Among all the technological innovations that are transforming our world, there is digitization one of the most important for environmental efficiency and sustainability: it is estimated that digital technologies can help reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by 20 %. On the other hand, the production of computing devices, the raw materials used and the energy consumed also have an impact on the environment: this is the so-called digital carbon footprint, which corresponded to 2 % of total global emissions in 2015 and 4 % in 2020. These figures are undoubtedly smaller than the amount of emissions saved by digitalization, but they are still increasing: at the current pace, the percentage could increase to 8.5 % by 2025 and 14 % by 2040. Reducing our digital carbon footprint is possible with electricity produced from renewable resources , but also through solutions from information technology itself – for example, companies that move to the cloud significantly reduce their emissions.

Reducing a building's carbon footprint is challenging, but the benefits are significant. Efficient, low-carbon facilities use cost-effective solutions to minimize emissions while improving health, equity and reducing operating costs. Property managers and building owners can consider several tools to reduce carbon emissions and save costs: – Decarbonization – Electrification – Efficiency – Digitization. The World Economic Forum emphasizes that these approaches are necessary to reduce carbon emissions and the overall cost of running a building. Buildings can achieve low or zero carbon readiness by reducing (or eliminating) energy generated from fossil fuels, using renewable energy, reducing refrigerants with high global warming potential, and incorporating low-carbon, reused or recycled energy materials into construction. Energy efficiency saves energy supply costs and reduces future network infrastructure costs. Passive measures such as better insulation and high-efficiency appliances can reduce overall electricity consumption. Real-time data and analytics also enable energy efficiency and flexibility in building requirements. Energy-smart buildings can save up to 15 % of energy through basic automated control, with demand-controlled ventilation saving a further 10 %. Building systems integration can deliver incremental energy savings of up to 18 % compared to basic HVAC and lighting controls. In addition, efficient buildings with an interactive grid can reduce energy costs by up to 20 % through active demand management. (Frikkie Malan, MSN)

The Net Zero Live specification will explore how designers should deal with net zero in the commercial sector. Net Zero Live is back with a day-long program exploring how the sector can best prepare for decarbonisation to meet the government's 2050 emissions target. Chaired by Editor-in-Chief Chloe McCulloch and Special Projects Editor Jordan Marshall, two morning sessions will look at determining the approach to retrofit and renovation, as well as the Building Awards Net Zero Award finalists sharing their next steps. Sponsored by Kingspan Data and Flooring, the afternoon session will focus on the net zero specification in the commercial sector. Achieving net zero carbon emissions is an important part of environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategies in the commercial real estate sector, and assessing the carbon emissions associated with the entire life cycle of a building is vital. However, improving the energy efficiency of workplaces is difficult. To move the office sector from ambition to action, industry change is urgently needed. Pjoin our panel of experts from Lendlease, Kingspan Data and Flooring and the British Council for Offices who explore the areas to consider when designing a clean commercial workspace. After considering all aspects of building design, panelists will discuss design requirements as well as product and material specifications that can assist in implementation. (Hollie Tye, Building Design)

New City College is proud to announce the launch of the first low-carbon FE lab to deliver green skills training for London's workforce. The state-of-the-art laboratory was launched at a special breakfast presentation on Thursday 4 May, attended by industry experts and business leaders who had the opportunity to view the new facilities and hear about the benefits that this challenge will bring to a new way of working to meet cleaner energy and net zero goals. The launch follows the creation of the Central London Forward Partnership, led by New City College, which includes nine colleges in central London. The partnership has successfully secured a £2.7m bid from the Strategic Development Fund (SDF) to deliver high quality technical training in the low carbon energy sector. The lab has been developed at New City College Hackney and will be invaluable to employers who need to retrain staff in green skills and low carbon technologies. Courses and training for the next generation of installers include solar PV, solar heat pumps, air source heat pumps, electric storage, electric vehicle charging, retrofitting and energy efficiency. Speaking at the launch, Gerry McDonald, Chief Executive and Group Director of New City College said: “This new and innovative training facility is a major step forward in our commitment to sustainability and makes us the sector's leading school for the low carbon energy agenda. We have invested in it and delivered, putting us in a good position to pioneer this vital work.” Gerry added to the participants: “You are the people who will do it. And you need a college to work hand-in-hand with industry and other partners to make sure London and the UK have the right people and skills to make the necessary changes to get to zero.” (BBC News Team, Co2News)

Did you know that using digital devices has an impact on the environment? Every online activity has an impact on the environment.CO2 emissions from the manufacture, use and data transmission of digital devices are known as the "digital carbon footprint".Due to our extensive digital presence, leaving a digital footprint has always been overlooked or ignored.Here's how minimizing your digital footprint can help you adopt sustainability .

