries such as nuclear power, aerospace, and defense.

Anfield uranium velvet wood project
Source: Anfield

Uranium and Vanadium: Key Strategic Materials

Uranium powers nuclear reactors, fuels U.S. Navy submarines, and helps produce medical isotopes. It is also used in tritium production for national defense. Vanadium strengthens steel and titanium alloys used in both commercial and military aircraft. Together, these minerals are vital for energy, defense, and industrial security.

EIA’s Domestic Uranium Production Report Second-Quarter 2025 highlights that in Q2 2025, the U.S. produced 437,238 pounds of uranium concentrate (U3O8), up 41% from the first quarter’s 310,533 pounds.

U.S. uranium
Source: EIA

Production came from the following mines:

uranium production
Source: EIA

Underground Mining Keeps Environmental Impact Low

Velvet-Wood will focus on underground mining. The company will use existing mine workings and develop new mineral areas. This approach keeps surface disturbance to just three acres and makes use of the old Velvet mine site.

Anfield also owns the Shootaring Canyon mill, one of only three licensed uranium mills in the U.S. Restarting this mill will allow the company to convert uranium ore into concentrate, reduce reliance on imports, and support domestic nuclear fuel production.

Economic and Strategic Benefits

Anfield combines strong assets with efficient operations. Its hub-and-spoke model links mining sites with processing mills, maximizing the value of Velvet-Wood’s resources. With measured resources, a licensed mill, and fast government approvals, the company is ready to meet growing demand for uranium and vanadium.

The project also brings jobs to Utah and supports local communities. Restarting the Shootaring Canyon mill adds processing capacity, lowers costs, and improves efficiency.

Moving Toward a Sustainable Energy Future

Anfield focuses on sustainable growth. Its operations balance environmental responsibility with energy and defense needs. By producing domestic uranium and vanadium, the company supports a carbon-free energy future while reducing reliance on imports.

Velvet-Wood shows how companies and supportive policies can address energy and security challenges. By using old mining assets and modern techniques, Anfield aims to become a leading U.S. uranium producer. It’s fast move from permitting to production sets an example for other critical mineral projects.

The post U.S. Uranium Production Set to Rise as Anfield Energy Gains Velvet-Wood Approval appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Countdown to CSRD: Your 12-month plan for compliance and competitiveness

Published

on

2025 marks the decisive year for companies to prepare for CSRD compliance. By next year, thousands of businesses across Europe, large multinationals and SMEs alike, will need to publish detailed sustainability disclosures aligned with ESRS standards. The countdown has officially begun, and with only one reporting cycle left to strategise, getting started now is a must.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Pentagon’s $1B Mineral Stockpile Boosts U.S. Independence from China

Published

on

US MINERAL

The Financial Times reported that the Pentagon plans to spend up to $1 billion on critical minerals. This move aims to cut U.S. reliance on China for essential metals in defense, clean energy, and advanced tech. Led by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), this program is the largest U.S. strategic mineral acquisition since the Cold War.

Significantly, the Pentagon’s plan is part of Trump’s broader “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBA) to enhance domestic and allied resources. Under OBBA, the DLA will use a $7.5 billion allocation to:

  • Expand the U.S. stockpile by 2027 ($2 billion)

  • Invest in mineral and processing supply chains ($5 billion)

  • Launch a Pentagon credit program to support private mining and refining projects ($500 million)

Washington’s Strategic Push: From Market Reliance to State Control

China’s control over global mineral supply chains has raised national security concerns. The country refines 80–90% of rare earths and dominates other key metals, such as cobalt and nickel.

Recent Chinese export limits on rare earths have raised concerns in the U.S. Washington views these limits as an effort to weaponize mineral exports. The Pentagon’s stockpiling shows a move from market-driven sourcing to state-led resource security.

Trump Targets China with 100% Tariffs

As per the latest news, President Trump has confirmed plans to impose 100% tariffs on all Chinese imports starting on November 1. He labeled China’s export limits a “hostile act.” He noted the timeline might change, saying, “Right now it is. Let’s see what happens.”

On Truth Social, Trump accused Beijing of manipulating supply chains and warned of “100% tariffs… over and above any tariff they are currently paying.”

This tariff announcement follows China’s decision to limit rare earth exports. These actions link industrial policy more closely to national security.

China exports

Pentagon Boosts Stockpile with High-Value Minerals

According to the Financial Times, the Pentagon’s buying spree targets four key minerals vital for defense and clean energy:

  • Cobalt – Up to $500 million. Used in batteries, superalloys, and medical implants.

  • Antimony – About $245 million, partly sourced from U.S. Antimony Corp. Key for flame retardants, batteries, and defense components.

  • Tantalum – Around $100 million. Essential for missile systems and aerospace parts.

  • Scandium – A combined $45 million, reportedly from Rio Tinto and APL Engineered Materials. Used in aerospace alloys and electronics.

These purchases will expand the U.S. national stockpile, which already holds $1.3 billion in metals. The new acquisitions focus on materials critical for weapons production, energy systems, and high-tech manufacturing.

A defense official told the FT that several Pentagon offices are now “flush with cash” for mineral procurement. The government is also exploring offshore mineral resources in the Pacific Ocean, rich in nickel, cobalt, copper, and manganese.

Alaska’s Ambler Road Project Approval

President Trump approved the long-contested Ambler Road Project in Alaska. This 211-mile corridor will connect the Dalton Highway to vast mineral deposits in the northwest.

This decision reverses a Biden-era block and is seen as a vital step toward U.S. resource independence. It opens access to copper, zinc, and rare earth elements essential for clean energy and defense manufacturing.

Mineral Stockpiling: Shielding the Nation from Supply Shocks

The U.S. imports over 80% of its critical minerals and relies heavily on foreign refining, according to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This dependence exposes the country to significant supply risks, especially amid rising geopolitical tensions.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that China controls 90% of rare earth refining and significant percentages of nickel and cobalt refining. Such dominance highlights the risk of relying on a single country for critical inputs.

Thus, to tackle these challenges, the U.S. is building a stockpile of critical minerals. This will reduce supply risks, maintain production of weapons and advanced technologies, and support domestic mining investment.

In short, this stockpile acts as strategic insurance, safeguarding industrial capabilities and boosting national security.

The U.S. aligns with a global trend in mineral stockpiling. The EU requires reserves under its Critical Raw Materials Act. India launched a National Mineral Security Strategy in 2025, while Japan maintains a months-long reserve of rare earths.

Minerals with Net Import Reliance on China

u.s. import mineral commodities
Source: USGS

Market Impact and Industry Response

The Pentagon’s stockpiling effort has caught attention in mining and rare earth stocks. Companies like U.S. Antimony and MP Materials are gaining interest as Washington increases mineral procurement.

For example, the DLA’s plan for 3,000 tonnes of antimony—about one-eighth of U.S. annual demand—may stabilize the market for this volatile metal. Analysts expect similar effects for other targeted minerals as demand becomes clearer.

In conclusion, the Pentagon’s $1 billion mineral stockpile plan marks a clear shift. The U.S. government is no longer waiting for markets to secure resources. Instead, it is actively building reserves, funding domestic projects, and aligning economic policy with defense needs.

As competition for minerals increases, the Pentagon’s stockpiling is a defensive strategy and a clear signal. It shows that the next big race among global powers will be for critical minerals. These are vital for future technologies, not oil.

The post Pentagon’s $1B Mineral Stockpile Boosts U.S. Independence from China appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com