Big Tech buys carbon credits
As AI-driven data‑center demand spikes, major tech firms are increasingly relying on carbon credits to meet climate pledges — but analysts and critics question whether offsets can truly curb the sector’s growing emissions. (oilprice.com). The limits of market‑based offsets are now a live corporate-governance debate as companies scale AI workloads and energy use climbs. (oilprice.com)
Ceezer‑compiled market data cited by CNBC shows purchases of permanent carbon‑removal credits by Microsoft, Amazon, Google and Meta rose from about 14,200 credits in 2022 to roughly 68.4 million credits in 2025. (cnbc.com) Microsoft reported signing agreements to remove about 45 million metric tonnes of CO2 in 2025, including a reported 18‑million‑tonne framework with Rubicon Carbon and multiple multi‑million‑tonne deals with Re.green, CO280 and AtmosClear. (esgtoday.com) (rubiconcarbon.com) (carboncredits.com) (bloomberg.com) Google said it contracted more than $100 million of carbon‑removal credits in 2024—roughly 800,000 tonnes—and in January 2026 agreed nearly 1.2 GW of U.S. carbon‑free energy PPAs to support its data‑center operations. (esgtoday.com) (carboncredits.com) Amazon has launched a carbon‑credit service through its Sustainability Exchange and joined roughly $180 million of rainforest credit purchases, while Meta signed a 10‑year, 676,000‑credit forestry agreement with EFM and a separate BTG Pactual deal that could deliver up to 3.9 million tonnes through 2038. (aboutamazon.com) (cnbc.com) (esgdive.com) (esg‑today.com) Buyers are shifting procurement strategies toward durable removals and long‑term offtake contracts rather than spot offsets, even as Forest Trends’ State of the Voluntary Carbon Market report found transaction volumes fell about 25% in 2024—a sign of tightening liquidity and a focus on credit quality. (ccus‑carbon‑credits.com) (forest‑trends.org) Researchers and market watchdogs say integrity problems persist: peer‑reviewed reviews and major studies find high rates of non‑additionality, leakage and over‑crediting, and the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market has deemed roughly one‑third of legacy credits ineligible for its Core Carbon Principles label. (annual‑review/peer‑review‑summary) (smithschool.ox.ac.uk) (icvcm.org) (greenqueen.com.hk)