Every email or attachment sent, received or saved requires a lot of computing power.Therefore, it is recommended to reduce the number of emails you save in your inbox. Don't forget to unsubscribe from unnecessary newsletters and report your spam emails so they don't come back.Likewise, keep your inbox compact by deleting emails you don't need to keep, including calendar invites.

If you plan to leave the device idle for a long time, turn off the electronics.Devices like laptops consume power even when they are in sleep mode.It also ensures that you don't leave your devices connected for longer than necessary. Avoid charging smartphones and laptops overnight. It will degrade your battery and also consume power unnecessarily.

Every query you enter into a search engine consumes energy. So try to be as specific as possible when searching for something and avoid multiple searches.Also, don't forget to save the websites you visit often. This will reduce the energy consumed each time you search and enter a particular web page.Also, don't forget to close inactive browser tabs.

For security reasons, every file you save to the cloud is saved many times. So record and keep only what you think is really important.Delete identical photos and all unnecessary files shared with you from the cloud storage.Another viable option is to have such items stored on pen drives or hard drives instead of the cloud.

Video streaming is a major source of power consumption and data expansion. Reduce power consumption by not streaming videos you're not watching.While it's not practical to completely avoid streaming, one effective way you can manage it is to disable the "autoplay" option.Also, instead of streaming audio or music online, try to download it when possible. (Apurva P)

These are the arguments of the big beef titans to convince consumers that eating meat has a negligible impact on the planet:

It's a hard, disgusting and disorienting truth: if we're serious about avoiding the worst-case scenarios of the climate crisis, people – especially those living in wealthier countries – need to consume less animal products. But for the corporate titans who stand at the top of the nearly trillion-dollar global meat industry, this slight change is an existential threat, and so they are telling the truth about the full climate impacts of animal agriculture. In the Guardian's review of dozens of articles, op-eds, fact sheets, blog posts, informational videos, educational resources and social media reports, several themes emerged repeatedly. In total, this vast body of industry-funded reporting perpetuates five myths that suggest that beef production is not a problem for the climate and that reducing consumption will not help—and may even hurt—environmental progress. Myth 1: fossil fuels are the only real problem to solve: "What we eat is important to the environment to some extent, but it pales in comparison to what we drive or how we use energy," Frank Mitloehner, a UC Davis animal scientist who works with the beef industry to research and reporting for industry publication Meatingplace. "Then have a burger. Just make sure you walk to the restaurant." (Joe Fassler, The Guardian)

Most of us know that if we want to stand a chance in the fight against the climate crisis, we need to limit our carbon emissions. "The climate emergency is a race we are losing, but it is a race we can win," said UN Secretary-General António Guterres. The race is certainly on, but do we fully understand the impact of our daily travel on the environment? In other words, how carbon literate are we? Prime Time took to the streets of Ballydehob in West Cork to find out. Levi's Corner House pub is the focal point of the Ballydehob Jazz Festival. It is run by festival organizers Joe O'Leary and his partner Caroline O'Donnell. The couple are acutely aware of the challenges people living outside of Ireland's major cities have in accessing sustainable modes of transport. With buses running infrequently, Caroline says getting to Ballydehob is a "convoluted journey". Caroline told Prime Time: "We're limited by public transport options if you look at it from a sustainability point of view because you want to do it with the smallest carbon footprint." Joe says it took a friend five hours to get from Cork City to Ballydehob. One regular bus from Cork to Skibbereen has been cancelled. He had to wait an hour for another bus to take him the short 10-mile journey from Skibbereen to Ballydehob. Joe added that most people cannot afford electric cars. Like most rural towns and villages, Ballydehob does not have a public charging station for electric cars.

