Taranis and Albo Climate have partnered together to create a new, satellite-based carbon verification. The AI-powered remote sensing technology will verify soil carbon in row crops. Though its initial launch will be in the US, they hope to launch globally soon.
“We are excited to be partnering with Albo Climate. The high costs of measuring and verifying soil carbon credits have prevented more farmers from participating in carbon programs. Automatic and remote sensing of soil carbon would eliminate the farmer’s need to take cumbersome soil sampling, allowing farmers to enter the carbon credit market and increase their ROI seamlessly,” said Taranis President and Co-Founder Ofir Schlam.
Carbon verification is essential to the carbon credit industry – which has grown this past year exponentially. Experts expect it to reach $22 trillion by 2050. It is now valued at $100 billion, up from $300 million in 2018. Many feel this growth is due to COP26 and the Paris Agreement, as companies and governments look to find ways to offset their emissions.
Still, critics feel that the carbon credit industry doesn’t have the oversight it needs. But, if this verification process proves successful, environmental projects used to offset carbon can be measured more accurately. This will help the farmers completing these projects and the industry as a whole. Projects include crop rotation, planned grazing, and the reduction of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides.
“We are putting farmers first on our new platform. To have a true impact on climate change, we need scalable execution and to have as many people on board in the effort as possible,” says Ariella Charny, CMO of Albo Climate.
Carbon credits can offset emissions, improve the atmosphere, and support economic growth. And, as advances in technology strengthen the verification process, the industry will only continue to get better.
The UN’s plans for a global offset market, and what might – and might not – happen at COP 26.
It’s all about Article 6.
That’s Article 6 of the Paris Agreement – approved on the final day of that meeting back in 2015 – which lays out, broadly, the goal of the UN-administered international carbon trading scheme.
Everyone agrees on the need for a rulebook that lays everything out in black-and-white. But nations tend to prefer grey areas, and a carbon market would cover a lot of those.
Setting the table
The broad outline of the discussion runs like this:
Every nation has NDCs – Nationally-Determined Contributions – that outline exactly how much each one is able and willing to reduce their CO2 emissions.
Each NDC is broadly determined by the goals of the Paris Agreement.
Given that those NDCs are different, there’s room for some countries to cut emissions faster. That opens the door for a system in line with a traditional cap-and-trade system.
Entities that cut emissions quickly come in under the cap; they can trade their excess credits to other entities that need a bit more wiggle room.
That’s all well and good in practice. But governments aren’t your normal entities.
First off, those NDCs aren’t created equal – some countries are doing more to cut emissions than others.
How are those efforts graded and measured?
What should each country be doing?
Should some offsets count for more than others, since some countries can meet their reductions targets more easily?
All of those are thorny questions for the leaders gathered in Glasgow to consider. But the problem goes even deeper.
International markets meet the VCM
What about private efforts within those countries? After all, carbon offset projects, particularly involving nature-based offsets like forestation efforts, are nothing new. They’ve been around for decades.
Do those projects count? Institutions like the Gold Standard have been heavily involved in measuring those early offsets. How much do they carry over?
Do those projects count? Institutions like the Gold Standard have been heavily involved in measuring those early offsets. How much do they carry over?
COP 26 needs to define the guidelines by which an internationally-regulated offset market will operate. In doing so, they’ll have a chance to set the standards for the broader Voluntary Carbon Market (VCM).
The VCM has already seen explosive growth. If the leaders at COP 26 can establish a good framework, that growth rate could skyrocket.
What might happen
We’ve been here before.
Article 6 is nothing new. It was discussed at COP 25, at COP 24 . . . at every major summit since Paris, actually. So far, agreement has been hard to come by.
But there are signs that things are changing for COP 26.
Brazil, a key holdout in the talks, has signaled a willingness to come to the table. Bolonsaro’s government not only has proved to be a reluctant signatory to the Paris agreement but also presides over the management of the Amazon rainforest – a key factor in many nature-based offset programs.
