Verde AgriTech, a company based in Brazil, has entered into an exclusive partnership with UNDO Carbon Ltd., a UK-based firm. Under this agreement, they will work together to create carbon removal credits. These credits will come from a process called Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW), using a special mineral that Verde mines in Brazil.
This deal marks Verde’s first major step into the carbon credit market. Both companies believe their combined strengths can lead to large-scale removal of carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere.
What Is Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW)?
ERW is a method to capture CO₂ using natural minerals. The idea is to spread crushed rock, rich in silicate minerals, over farmland. When rain and soil interact with this rock, a natural chemical reaction pulls CO₂ from the air. Over time, that CO₂ becomes part of new, stable minerals — basically locking it in the ground.
UNDO specializes in this technique. They have developed systems to measure how much carbon is removed. They also know how to verify and package these removals into credits that companies can buy.
- RELATED: Microsoft and UNDO Partner for 15,000 Tons of Carbon Removal Using Enhanced Rock Weathering!
Scaling Carbon Removal Together
The partnership allows Verde to expand beyond fertilizers and minerals by selling carbon removal credits. Verde brings a large supply of glauconitic siltstone, mining operations, field-application capacity across Brazil, and local expertise in soil, agriculture, and mineral processing.
In effect, UNDO gains reliable access to mineral feedstock and a strong local partner, essential for scaling ERW projects. Verde’s facilities can handle, crush, and spread the rock, supported by its logistics and soil sampling experience.
UNDO will handle the measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) of CO₂ removed from the atmosphere. Their platform uses proprietary (patent‑pending) protocols to ensure the credits are real and permanent.
- Together, they aim to remove hundreds of thousands of tonnes of CO₂, with each tonne of rock capturing 70–120 kilograms depending on conditions.
Verde’s mineral reserves, in the hundreds of millions of tonnes, give the partnership long-term capacity to meet these goals.
The deal also offers a new revenue stream for the agritech company and high-quality credits verified through strict MRV, aligning with standards such as Verra, Gold Standard, and Puro.earth.
Cristiano Veloso, Founder and CEO, Verde, said:
“By combining our glauconitic siltstone products and established operations in Brazil with UNDO’s award-winning expertise in measurement, reporting, and verification, we aim to originate and deliver durable, high-quality carbon removal credits aligned with global best practices, including leading Enhanced Rock Weathering methodologies .”
The warrant system further aligns interests: UNDO benefits only when credits are sold, while Verde shares in future growth. With these combined strengths, the partnership could scale ERW locally and globally, providing credible, durable carbon removal.
Turning CO₂ Into Credible Carbon Credits
Verde and UNDO plan to sell the carbon removal credits to companies that want to offset their emissions. These credits are expected to be durable — meaning the CO₂ will stay locked away for a very long time.
The voluntary carbon market has grown steadily in recent years. Industry estimates show it reached around $2 billion in annual transactions. Projections suggest that it could rise to over $40 billion by 2030 as companies demand more high-quality carbon removal. This growth provides a strong commercial foundation for Verde and UNDO as they prepare to bring ERW credits to market.
Meanwhile, estimates show the global carbon market will rise sharply by 2030.
To align incentives, Verde is granting UNDO up to 1.7 million share purchase warrants. These warrants will vest (or become usable) based on future sales of carbon credits.
Here is how the warrant structure works:
- Initial warrants: 100,000 options, tied to credit sales at a high price per ton of CO₂.
- Additional warrants: 1,000,000, tied to more credit sales at slightly lower prices.
- Success-based warrants: 600,000, tied to further future sales if targets are met.
Verde’s Long Road to Carbon Market Leadership
Verde’s entry into carbon credits is not instant. In 2023, the company announced plans to enter the market. It highlighted the potential of its silicate rock for ERW to capture a lot of CO₂.
Based on its mineral reserves and processing capacity, Verde estimates it can produce up to 300,000 tonnes of carbon removal credits annually. This shows that carbon removal is a long-term strategic focus, not a side project.
To prepare, Verde explored partnerships that could strengthen its expertise in carbon markets. Verde teamed up early with WayCarbon, a well-known carbon project developer. They looked into how Verde’s minerals could help remove carbon and generate revenue.
WayCarbon guided Verde on project design, verification paths, and market demand. This helped Verde grasp what’s needed for high-quality, credible carbon credits.
These steps helped Verde gain experience in science, market trends, and regulations. This groundwork paved the way for bigger deals, like its current partnership with UNDO.
Studies in journals like Nature and PNAS back ERW’s effectiveness. They show that finely crushed silicate rock can capture CO₂ in months to years.
The carbon stays stored in mineral form for tens of thousands to millions of years. This validates Verde’s confidence in its mineral reserves as a tool for long-term climate mitigation.
ERW in Action: Impact on Emissions and Agriculture
This deal is part of a larger trend in the climate field: companies are looking for durable, scalable ways to remove CO₂. Enhanced Rock Weathering is one such method. When done right, it can store carbon for very long periods.
Brazil emits roughly 2.4 to 2.7 billion tonnes of CO₂-equivalent each year, depending on land-use trends. Agriculture accounts for about one-quarter of national emissions. Because ERW is deployed directly on farmland, it offers a pathway to reduce or offset part of this sector’s footprint while improving soil conditions.
Partnerships like this one help make carbon removal more real and credible. They mix scientific innovation (UNDO’s MRV systems) with physical capacity (Verde’s mineral operations). This could attract more buyers who want serious, long-term climate solutions.
However, scaling ERW also comes with challenges. Large-scale rock crushing and distribution can increase operational costs, and long-term monitoring requires specialized scientific methods.