(Would Conor McMorrow, Prime Time)

Telegraph Money takes a closer look, from solar to heat pumps and electric cars. British homeowners and drivers are under pressure to significantly reduce their emissions, thanks to the government’s major decarbonisation policy and proposals to achieve net zero by 2050. The concept of net zero stems from a recommendation by the Climate Change Committee, the government’s independent environmental adviser, in May 2019. Before the net zero target, Britain had a legally binding target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 % by 2025 compared to 1990 levels. The new target of reducing emissions by 100 % by 2050 became legally binding in 2019 as part of an amendment to the Climate Change Act 2008. Historically, much of the cost of carbon has been borne by industry, but there are concerns that the government is increasingly shifting the responsibility for net zero onto ordinary people – while offering few incentives. This may mean we have to finance our own decarbonisation, but that is easier said than done in the midst of a cost of living crisis. For example, switching to an electric vehicle (EV) may be a key part of the UK’s drive to achieve net zero, but a new family electric car could easily cost £25,000. Similarly, improving the energy efficiency of a property with heat pumps or solar panels can often come with a five-figure price tag (albeit with potential long-term benefits). Here, Telegraph Money takes a closer look at what is involved in adopting the government's net zero initiatives and how much they could cost you. (Esther Shaw, The Telegraph)

It’s good to be mindful of your carbon footprint. But it’s also important to remember that the very idea of an individual “carbon footprint” was invented by BP, a massive oil company. There’s a famous 2016 cartoon by Matt Bors that has since become a meme, in which a medieval peasant says, “We should do a little better for society.” The smug man, trying to catch the peasant in his hypocrisy, replies, “And yet you’re participating in society! Curious!” When it comes to climate change, too many of us have adopted a smug attitude. Maybe we can’t afford to buy an electric car or a heat pump yet. Maybe we just can’t bring ourselves to stop eating meat or driving long distances. Maybe we’re sometimes lazy about recycling. We may be worried about climate change and want to do something about it. But after years of being fooled by our “carbon footprints,” we can feel like we’re too hopelessly compromised to do any good. I’m here to tell you not to be too hard on yourself. Yes, focusing on individual carbon footprints distracts from the need to make fundamental changes where they can have the biggest impact: at the corporate and government levels. The vast majority of people in this country want action on climate change, but too many of us are afraid to ask for it. “The consumer carbon footprint makes people so anxious and guilty that they feel like they don’t have the right to say what they think because they think they’re directly responsible for climate change,” Miranda Massie, founder of the Climate Museum in New York, which seeks to inspire people to take individual action, said in an interview. “It was a masterstroke of cartoon villainy.” Tim McDonnell of Semaphore recently noted that changing consumer behavior has the potential to cut 5 % from global emissions. He published a chart based on research by Diana Ivanova of Leeds University and others that shows how much individual consumption choices can save carbon. Using her data, I created a similar one of my own: A person who hands over their gas-guzzling SUV to a repo man; stops eating animals and dairy; gives up their annual vacation to Greece; installs a heat pump and solar panels; and sends their dog away to a nice farm in the upstate where he can run and play, saving up to six tons of carbon dioxide per year. (Mark Gongloff, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

New York is the first state in the country to ban natural gas and other fossil fuels in most new buildings—a big win for climate advocates, but a move that could trigger a backlash from fossil fuel interests. Gov. Kathy Hochul and the Democratic lawmakers who control New York's Senate and Assembly are facing growing pressure from environmental advocates and climate-focused voters, who approved a new $229 billion state budget late Tuesday that includes the provision. The law bans gas stoves, ovens, and propane heating and effectively encourages the use of environmentally friendly devices such as heat pumps and induction stoves in most new residential buildings across the state. It requires all-electric heating and cooking in new buildings shorter than seven stories by 2026 and for taller buildings by 2029. The state budget doesn't ban gas in all new buildings — there are exemptions for large commercial and industrial buildings, such as stores, hospitals, laundries and restaurants. But the impact on new residential buildings could be significant. According to a 2022 report buildings account for 32 % of global warming emissions in New York State. Methane, the main component of natural gas used as fuel for stoves and home heating, has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide in the first two decades it is in the atmosphere. For this reason, scientists have narrowed down to fossil fuels as a way to quickly reduce planet-warming pollution. Several studies have also found that gas stoves are responsible for serious health conditions, including asthma. The bill’s passage comes after a federal official’s comments about gas stoves sparked controversy earlier this year. Richard Trumka Jr., the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commissioner, sparked a firestorm in January when he said gas stoves were a significant source of indoor air pollution linked to childhood asthma and suggested the agency could work to ban them in new homes. Trumka later clarified his statement, saying the agency “does not plan to go into someone’s home and take away things that are already there.” (Rachel Ramirez and Ella Nilsen, CNN)

Industry needs huge amounts of heat for a wide range of activities. Analysis – New Zealand burns the equivalent of 108 liters of gasoline in coal and natural gas every second to generate heat for industrial processes.

