Connect with us

Published

on

What Does the New VCMI Code Mean for Carbon Credit Usage?

The carbon credit/carbon offset market has been a topic of both celebration and contention. Purchasing carbon credits can fund climate benefit projects like reforestation that ultimately help the world mitigate climate change. Yet the lack of global regulatory clarity has coincided with confusion, risk, and sometimes even deception within the voluntary carbon market.

However, new rules and universal best practices are emerging in ways that will:

  • Improve quality within voluntary carbon markets
  • Increase businesses’ confidence in funding climate benefit projects
  • Bring clarity to consumers and other stakeholders around companies’ sustainability credentials

One of the most significant developments in this area has been the June 2023 release of the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI) Claims Code of Practice. While not a panacea, this code is an important step forward toward companies being able to reliably use carbon credits in ways that are aligned with scientific best practices.

What Is the VCMI Claims Code of Practice?

Following a provisional release last year, the VCMI’s new Claims of Code of Practice specifies how businesses can make trustworthy claims related to the use of carbon credits in ways that are aligned with the Paris Agreement.

The code includes four steps to make VCMI Claims:

1) Comply with VCMI foundational criteria

To start, businesses that voluntarily comply with the code need to meet foundational criteria, such as setting science-based near-term emissions reduction targets, along with publicly committing to reaching net zero by 2050.

However, reducing emissions and reaching net zero isn’t just a matter of buying carbon credits to offset emissions. While there’s flexibility in terms of which net zero framework to use, companies have to disclose “globally recognized sustainability frameworks or guidance” they’re using, VCMI explains.

Under the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), for example, carbon credits don’t count as reductions in terms of reaching near-term targets. SBTi’s Corporate Net-Zero Standard also says that most companies need to cut 90% or more of emissions, and then use permanent carbon removal and storage to offset residual emissions.

2) Choose a VCMI Claim

After meeting foundational criteria, businesses can make one of three VCMI Claims. The three levels correspond to companies purchasing and retiring high-quality carbon credits equal to the following percentages of their remaining emissions for the most recent reporting year:

  • VCMI Platinum: 100% or more
  • VCMI Gold: 60% to < 100%
  • VCMI Silver: 20% to < 60%

Again, these credits are not a substitute for emissions reductions; they must be used “to finance additional climate mitigation” while the company also works toward meeting near-term emissions reduction targets, as VCMI explains.

3) Meet Carbon Credit Usage and Quality Requirements

When using carbon credits to make VCMI Claims, companies also need to follow certain requirements. For one, carbon credits will need to be CCP-approved when available, meaning they meet the standards of the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) Core Carbon Principles.

Companies also have to disclose details about the carbon credits they use, like project IDs and methodologies.

4) Get Third-Party Assurance

Lastly, companies will need to get independent, third-party assurance that they’re meeting the requirements for making VCMI claims. This assurance will need to adhere to the VCMI Monitoring Reporting & Assurance (MRA) Framework, which is set to be published in November 2023.

Carbon Credit Usage Carbon Gas Emissions

What Are the Benefits of Making a VCMI Claim?

By following these rules and making VCMI claims, your business can communicate to stakeholders that you’re using carbon credits and working toward net zero in a way that’s aligned with reaching the Paris Agreement goals.

Rather than stating that your business is carbon neutral solely by way of carbon offsets, for example, you might state that your business is VCMI Platinum, signifying that you’re funding climate benefit projects while working toward science-based emissions reductions.

Taking this approach, rooted in climate science, can help win over doubters who are put off by low-quality carbon credits plaguing the voluntary carbon market.

Bad actors can sour the market, but new standards, like those set by the VCMI and ICVCM, are helping to change stakeholder perceptions while supporting important goals, like trying to limit global temperature increases to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Part of the debate over carbon credits is that some stakeholders see global climate regulation as the only way forward. If countries and companies were aggressively regulated and taxed in order to meet the Paris Agreement goals, then the carbon credit market as we know it might not be necessary.

