Verra announced an update on the ongoing compensation process for carbon credits linked to the 37 rice cultivation projects in China that were rejected in August 2024. The news sheds light on the progress made toward compensating over-issued Verified Carbon Units (VCUs). It also details the remaining steps needed to rectify the situation.
Inside Verra’s Actions to Rectify Carbon Credit Discrepancies
In August 2024, Verra, a leading organization in the voluntary carbon market (VCM), decided to reject 37 rice cultivation projects in China. The rejection followed a thorough review that raised concerns about how these projects were being managed.
Verra found that the projects did not follow proper methods, and there were problems with the audits done by validation and verification bodies (VVBs). These issues led to more carbon credits being issued than were actually earned by the projects.
Of the 37 rejected projects, 25 were found to have over-issued VCUs, which are critical units in the carbon offsetting market. These credits are used by companies and organizations to offset their carbon emissions.
Any discrepancies in the issuance of these credits undermine the integrity of the entire carbon market. In other words, when too many credits are issued, it makes the carbon offset market less trustworthy.
As a result, Verra took swift action, imposing sanctions on the companies involved and VVBs to ensure accountability and maintain the credibility of its registry.

4.56 Million Credits at Stake: Compensation for Issued VCUs
As of January 2025, Verra confirmed that compensation has been made for the first set of over-issued VCUs. A total of 480,000 VCUs from 5 of the affected projects have been compensated by two of the project proponents:
- Vitol (China) Energy Co. Ltd. and
- Timing Carbon Asset Management Co. Ltd.
These companies have worked directly with Verra to ensure that the over-issued VCUs were fully compensated for. This is an important step in fixing the issue and making sure the carbon credits are correct.
However, there are still 4,080,000 VCUs that have not yet been compensated. These credits are linked to two main groups of projects managed by:
- Search CO2 (Shanghai) Environmental Science & Technology Co. Ltd., and
- Hefei Luyu Agriculture Technology Co. Ltd.
Sanctions and Next Steps
Verra has taken a firm stance against the non-complying parties. Search CO2, which is responsible for 10 rejected projects and 2,220,000 outstanding VCUs, has had its registry account suspended.
If the company does not compensate for the over-issued VCUs, Verra will permanently close its account. This shows Verra’s commitment to holding companies accountable and ensuring the integrity of the carbon credit market.
The remaining 1,860,000 VCU credits are linked to projects managed by Hefei Luyu Agriculture Technology Co. Ltd.
Hefei had an agreement with Shell Energy (China) Limited to manage these projects, but in September 2024, they ended their agreement. This left the projects without an active account holder on Verra’s registry.
As a result, Verra moved these projects to an administrative account and is now requiring Hefei to resolve the issue before they can open a new account or register new projects.
Integrity First: How Verra Is Shaping the Future of Carbon Markets
Verra’s actions in response to the rejected rice cultivation projects are a direct reflection of its commitment to maintaining the integrity, transparency, and quality of the VCM. According to Justin Wheler, Verra’s Chief Program Management Officer,
“This was the first time Verra imposed such sanctions, demonstrating Verra’s commitment to greater integrity, transparency, and quality in the voluntary carbon market. Verra took decisive action at every level at which concerns were identified. Verra is committed to continual improvement of its standards programs, particularly as we address issues arising from inappropriate marketplace conduct.”
In addition to its work with the project proponents, Verra is also finalizing its review of the responses received from the four VVBs that were involved in the rice cultivation projects.
The largest carbon registry issued non-conformity reports to these VVBs. Depending on the findings of the review, further sanctions may be imposed. These could include suspending the VVBs’ ability to validate or verify projects in the future, which would have significant implications for their operations in the carbon market.
The outcome of this review will be crucial in determining the long-term credibility of the VVBs involved. It will send a strong message about the importance of ensuring quality audits and transparency in issuing carbon credits.
Verra’s handling of rejected rice projects in China shows its commitment to carbon market integrity. How the carbon standard manages this situation will have a big impact on the future of the carbon credit market, especially as more and more companies turn to carbon credits to help meet their decarbonization targets.
By addressing discrepancies, ensuring carbon credit accuracy, and holding VVBs accountable, Verra aims to build trust. Its focus on transparency and quality will shape carbon credit standards, supporting global climate goals and the transition to a low-carbon future.
The post Verra Updates on 4.5 Million Over-Issued Carbon Credits from Rejected Rice Projects in China 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.
![]()
-
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