This burning of fossil fuels for industrial heat generates 28 % of New Zealand’s energy-related emissions. Industry needs vast amounts of heat for a wide range of activities, including processing basic food, manufacturing building materials and producing packaging for everyday goods. But it is abundantly clear that to achieve a clean, zero-carbon economy by 2050, we need to step up our use of renewable energy technology to generate industrial heat instead of burning fossil fuels. The government is using a carrot-and-stick approach to support the transition to low-carbon, renewable energy sources. The “type” requires industry to phase out coal-fired boilers for low- and medium-temperature heating applications by 2037. New natural gas exploration has also effectively ended, leading to a decline in gas supplies in the future. The “carrot” is the government’s Decarbonisation Initiatives Investment Fund. The results so far are significant, with industry turning to tried and true solutions: increasing energy efficiency, biomass boilers, electrode boilers and heat pumps, sometimes combined with electric or thermal batteries. These technologies are clean and green, but also adaptable to the needs of industry. (The Conversation's Timothy Walmsley and James Carson)

– As governments move to support carbon capture projects and corporations seek to reduce their carbon footprint – In the UK, the spring budget in March allocated up to $25 billion for carbon capture, utilisation and storage – Companies are signing long-term carbon credit agreements with developers of carbon capture technologies, which supports the investment case for CCS projects.

Carbon capture projects and carbon credits have received a new boost over the past year, with strong government support, as part of the solution to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and put the world on track to meet the Paris Agreement goals. In the UK, the Spring Budget in March made up to $25 billion (£20 billion) available for carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS), while the US Inflation Reduction Act significantly increased incentives for carbon capture projects, including direct air (DAC). As governments move to support carbon capture projects and corporations seek to reduce their carbon footprint, the market for carbon capture projects and carbon credits is expected to thrive in the coming years. The schemes have faced criticism from environmental advocates who argue that carbon credits do not address the issue of reducing emissions and could lead to more greenwashing by big polluters. Government support is accelerating carbon capture projects. The UK government has pledged up to £20 billion to finance the early deployment of a carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) system to help meet the government's climate commitments. The government has recognized the Viking CCS project as one of two leading bidders for the next phase of the project, prompting parent company BP to enter into a deal with Harbour Energy, the largest oil producer in the UK's North Sea, on the development of the Viking CCS project. In the United States, the IRA increased the value of the credits overall, with the tax credit for carbon storage from carbon capture at industrial and power generation facilities increasing from $50 to $85 per ton, and the tax incentive for storage from DAC jumping from $50 to $180 per ton. The provisions also extend the construction period by seven years to January 1, 2033. This means that projects must begin physical work by then to qualify for the credit. (Cvetana Parašková, OilPrice.com)

But the agency has been slow to approve permits for injection wells to capture carbon.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing to unveil new emissions standards for natural gas power plants this week, its latest effort to support the president's agenda to decarbonize America's energy. The space that companies need to store or sequester captured carbon emissions is called an injection well. While the EPA's plant-specific decision is consistent with a Supreme Court decision last July that banned a full overhaul of U.S. power plants but allowed plant-specific decisions, the agency has delayed permitting Class VI injection wells. The EPA has also been slow to approve states' requests for "primacy" to ease the permitting process for injection wells.  AS THE LORD LEADS, PRAY WITH US… – For Administrator Regan to seek God's guidance as he leads the EPA. – For wisdom for agency members to process applications and issue approvals so that companies and states can implement and comply with EPA rules. (The Presidential Prayer Team)

Alaska Airlines has partnered with ZeroAvia, a US company that designs and manufactures hydrogen propulsion systems for zero-emission aircraft, to retrofit the Bombardier Q400 regional turboprop with a hydrogen-electric propulsion system. The retrofitted aircraft will expand the reach and applicability of zero-emission flight technology, further supporting the aviation industry's efforts to achieve a zero-carbon balance sheet. At a recent event held at ZeroAvia's research and development facility at Paine Field, Alaska Airlines' regional carrier, Horizon Air, formally handed over a 76-seat Q400 aircraft to ZeroAvia for research and development. The aircraft was repainted in a special color to emphasize the innovative mission of this partnership.