Canada, a hard-liner on the other side, also sees the benefits of coming to an agreement soon. Doing so in a way that leads to concrete environmental benefits still poses a challenge, but COP 26 seems to have a real sense of momentum behind it.
COVID-19, for all the havoc it wreaked on the world economy, also demonstrated that dramatic decreases in CO2 emissions are possible. No one wants to re-create those circumstances, but there might be a path forward that combines significant emissions reductions with increased offsets.
The global community goes to the VCM
There’s one other dramatic difference between previous COP conferences and this one.
That’s the growth of the VCM.
Why are nations like Brazil, India, and over developing countries more willing to compromise?
The Paris agreement set out a fund of up to $100 billion to help developing countries take advantage of the trading schemes and finance their own NDCs.
That’s a lot of money, but unsurprisingly, it hasn’t all been delivered as planned. Disagreements over that fund were part of the reason the Article 6 talks were derailed in Madrid in 2019.
But in the meantime, the VCM is on pace to pass the 100-billion-dollar mark globally by 2030. Developing countries don’t need to wait on the UN.
With a clear Paris rulebook for an international VCM, Brazil and other countries can take advantage of a market-led climate change initiative that puts money in the bank while also contributing to the goals of the Paris Agreement.
That market lies at the heart of the matter. Developing countries have the potential to be on an equal footing with developed countries when it comes to the VCM.
If some of the potential pitfalls can be resolved – offset double-counting, verification, etc. – then developing countries could actually be even more appealing to the VCM.
As experts have pointed out, while CO2 emissions are spread globally, opportunities to counter them are not. An international market could leverage those differences.
Will Glasgow 2021 be the COP that solves the problem?
Will the VCM go global in a whole new way?
And if COP 26 finishes with a Paris Rulebook for an international VCM, then just how quickly will the VCM hit the $100 billion mark?
COP26 is just days away, and in a bold move, Quebec has announced the ban of all fossil fuel extractions and exploration.
Quebec Premier François Legault announced that the province will “definitively renounce the extraction of hydrocarbons on its territory,” a huge victory for environmentalists.
In a statement, Greenpeace Canada Climate Campaigner Patrick Bonin said that “Closing the door on fossil fuel extraction is a huge victory, made possible by the relentless opposition from citizens to both shale gas and conventional oil and gas exploration.”
He believes that now, “In Canada, and around all the world, the pressure to end the expansion of oil and gas production will only continue to grow.”
The ban has not come without challenges. Three oil and gas companies are suing the Quebec government since their leases were previously approved. Other companies are filing a lawsuit over application rejections.
Quebec is currently the second-largest oil refiner in Canada, followed by Alberta. Greenland, Ireland, and Denmark have also banned fossil fuel exploration.
Quebec’s announcement couldn’t have come at a better time.
With COP26 taking place, and Paris Agreement milestones coming due, many governments and corporations are trying to find ways to reduce their carbon emissions.
Their desire to offset carbon while other technologies become available as certainly led to the rise of the carbon offset industry. The carbon credit industry was valued at $300 million in 2018. It is now at $100 billion and is expected to reach $22 trillion by 2050.
Carbon offsets, strong regulations, and advanced technology all have a part to play in helping the world reach their net-zero goals. If more nations step up as the province of Quebec has, we could all be that much closer.
Let’s hope that Quebec’s announcement inspires others to do the same.
New Zealand is the first country to require banks to report on the effects of climate change. This is all part of their goal to be carbon neutral by 2050, and they feel that the financial industry plays a significant role.
Climate Change Minister James Shaw believes New Zealand’s move will pave the way for other countries to do the same. “New Zealand is a world-leader in this area and the first country in the world to introduce mandatory climate-related reporting for the financial sector.”
Shaw went on to say that “Climate-related disclosures will bring climate risks and resilience into the heart of financial and business decision making. It will encourage entities to become more sustainable by factoring the short, medium, and long-term effects of climate change into their business decisions.”