The reality, however, is that we’re closing in on a decade passing since the Paris Agreement. The climate picture is arguably bleaker than it was then, as evidenced by the most recent IPCC report. The political will to meet these goals in their entirety just doesn’t seem to be there, so supplements like funding climate benefit projects to meet VCMI Claims should be taken seriously.

What Will Happen to Carbon Markets Going Forward?

The new VCMI rules are an important step for carbon markets, and other organizations are also moving forward with related rules around carbon credits and climate claims.

For example, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is cracking down on fraud in carbon markets, such as double counting and fraudulent statements about carbon credit terms.

While that might sound negative for carbon markets at first glance, going after bad actors could help bring confidence back to high-quality carbon credits. Highly regulated securities like publicly traded stocks give investors confidence that they’re getting what they pay for when they buy shares, and ideally the same should happen in carbon markets.

New disclosure standards from the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) should also help. As part of these standards (which regulatory agencies around the world could use as a model for future regulation), companies need to disclose how carbon credits fit into any net greenhouse gas emissions targets.

Carbon Credit Usage Industrial Plant

So, these types of frameworks could bring further confidence to carbon markets, as consumers, investors, and others will be able to more clearly understand how carbon credits fit into a company’s operations.

Rather than assuming a company is green washing when using terms like carbon neutral, for example, they will be able to make more informed judgments.

If a business has not been able to cut emissions significantly but still invests heavily in climate benefit projects, that does not mean the business is inherently sustainable. But stakeholders at least have the clarity to decide whether they want to engage with that business vs. others that might be polluting without also giving back as much to climate mitigation efforts.

Meanwhile, businesses that can both cut emissions and fund climate benefit projects, like those that make VCMI claims, can stand out from competitors that lack the same veracity of their sustainability efforts.

Some of these rules and standards will take time to solidify, but businesses that want to get a head start on measuring, managing, and marketing their carbon footprint strategies can do so through Terrapass and our vetted, high-quality partners.

Brought to you by terrapass.com
Featured image:

The post What Does the New VCMI Code Mean for Carbon Credit Usage? appeared first on Terrapass.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Apple: $94 Billion Record Earnings and the Breakthrough Climate Solutions Fueling Growth

Published

on

apple

Apple stock (AAPL) has been on an upward trend, fueled by a mix of strategic investments, strong earnings, and a push toward domestic manufacturing. Investors are taking notice as the tech giant positions itself to reduce tariff risks, strengthen its supply chain, and meet rising demand for its products—all while staying true to its sustainability goals.

The Rise of AAPL Stock: Why and How

Several factors are driving the recent rally in Apple (AAPL) shares. The company’s $100 billion expansion of its U.S. manufacturing program, record-breaking quarterly results, partnerships with domestic suppliers, and commitment to recycled materials have combined to create strong investor confidence.

On top of that, bullish technical signals and potential AI collaborations are adding to the market enthusiasm.

“As of August 14, 2025, Apple Inc. (AAPL) is trading at $233.33 USD on the NASDAQ exchange, reflecting a 1.6% increase (+$3.68) from the previous close.”

APPLE AAPL Stock
Source: Yahoo Finance

Let’s dive deeper into this:

$100 Billion Boost to American Manufacturing

Apple recently pledged an additional $100 billion to expand its U.S. manufacturing footprint, raising its total four-year American Manufacturing Program commitment to $600 billion. This plan includes opening new plants, offering supplier grants, and forming partnerships for key components like glass and chips.

The move is seen as a direct response to trade tensions with Washington, particularly past threats from President Donald Trump to impose a 25% tariff if iPhones weren’t made in the U.S. By increasing domestic production, Apple is improving its standing with policymakers and reducing the risk of costly import tariffs.