(Can Emir)

Subglacial lakes that will never see the light of day are among the least accessible frontiers of science, brimming with more untold stories than even the planets of our solar system. One thing seems certain: where there's water, there's life—even if said water is at the bottom of a cold lake, in the dark, under more than half a mile of the West Antarctic ice sheet. As he states AGU Advances, scientists analyzed the chemical fingerprints of the ocean and microbes obtained from the sediments and water at the bottom of a subglacial lake called Mercer Lake to describe for the first time where wild microbes acquire carbon, an energy source, and move it through this starkly barren system. They used data from sediment, microbes and the carbon cycle to infer the geologic history of the region, and the results surprised them. While the ice above Mercer Lake was previously thought to have been stable for hundreds of millennia, this new work confirms that the lake was connected to the ocean about 6 years ago and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet was smaller than it is today. It was a time when the climate was stable compared to the end of the last ice age and even today's anthropogenic climate change. "This is the first time we have clear geological evidence that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's grounding line, which is like its coast where the ice meets the ocean, was at least 250 kilometers further inland than it is today—perhaps more," said Ryan Venturelli, lead author of the study and assistant professor at the Colorado School of Mines. Venturelli worked with her former Ph.D. advisor, marine geologist Brad Rosenheim at the University of South Florida College of Marine Science. In other words, just a few thousand years ago, the West Antarctic Ice Sheet retreated about 155 miles — a few tens of miles short of the distance from New York to Boston — before regrowing into its modern configuration.

(according to University of South Florida)

“Carbon offset markets are widely discredited. Their only benefit is to enrich the middlemen charged with selling the lie.” A leading US green group on Wednesday dismissed a major carbon offset deal as a “fraud”, stressing the ineffectiveness of such schemes in reducing emissions. NextGen - a joint venture between Swiss carbon finance consultancy South Pole and Japan's Mitsubishi Corporation - has announced a "groundbreaking" purchase of nearly 200,000 tonnes of carbon credits from three projects. These include the US direct air capture project – a technology that extracts carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere – and a Finnish producer of biochar, a black carbon substance derived from biomass. NextGen chairman Philip Moss said the deal "provides an opportunity for the oil and gas sector to transition to cleaner activities". While some scientists argue that CO2 extraction, either through natural or technological means, is necessary to meet the goals of the Paris climate agreement, opponents call the technology a "false climate solution." According to Food & Water Wath: Carbon offset markets have repeatedly been exposed as fraudulent, ineffective schemes that contribute little to reducing emissions. Likewise, carbon dioxide removal has been shown to fail. Direct air capture produces 2.2 to 3.5 tonnes of CO2 equivalent for every tonne captured, while an ethanol capture facility in Illinois, which is often offered as a proof of concept, has increased emissions since installing the technology in 2017. Carbon offset markets are widely discredited. Their only benefit is to enrich middlemen charged with selling the lie — the NextGen scheme is no different,” Food & Water Watch policy director Jim Walsh said in a statement. "Carbon capture is a costly and inefficient distraction from the real work of transitioning away from dirty fossil fuels and biofuels." (Brett Wilkins, Common Dreams)

Spending $1.50 per hectare to prune vines from the world's selectively logged forests could remove 800 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere over 30 years, according to new research. Professor Jack (Francis) Putz of the University of the Sunshine Coast is so excited by the findings that he and nine international co-authors have called on all tropical countries – including Australia – to include this simple procedure in their national carbon policies. "If we are to scale natural climate solutions at the pace necessary to avoid global climate catastrophe, we need effective, low-cost, ruthless practices that can be implemented immediately," said the recently joined professor of ecology and forest management. UniSC to continue its work. “This research shows why we should cut lianas (creepy vines) and suggests how government and private landowners can do this to achieve environmental and economic benefits through the timber industry. "Widespread acceptance of liana removal is more likely if it is incorporated into national carbon policy frameworks." Professor Putz was the lead author of a paper published on the research in areas of ecology and forest management with his predecessor, the University of Florida, as well as The Nature Conservancy, Conservation International, Eastwood Forests in the United States, and Science for Sustainability in Central America. "Vineas are great in some ways, but they compete with trees and other vegetation for sunlight," he said. "Liana infestation affects a quarter of the world's one billion hectares of selectively logged forests, primarily in the tropics, and is intensifying as a result of human intervention and climate change. “Our research found that cutting lianas from a minimum number of harvestable trees – just five trees per hectare – would increase carbon sequestration and contribute to timber yields to improve local livelihoods. “Forest managers with access to voluntary carbon markets could also diversify their income. “With processing costs estimated at less than $1 per ton of CO₂ it is an attractive opportunity for countries to meet their climate action targets and – given current carbon market prices of USD 10-20 per ton of CO₂ – to increase the economic potential of selectively harvested forests." He said equal treatment could also benefit biodiversity in non-logging forests. (University of Sunshine Coast, PHYSORG)