Regulatory clarity for ERW credits is still developing in many markets, and some buyers remain cautious as they compare different carbon removal approaches. These factors may influence how quickly Verde and UNDO can expand their projects.
Blueprint for Scalable, Durable Carbon Removal
Verde AgriTech’s exclusive partnership with UNDO Carbon is a major step for both companies. Verde gains a new source of income. UNDO secures a reliable supply of mineral feedstock for its ERW work. Together, they hope to produce high-quality, durable carbon credits from Brazil.
If they succeed, they could remove hundreds of thousands of tonnes of CO₂ while building a scalable model for future carbon removal. Their partnership could become a blueprint for how mining and climate technology firms work together to fight climate change — not just in Brazil, but around the world.
The post Verde AgriTech and UNDO Carbon Partner to Scale Enhanced Rock Weathering appeared first on Carbon Credits.
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.
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?
What replaced the cheap REDD credit on the boardroom slide deck, and why procurement is leading the rewrite.
Three years ago, a corporate slide showing a portfolio of cheap REDD+ credits could carry a board meeting. The number was big, the price was low, and the press release wrote itself. Today, that same slide gets sent back with questions. The questions are uncomfortable, the answers are unclear, and your general counsel is suddenly in the room.
Conventional carbon offsets are not dead. The voluntary carbon market retired 202 million tonnes in 2025, and the Morgan Stanley Institute for Sustainable Investing survey published in January 2026 confirmed that interest from corporate buyers remains substantial. What changed is the credibility threshold. The integrity floor has risen, the disclosure scrutiny has tightened, and the buyer profile has shifted. This article tracks what changed, what sophisticated buyers now ask before signing, and what serious corporates are putting on the board slide instead.
What boards used to buy, and why it stopped working
The 2020 to 2022 model was simple: buy a large tranche of avoidance credits at low single-digit prices, retire them against the company footprint, announce the carbon-neutral claim, and move on. Most of those credits came from REDD+ projects, renewable energy installations in countries where the renewable energy was already economic, or methane projects with thin documentation.
Several things broke that model. Academic research published in 2023, including a widely cited Science paper, found that the majority of REDD+ credits issued under the most common methodologies did not represent additional reductions when tested against rigorous counterfactuals. The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative published its Claims Code of Practice, which sets requirements for what companies can credibly claim from credit use. The European Union finalised its Green Claims Directive, restricting how companies can describe products as climate-neutral. France’s Décret 2022-539 already restricts carbon neutrality advertising. California’s AB 1305 imposes disclosure requirements on any company making net-zero or carbon-neutral claims while doing business in the state.
The collective effect: the cheap credit no longer buys the announcement, and the announcement now carries litigation risk.
The integrity reset: ICVCM, VCMI, and what changed
The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market published the Core Carbon Principles in 2023 and began assessing methodologies against them in 2024. The first methodologies received the CCP label later that year. The point of the label is to give corporate buyers a defensible quality screen they can cite in disclosure.
The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative complements this on the demand side. Its Claims Code of Practice defines what a buyer can say (Silver, Gold, or Platinum claims, with associated requirements) based on the quality of credits used and the underlying decarbonisation strategy. Together, CCP and VCMI build a quality stack: CCP on the supply, VCMI on the claim, with the science-based target sitting underneath both.
The reset is not a ban on offsets. It is a ratchet. Credits that meet the new bar continue to clear; credits that do not, do not. The Morgan Stanley survey found that 61% of current buyers like the CCP label concept but that supply of labelled credits remains limited. That supply constraint is now visible in pricing.
What sophisticated buyers ask before they sign
The questions on the procurement scorecard have changed. A 2022 buyer might have asked about price, vintage, and project type. A 2026 buyer asks five different questions before any of those.
- What does the counterfactual look like, and who validated it.
- What is the permanence regime, and what is the buffer pool exposure.
- What is the leakage risk, and how is it mitigated.
- What rating has the project received from the independent ratings agencies (Sylvera, BeZero, Calyx Global), and what was the rationale.
- What is the documentation discipline that survives an audit four years from now when the procurement team that signed the contract has moved on.
If the vendor cannot answer those five questions on a first call, the conversation ends. Conversely, if the vendor can answer them with documented specificity, the conversation often expands beyond a single transaction toward a multi-year engagement.
Where this leaves your near-term commitments
You probably have near-term commitments that pre-date the integrity reset. Public targets to be carbon neutral by 2025 or 2030. Product-level claims that ran in last year’s marketing. Disclosed reduction trajectories that assumed continued access to cheap credits.
You have three workable paths. The first is to re-baseline your strategy, replacing the most exposed credits with higher-quality alternatives and adjusting the public language to match what you can defend. The second is to shift the underlying spend from offsetting outside your value chain to investing inside your value chain, where reductions count against Scope 3 directly and the audit trail is cleaner. The third is to keep the strategy and absorb the risk, which is increasingly the most expensive option once you price in litigation, restatement, and reputational exposure.
Most serious buyers are choosing the second path. It moves the carbon spend from a compliance cost to a procurement and resilience investment, and it removes the central failure point of the legacy model: the disconnect between where the emissions occurred and where the reductions sat. Nature-based supply chain investments, structured under the GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard and aligned to the SBTi FLAG Guidance, are the asset class that fits this brief. They generate inventory-grade reductions, they produce audit-grade documentation, and they survive the new claim restrictions because the carbon math sits inside the value chain that the disclosure already covers.
If you are reassessing a carbon strategy under the new integrity bar, or rebuilding a board narrative that has to survive a more skeptical audience, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help. The Dual-Value Model gives you a defensible alternative to legacy offset purchases, with the documentation and operational integration that survives the procurement scorecard and the audit. Schedule a consultation.
-
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