Key Partnerships Strengthen U.S. Supply Chain

As per media reports, the manufacturing expansion covers a broad network of U.S.-based suppliers and partners:

  • Corning (GLW): Expanding smartphone glass production in Kentucky.
  • Coherent (COHR): Producing VCSEL lasers for Face ID in Texas.
  • TSMC, GlobalFoundries (GFS), and Texas Instruments (TXN): Collaborating on semiconductor production across Arizona, New York, Utah, and Texas.
  • GlobalFoundries: Manufacturing wireless charging tech in New York.

Apple says this reshoring effort will enable an “end-to-end” chipmaking process in the U.S., from wafers to finished semiconductors. Over 19 billion chips for Apple products will be made domestically this year.

Rare Earth Partnership with MP Materials

Apple is also investing $500 million in MP Materials (NYSE: MP) to secure a long-term supply of rare earth magnets made entirely from recycled materials. These will be processed and manufactured in the U.S., supporting both supply chain resilience and Apple’s environmental commitments.

Apple’s Strong Earnings Fuel Investor Optimism

Apple’s latest earnings report added fuel to the rally. The company posted record June-quarter revenue of $94 billion—up 10% year over year. Product sales hit $66.6 billion, led by strong demand for the new iPhone 16 lineup and Mac computers.

Services revenue rose 13% to $27.4 billion, showing the company’s ability to diversify beyond hardware and generate steady, high-margin income.

Sustainability at the Core of Apple Products

Apple’s stock story also has a purpose. As per its latest sustainability report, in 2024, 24% of all product materials came from recycled or renewable sources, including:

  • 99% recycled rare earth elements in magnets
  • 99% recycled cobalt in batteries
  • 100% recycled aluminum in many cases

Apple avoided 41 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions in 2024—equal to taking 9 million cars off the road. The company aims for a 75% emissions reduction from 2015 levels.

apple products
Source: Apple

AI Partnerships Could Add Another Growth Driver

Reports suggest Apple is exploring partnerships with OpenAI and Anthropic to enhance Siri. If successful, these deals could strengthen Apple’s position in the fast-growing AI market.

Can U.S. Manufacturing Plans Keep the Rally Going?

Apple’s reshoring strategy could sustain momentum over the medium term. By resonating with Trump’s “America First” policies and reducing reliance on overseas suppliers, the company is lowering regulatory risks and earning political goodwill.

Nonetheless, challenges remain, but the long-term benefits could outweigh them by securing a more resilient supply chain.

From this analysis, it’s evident that Apple’s recent gains reflect a powerful combination of U.S. manufacturing investments, record earnings, sustainability leadership, and potential AI growth. By strategically aligning with domestic policy and building a stronger supply chain, the company is reducing uncertainty, which is one of the biggest drivers of investor confidence.

The post Apple: $94 Billion Record Earnings and the Breakthrough Climate Solutions Fueling Growth appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

U.S. DOE Reveals $1B Funding to Boost Critical Minerals Supply Chain

Published

on

U.S. DOE Reveals $1B Funding to Boost Critical Minerals Supply Chain

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has announced a nearly $1 billion program to strengthen America’s supply of critical minerals and materials. The funding will support mining, processing, and manufacturing within the country. These materials power clean energy technologies and are vital for national security.

This funding builds on President Trump’s Executive Order to Unleash American Energy. It also supports the DOE’s wider Critical Minerals and Materials Program, which focuses on boosting U.S. production, expanding recycling, and strengthening supply chain security.

U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright remarked:

“For too long, the United States has relied on foreign actors to supply and process the critical materials that are essential to modern life and our national security. Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, the Energy Department will play a leading role in reshoring the processing of critical materials and expanding our domestic supply of these indispensable resources.”

From Mines to Magnets: Where the $1B Goes

The DOE’s $1 billion plan targets key minerals like lithium, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements. These are essential for electric vehicle batteries, wind turbines, solar panels, and advanced electronics used in defense systems.

