Microsoft agrees record purchase of 2.85 million soil credits

Microsoft has agreed to purchase 2.85 million soil carbon credits from Indigo Carbon under a 12-year contract, marking the largest soil-based removal deal yet disclosed by the company as it confronts rising emissions from a fast-expanding data-centre footprint and surging artificial-intelligence workloads. The credits are linked to regenerative agriculture projects in the United States that use practices such as reduced or no tillage, cover crops and managed grazing to increase soil carbon sequestration.

Microsoft said the purchase is part of its broader climate strategy, which includes a goal to be carbon negative by 2030. The company did not disclose the financial terms or which registry and verification protocol will certify the credits. A person with knowledge of the agreement said the credits fall within Indigo Carbon’s historical pricing range of $60 to $80 per ton, which would imply a deal value between roughly $171 million and $228 million; Microsoft has not confirmed that estimate.

The scale of the transaction is significant for both corporate climate plans and the voluntary carbon market. Market data firm Sylvera notes growing corporate demand for soil carbon removals and cites Microsoft’s history of large purchases, including a previous transaction for 2.6 million credits with Agoro Carbon. Major, multi-year offtake agreements like this one stabilize revenue prospects for participating farmers and can underwrite investments in regenerative practices, but they also put pressure on supply and market infrastructure.

Indigo Carbon framed the purchase as a market milestone. Meredith Reisfield, Indigo’s senior director for policy, partnerships and impact, said the transaction “brings the importance of soil carbon removal into corporate climate action” and solidifies Indigo’s “reputation and leadership on high‑integrity carbon credits.” Buyers and sellers alike are pressing for clearer, consistent verification regimes to translate on-farm practices into credible, permanent removals.

Verification remains a central policy and market concern. Earlier soil-carbon transactions have used verification frameworks such as the U.S. Soil Enrichment Protocol (SEP) of the Climate Action Reserve, but public information about this specific 2.85 million-credit contract does not specify which registry or protocol will be used. The absence of disclosed verification details amplifies scrutiny from investors, environmental groups and market monitors focused on measurement accuracy, additionality and permanence.

Economically, the deal signals a maturing supply chain for nature-based removals and a willingness by large tech firms to allocate sizable capital to offsetting strategies. For Microsoft, which continues to scale data-centre capacity and AI services that materially increase electricity use and associated emissions, purchases of removals can be a pragmatic complement to emissions reductions. However, policy analysts warn that corporate demand for offsets should not substitute for faster, direct cuts in energy intensity and grid decarbonization.

In the longer term, sustained corporate offtakes could lift market prices for high-quality soil credits and incentivize wider adoption of regenerative practices across U.S. agriculture. That transition will hinge on standardized verification, transparent pricing, and public policy that aligns incentives for both emissions reduction and carbon removal. As corporate emissions rise with AI and cloud growth, the market and regulators will be watching whether large purchases translate into durable climate outcomes.