The unfinished house on Rainbow Road, near Windsor's Bradley Airport, has the unmistakable smell of fresh paint. The converted four-bedroom building sits in a row with three other identical Habitat for Humanity homes — all functional and unadorned at first glance. But in reality they are much more. These houses represent the pinnacle of energy efficiency and a departure from the use of fossil fuels in construction. Once solar power is added to their roofs, these homes will be at or near net zero greenhouse gas emissions. Such potential speaks to the state's ability to address what is currently its second-largest and growing category of greenhouse gas emissions — emissions from buildings. In fact, the newly released updated state greenhouse gas emissions inventory shows that for the first time, only the residential sector — not including commercial and industrial buildings — has replaced the electric sector as the state's second largest emitter after transportation. Additionally, the fact that Habitat has built zero-emissions homes that are affordable to budget-conscious homeowners may be a significant indicator that such design and construction is no longer the domain of wealthy homeowners. Yes, they cost a little more to build — about 10% more — said Kris McKelvie, director of construction for Habitat's north central Connecticut office, which means Habitat has to raise more money. "If we raise a little bit more, we could save them hundreds of thousands of dollars over their lifetime and potentially for generations," he said. (Jan Ellen Spiegel, CTMirror.org)

Tough days ahead for global trade and climate negotiations. The shock comes from developed countries and affects poor countries the most. The European Parliament approved the introduction of a carbon border tax (CBT) on 18 April. The CBT will become law after approval by the EU Council next month. It will allow the EU to charge a new tax on imports of steel, aluminium, cement, fertilisers, hydrogen and electricity from 1 January 2026. However, Indian exporters must share company-level emissions data with the EU from 1 October. However, the EU is not alone in making such a decision. The UK, Canada, Japan and the US are also preparing to levy CBT on imports. Most developed countries will implement some form of CBT between 2026 and 2028. CBT rates will vary by product and production process. CBT rates are not fixed, they would be calculated for each consignment. The rates will depend on the intensity of the product's emissions, including built-in emissions. These may vary for different manufacturing units spread across the globe. For example, the CBT for cement can be 90 percent of the product value. For blast furnace steel, the rate can be around 20 percent of the product price. The average rate will be 20-35 percent of the value of the product. The following table shows the CBT product estimate. Targeted emission reductions The EU aims to achieve 55 percent lower carbon emissions by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. It wants to be carbon neutral by 2050. In 2005, it created the Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS) to achieve its climate goals. The EU-ETS monitors emissions from more than 10,000 power plants, oil refineries, iron, steel, aluminum, cement, paper and glass plants and civil aviation. The ETS system works through European emission allowances (EUAs). Let's call it a license or permit that allows one metric ton of CO2 emissions for a certain period of time. The EU-ETS sets an upper limit on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions (mainly carbon dioxide) that each installation can emit. Each participating company will receive a limited number of annual EUA quotas. At the end of each compliance cycle, all EU-ETS participants must surrender enough EUA allowances to cover all their emissions in that cycle. The EU-ETS system lowers the cap gradually to reduce emissions. Businesses are expected to achieve lower emissions by investing in better technologies, fossil fuel alternatives and energy efficiency. The EU-ETS is thus a cap-and-trade system that uses market forces to reduce emissions. The system allows the market to set a carbon price, and this price drives investment decisions and drives innovation in the market. However, the EU-ETS gave the most polluting industries, such as steel or aluminum, a free ride by granting them free emission allowances to cover all their emissions. This was done to prevent their resettlement to cheaper destinations such as China or India.

ohn Nergenah is a fourth generation farmer in Morgan County. He and his father have been working with Locus Agricultural Solutions' CarbonNow program for eight years. “We are 100% no-till and we use cover crops on every acre every year,” Nergenah said. “Carbon markets were an additional thing that fit into what we were already doing.” The CarbonNow program pays the Nergenahs $9 per acre for using best practices. When the company returns to take soil samples, Nergenah will receive an additional $3 per acre. There is potential for bonus dollars if carbon sequestration results are better than expected. Locus Ag converts data from all farms in the program into carbon sequestration credits that are sold to some of the largest corporations in the world. Corporations buy credits to offset the amount of carbon dioxide they produce in the course of doing business. Carbon credits are essentially "permits" that allow corporations to emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Because part of the Nergenahs land is sloping, they have always had problems with erosion. Thirty years ago, Nergenah's father started experimenting with soybeans, but planting them was more difficult. His father was shocked when John let the cover crop grow waist-high and when John planted corn directly into the cover crop.