The funding is split across several areas:

  • $500 million to the Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC) for battery material processing, manufacturing, and recycling projects.
  • $250 million to the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management to support facilities producing mineral byproducts from coal and other sources.
  • $135 million to boost rare earth element production by extracting them from mining waste streams.
  • $50 million to refine materials like gallium, germanium, and silicon carbide, which are crucial for semiconductors and high-performance electronics.
  • $40 million through ARPA-E’s RECOVER program to extract minerals from industrial wastewater and other waste streams.
DOE’s $1 Billion Critical Minerals Initiative
Source: U.S. DOE

By investing from extraction to refining, the DOE aims to reduce reliance on foreign suppliers, especially those in politically unstable regions. The plan also encourages public–private partnerships to scale production faster.

Why Critical Minerals Matter for America’s Future

Critical minerals lie at the heart of America’s economic transformation and defense strategy. In recent years, demand for lithium, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements has grown. This rise comes as clean energy technologies become more important.

The U.S. imports more than 80% of its rare earth elements, and most of this comes from one country – China. This heavy reliance creates risks during trade or geopolitical tensions.

US rare earth import from China

The Trump administration has placed strong emphasis on closing this vulnerability. In March 2025, an executive order highlighted critical minerals as vital for national defense. It also set timelines to boost U.S. production and processing capacity. This aligns with broader economic priorities, including clean energy jobs, green infrastructure, and domestic manufacturing.

The Inflation Reduction Act and infrastructure programs have unlocked billions in grants and tax credits. These funds support electric vehicle manufacturing, battery plants, and renewable energy projects.

The DOE’s $1 billion critical mineral fund supports programs by focusing on materials essential for the clean energy economy. Also, by reusing existing industrial facilities to recover minerals instead of building entirely new ones, the DOE can speed up progress and reduce costs.

EV production is expected to grow faster than any other sector, with demand for minerals likely to be more than 10x higher by 2050. This surge will transform the global supply chain and is critical for the global Net Zero aspirations.

Mineral demand for Electric vehicles in the Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario
Source: IEA

The combined impact of industrial strategy, financial incentives, and supply chain investments shows a clear push to:

  • Move production back onshore,
  • Boost innovation in materials recycling,
  • Support the energy transition, and
  • Cut down on foreign imports.

Building on Early Wins

The DOE’s new $1 billion investment boosts earlier funding for critical minerals. This aims to strengthen U.S. industrial capacity.

In 2023, the Department gave $150 million to various clean mineral projects. These include direct lithium extraction in Nevada and early-stage nickel processing partnerships in Oregon.

Since 2021, DOE has invested more than $58 million in research. This work focuses on recovering critical minerals from industrial waste or tailings. They are turning by-products into valuable feedstock.

These R&D projects created pilot facilities. They show how to recover lithium from geothermal brines and rare earths from coal ash. This approach models resource use without needing new mining.

Built on these early successes, the new $1 billion fund signals a shift from pilot programs to scaling proven technologies. It allows U.S. manufacturers to pivot from lab-scale experiments to full commercial operations. 

For example, lithium recovery projects are moving from test sites to large extraction facilities. This shift is supported by the technical help from DOE’s national labs.

Likewise, battery recycling pilots are set to grow. More recycling centers are being planned in the Midwest and Southwest.

This funding approach provides continuity. It supports U.S. firms from basic research to commercialization. This helps them quickly move from proof-of-concept to production-ready operations. It also reassures private investors that government backing is strategic and sustained.

McKinsey projects that developing new copper and nickel projects will require between $250 billion and $350 billion by 2030. By 2050, the broader critical minerals sector could grow into a trillion-dollar market to support the net-zero or low-carbon transition.

raw materials supply for low-carbon transition

Washington’s Backing, Industry’s Buy-In

Political backing for the domestic minerals strategy is strong. A recent executive order aims to speed up mining permits and provide federal support.