New Zealand’s new mandate will apply to insurers, banks, publicly listed companies, issuers, and investment managers – impacting around 200 of the most prominent financial market participants. Total assets are approximately $719 million.
Climate emissions have increased by 57% in New Zealand since 1990 – one of the largest increases of all industrialized countries. Because of this, New Zealand is doing everything it can to drive down emissions. They are even working to make their public sector carbon neutral by 2025.
As government entities work together, they can set regulations that will drive companies to reduce emissions.
Take the Paris Agreement, for example. Governments and companies are working to meet upcoming milestones, causing the carbon credit industry to boom this year alone. Since carbon credits can offset emissions, improve the environment, and spark economic growth, many view them as integral to fighting climate change.
Shaw said that Australia, Canada, the UK, France, Japan, and the EU are also working towards climate risk reporting for companies.
COP26 is set to start in just a few days. It will be interesting to see what other announcements will be made.
The UK has unveiled a 368-page strategy to reach net-zero, placing them at the front of the climate change fight. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is hopeful that the UK’s announcement will set an example for others, as the UK “leads the charge towards global net zero.”
COP26 starts this weekend, so Johnson’s announcement couldn’t come at a better time. The UK initiative is called ‘Net-Zero Strategy: Build Back Greener.’ Some areas of focus include:
Moving to clean electricity and electric vehicles
Setting a path to low-carbon heating for homes across Britain
Carbon capture and storage
Hydrogen production capacity
The UK also plans to:
Create 440,000 jobs
Generate $166 billion in private investment funds
Provide 40 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2040 (and 1 GW of floating offshore wind)
Cut emissions from oil and gas 50%, removing 5 million tons of carbon from the air by 2030
Some feel the strategy is more “promise-focused” than “action-focused” and would like to see the UK take more significant steps. It is important to note that gas and power prices have surged within Britain this year, which may be one of the driving forces behind this announcement.
With Paris Agreement milestones approaching, and COP26 happening, all are trying to find ways to reduce and offset carbon emissions. The technologies needed to cut emissions entirely aren’t developed yet – and the earth isn’t going to stop getting hotter until we say we’re ready.
The carbon credit industry has proven to be a beneficial way to offset emissions – while improving the environment and creating economic opportunity.
It is currently expected to be valued at $22 trillion by 2050. Still, the carbon marketplace isn’t going to solve this crisis on its own. Advances in technology and additional regulations are needed.
Whether it is too little too late or simply not enough, Johnson’s move is a bold one. If other nations follow his lead, as he hopes, net-zero goals may be possible for all.
China has opened the world’s 1st zero-carbon container terminal in Tianjin, saving manpower, time, and costs.
It’s a 200,000-ton container terminal, with room for 2.5 million twenty-foot containers to pass through annually. Construction of the Tianjin Port took 21 months.
The Zero-Carbon Technology Being Used in Tianjin Port
Tianjin Port is the world’s first smart, zero-carbon terminal with an “intelligent brain.” The technology is different from other automatic container terminals since wind turbines, and photovoltaics are on site. This allows the terminal to use its own electricity. The result? Zero-carbon emissions.
Regarding its creation, Liu Xiwang, Deputy Manager of Information Department of Tianjin Port Second, said that “We have independently developed an intelligent horizontal transportation system, also known as the ‘central control brain,’ to be responsible for the unified command and dispatch of 76 intelligent horizontal transportation robots in the terminal for fully automated container handling.”
He went on to say that the “brain” uses advanced algorithms to map out the optimal driving path and speeds – knowing when to accelerate, decelerate and overtake.
Essentially, the AI system can provide loading and unloading plans and control equipment, driving efficiency, and positioning. This is done through laser radars, cameras, and millimeter-wave radars.