The Defense Department has also invested $400 million in MP Materials, the largest stakeholder in the only U.S. rare earth mine. This deal includes a new plant to produce magnets for electronics and defense applications.

Industry players are moving in the same direction. Battery maker Clarios is exploring sites for a $1 billion processing and recovery plant in the country. These moves show a shared goal between government and industry to rebuild America’s mineral supply chains.

Opportunities—and the Roadblocks Ahead

The DOE’s program offers major opportunities:

  • Less reliance on foreign countries for essential materials.
  • Creation of high-quality U.S. jobs.
  • Growth in recycling and recovery technologies.

However, challenges remain. Mining and processing must be done without harming the environment. Technology costs need to stay competitive. And benefits must be shared fairly with local and Indigenous communities.

Amid all this, the global race for critical minerals is intensifying. Many countries are already securing their own supplies. The U.S. wants to close its supply gap and become a leader in clean energy manufacturing.

The DOE’s nearly $1 billion plan is a key step toward reshoring America’s critical minerals industry. It builds on earlier successes and aligns with private investments and new policies. If successful, it could make U.S. supply chains more secure, support the clean energy transition, and strengthen national security.

The post U.S. DOE Reveals $1B Funding to Boost Critical Minerals Supply Chain appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Bitcoin Price Hits $124,000 Record High vs Ethereum Price Near $4,800: Which Crypto Is Greener?

Published

on

Bitcoin Hits A New Record, Ethereum Nears Its Peak: But Which Is Greener?

Bitcoin price just smashed through $124,000 while Ethereum is closing in on its $4,800 record, fueling fresh excitement in the crypto market. But beyond price charts, the two blockchains have sharply different environmental footprints.

One still runs on an energy-hungry proof-of-work system, while the other has reinvented itself with a proof-of-stake model that slashes energy use by over 99%. The question for climate-minded investors: which crypto comes out greener? Let’s find out.

Crypto’s New Highs, Old Questions

Bitcoin price surged past $124,000 upon writing, setting a new all-time high. Analysts credit several factors:

  • strong institutional buying,
  • increased inflows into Bitcoin ETFs,
  • favorable regulatory changes allowing crypto assets in 401(k) retirement accounts, and
  • growing market optimism over expected Federal Reserve interest rate cuts.
Bitcoin all time high $124,000
Source: AlphaFlipper

The rally reflects both a recovery from previous market downturns and a renewed appetite for digital assets among mainstream investors.

Ethereum, the second-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, is also on the rise. It is now approaching its all-time high of around $4,800, last seen in November 2021.

ethereum near record high

Investor sentiment is rising because of Ethereum’s role in decentralized finance (DeFi) and NFT marketplaces. Its better environmental profile, thanks to the switch to a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, also helps.

With both tokens in focus, let’s look at their energy use and carbon footprint. This matters for investors and policymakers who care about their climate and environmental impact.

How Bitcoin’s Proof-of-Work Consumes Energy

Bitcoin’s network runs on a process called proof-of-work (PoW). Miners around the world compete to solve complex mathematical puzzles. The first to solve it gets to add a block of transactions to the blockchain and earn newly minted Bitcoin. This process secures the network but demands enormous computing power.

That computing power uses a lot of electricity. Bitcoin’s annual energy use is estimated at about 138–178 terawatt-hours (TWh). This is similar to the electricity consumption of countries like Poland or Thailand, and even greater than Norway.

The carbon footprint is equally large, at around 40 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent per year. To put that into perspective, that’s similar to the emissions of Greece or Switzerland.

On a per-transaction basis, a single Bitcoin payment can use as much energy as a typical U.S. household does in one to two months.

Bitcoin energy use versus countries
Source: Statista

Beyond electricity, Bitcoin mining also generates significant electronic waste. Specialized mining hardware, called ASICs, becomes obsolete quickly—often within two to three years—because faster, more efficient models keep being developed. This turnover contributes thousands of tonnes of e-waste annually.

Ethereum’s Post-Merge Energy Transformation

Before 2022, Ethereum also used proof-of-work, with high energy demands. But in September 2022, the network completed the Merge, switching to proof-of-stake.

Ethereum now uses validators instead of miners. These validators “stake” their ETH tokens as collateral. This helps confirm transactions and secure the network.

This change cut Ethereum’s energy use by over 99.9%. Today, the network consumes an estimated 2,600 megawatt-hours (MWh) annually—roughly 0.0026 TWh. That’s less electricity than a small town of 2,000 homes might use in a year.

The carbon footprint is also tiny compared to Bitcoin—under 870 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent annually. That’s about the same as the yearly emissions of 100 average U.S. households. In environmental terms, Ethereum has gone from being one of the largest blockchain energy consumers to one of the most efficient.

Ethereum carbon footprint
Source: Ethereum

Beyond Electricity: Hidden Environmental Costs

While electricity use is the biggest factor, it’s not the only environmental concern for both cryptocurrencies. Here are the other environmental impacts:

  • Water Use:
    Large-scale Bitcoin mining facilities often require substantial cooling, which can consume millions of liters of water annually. This can put pressure on local water supplies, particularly in drought-prone regions. Ethereum’s low energy profile greatly reduces such needs.
  • Heat Output:
    Mining facilities generate significant heat. In some cases, waste heat is reused for industrial or agricultural purposes, but in most situations, it is simply released into the environment, adding to local thermal loads.
  • Land and Infrastructure:
    Bitcoin mining operations require large warehouses and access to high-capacity electrical infrastructure. This can limit available industrial space for other uses and put stress on local grids.

By using proof-of-stake, Ethereum avoids most of these impacts. It just needs standard server equipment. This can run in data centers with other low-impact computing tasks.

bitcoin versus ethereum carbon footprint

How the Industry Is Addressing Bitcoin’s Footprint

The crypto industry is aware of Bitcoin’s environmental challenges and is taking steps to address them. Some of the actions taken include:

  • Renewable Mining: Some mining operations use only hydro, wind, or solar energy. This is common in areas with plenty of renewable resources.
  • Waste Heat Recovery: A few miners capture and reuse waste heat for agriculture (e.g., greenhouse farming) or district heating systems.
  • Carbon Offsetting: Companies and mining pools are buying carbon credits to offset emissions. However, how well this works depends on the quality of those credits.
  • Policy Proposals: Governments may require Bitcoin miners to share their energy sources or meet renewable energy goals.

SEE MORE: Top 5 Sustainable Bitcoin Mining Companies To Watch Out For

While these efforts are promising, the core challenge remains: proof-of-work’s high energy requirement is built into Bitcoin’s security model.

Why This Matters for ESG-Minded Investors

For investors who care about environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors, the difference between Bitcoin and Ethereum is stark. Ethereum’s low-energy proof-of-stake model makes it easier to align with climate goals. Bitcoin’s high energy use and emissions, while partially mitigated by renewable adoption, remain a significant concern.

These factors may influence where ESG-focused funds allocate capital. Companies and institutions wanting exposure to blockchain technology without a large carbon footprint might prefer Ethereum or other PoS networks.

Bitcoin may still attract investors because of its market dominance and value as a store. However, it will likely keep facing environmental concerns.

The Road Ahead for Crypto and Climate

Bitcoin and Ethereum’s price rallies show that investor interest in crypto remains strong. As climate change and sustainability gain importance in policy and investment, environmental performance may play a larger role in the long-term value and acceptance of digital assets.

For now, Ethereum sets the standard for energy efficiency among major blockchains, while Bitcoin represents the ongoing challenge of balancing security, decentralization, and sustainability. Can Bitcoin cut its environmental impact without losing its key features? This will be an important question in the coming years.

The post Bitcoin Price Hits $124,000 Record High vs Ethereum Price Near $4,800: Which Crypto Is Greener? appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com