What Tianjin Port Means for Global Net-Zero Goals
The Paris Agreement, as well as COP26, have encouraged governments and companies to go green. The voluntary carbon marketplace is booming because of it, reaching $100 billion this year (compared to $300 million in 2018).
Many companies have opted to offset their emissions through the carbon marketplace since they do not have the technology to reach net-zero (yet). So, purchasing offsets can help them meet climate goals as they work to achieve what Tianjin Port has.
With advances in technology, carbon credits, and increased regulation, it is possible to offset and reduce carbon emissions to achieve green objectives.
Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil producer, plans on going net-zero carbon emissions by 2060.
Earlier in March, Saudi Arabia announced The Saudi Green Initiative. They pledged to reduce their global carbon emission contribution by more than 4 percent. The Saudi’s also stated that they will generate 50% of their energy from renewables by 2030 while planting billions of trees.
While these steps are admirable, the Saudis have yet to provide the world with a net-zero goal, which is why critics feel their “green” announcements are too little too late.
Many believe that the Saudis have been less open and slower to move forward with their plans due to their economy’s dependence on oil. That being said, they haven’t exactly done nothing.
Saudi Arabia opened their first renewable energy plant in April and its first wind farm in August. They have plans to develop a $5 billion hydrogen plant and incorporate green energy into their infrastructure. The Saudi’s are even focused on building a futuristic city called NEOM. The city plans to use smart city technologies for sustainable living.
Saudi officials have said that the world will need access to their oil supply for decades – even with green fuels being developed. As such, they feel they are moving as they should.
As the world takes steps to stop temperatures from rising above 1.5 degrees Celsius (per the Paris Agreement), major polluters, like Saudi Arabia, have a significant role to play.
The startup, Pledge, raised $4.5 million to develop a carbon measurement and removal API. Pledge claims that by integrating the Pledge API, businesses will be able to measure and mitigate their shipments, rides, deliveries, or journeys to achieve carbon neutrality.
Its platform will allow businesses to acquire a fraction of a carbon credit (akin to ordinary investors purchasing a fraction of a stock). This also provides access to balanced portfolios comprising various methodologies and geographies (similar to an ETF).
Pledge aims to provide clients with options for adding offsets to their transactions in industries such as freight forwarding, ride-hailing, travel, and last-mile delivery.
With the impending climate disaster, many businesses want to do their part. However, asking customers to “offset the CO2 emission of this delivery” is a big step. There is relatively little openness when it comes to carbon offsets.
According to Pledge, its emissions calculations will adhere to global standards such as the GHG protocol, the GLEC framework, and the ICAO methodology, as well as ISO standards.
Furthermore, smaller businesses seek to acquire high-quality carbon credits while calculating their impact at the product, service, and transactional levels, and be able to purchase a fraction of a carbon credit.
The carbon credit industry was valued at $300 million in 2018. It is now at $100 billion, with some experts expecting it to top $22 trillion by 2050. Many believe carbon offset growth is due to COP26 and Paris Agreement deadlines.
As companies and governments look to find ways to address climate change, what Pledge is doing can help make the carbon market more accessible. And when programs – such as carbon credits – become more accessible, we can all be a part of the solution.
The COP 26 conference in Glasgow will need to solve two dilemmas at once: offsets might just be the answer.
What do you do when you’ve got an energy crisis that requires dramatic increases in production, but a climate crisis forcing you to decrease production to reduce CO2 emissions?
For the various world leaders meeting in Glasgow in November, that’s not a rhetorical question.
Europe faces an acute energy shortage, with comparisons being drawn to the 1970s oil crisis. The parallels are more than skin-deep; there’s a strong geopolitical element to today’s crisis, just like back then.
That was then and this is now.
But direct comparisons are rarely cut-and-dried, and Europe’s energy crisis owes much to a combination of factors that include a growing but untested renewable energy sector and rising carbon prices.
Take the UK as one example.
UK natural gas storage is a pitiful 4%, giving virtually no reserves in case of a shortfall. With most of Europe’s natural gas supply coming from Russia, that opens a geopolitical weakness.
Not to worry, though, because the UK is a bit different – most of their supply comes from Norway, not Russia. Besides, growth in renewable energy investment, including offshore wind farms in the North Sea, would more than cover any gap.
But in September and October, the UK was hit with a perfect (non)storm.
Geopolitical concerns from Russia led to a constriction of gas prices in the EU. That drove up prices across the board – even the supply from Norway.
Renewables couldn’t cover the gap; September was unusually warm and still, and wind-generated energy dipped. A dry summer also hit the UK’s hydro power. Renewable prices remained mostly steady, but there was no way to ramp up supply when the gas crisis hit.
At the same time, demand surged. Industries side-lined by the pandemic cranked back up in 2021, causing a spike in demand. Ongoing logistics and supply chain issues drove demand further.
Behind it all lies a drumbeat of ever-growing populations and increasing urbanization, factors that together are expected to push electricity demand upwards steadily for the next few decades.
So what’s the takeaway?
Shun renewables because of the inelasticity of supply?
Double-down on domestic fossil fuel production?
Turn to increasingly desperate methods of reducing demand, at the risk of severe economic damage?
None of those options hold much long-term potential. Offsets just might.
Carbon offsets acknowledge the need for current production, even (in drastic circumstances) from admittedly dirty sources like coal.
And yes, the crisis forced the UK to fire up one of its coal-powered plants, despite a promise to phase out coal-fired energy production by 2024.
With offsets, the damage of high-emissions energy sources can be at least partially mitigated. There’s a longer time scale involved, as most offsets rely on natural forms of carbon capture that can take decades to mature. But in the short-term, it offers a chance to keep the LNG flowing while at least starting to address the climate issue.
Companies are jumping on board; over 30 offset deals have been signed since 2019 with leading providers such as BP and Gazprom.
But back in reality, everyone realizes the need to continue fossil fuel production and energy production based on hydrocarbons. The energy crisis is simply the most pressing example.
Even given that crisis, none of the world leaders’ meetings in Glasgow are proposing an energy limit on the forthcoming COP 26 summit. That demand, at least, needs to be met.
Given that reality, offsets – while admittedly not perfect – provide a way to address long-term concerns in the here-and-now.
The gas must flow (for the time being). So too must the offsets.
In the race against climate change, companies and governments are searching for ways to reduce their carbon emissions. Yes, we need advances in technology so that there is no carbon, to begin with, but many industries are not quite there yet.
This is why the carbon offset industry is so important – and Karen Fang, Bank of America’s Head of Global Sustainable Finance, agrees.
According to Fang, carbon offsets are necessary for combating climate change, even though they may be imperfect. Because of this, the industry needs to grow fast since the demand is there.
The carbon offset industry is on track to reach $100 billion by 2030 (up from $300 million in 2018). Some believe it could even reach $22 trillion by 2050. The carbon marketplace has grown in popularity due to its ability to improve the environment and support socio-economic growth – a win for ESG initiatives.
Although the industry has great potential, critics have their concerns – many of which Fang agrees with. This is especially true when it comes to the lack of a standardized, global verification process.
Right now, the primary registries for carbon offsets are all non-profit, non-governmental organizations.
“I almost hope, maybe this is naïve, that they [leaders] could all come together with a unified form of standard recommendation,” Fang said. “Because the world needs it [offsets] and needs a lot of it and needs a lot of it really, really, fast.”
Put ever so simply, Fang said, “Planting a tree is better than not planting a tree. I don’t think anyone can argue with that, from a carbon perspective.” In other words, while the carbon market may not be perfect, it’s doing a lot of good.
With COP26 approaching, leaders have the opportunity to address critic concerns by placing their support behind a global standard. If they do, it will only help drive quality projects and strengthen the carbon offset industry.
The COP26 is scheduled to take place in Glasgow, Scotland, October 31 – November 12.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
