Carbon Capture Technology Faces Uphill Battle in Scaling Efforts

For years, carbon capture and storage (CCS) has been touted as a critical tool in the fight against climate change, offering a way to trap carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels before they enter the atmosphere. The United Nations’ climate science body estimates that between 350 to 1,200 gigatons of CO2 must be stored this century to avoid the worst impacts of global warming. But the gap between technological feasibility and large-scale deployment remains substantial.

CCS involves capturing CO2 at concentrated emission sources such as smokestacks or industrial facilities, then compressing and transporting it via pipelines or trains for geological storage in aquifers or depleted oil reservoirs. This differs from carbon dioxide removal (CDR), which extracts CO2 already present in the atmosphere using distinct capture technologies.

“Given the legacy of emissions in the atmosphere, given where we are in terms of emissions reductions, we’re going to need these approaches,” said Wil Burns, co-director of the Institute for Carbon Removal Law & Policy at American University. “We just have to figure out how to use them thoughtfully and still keep our eye on the prize of decarbonizing.”

The technology itself is proven, but commercial scaling presents formidable obstacles. Susan Hovorka, a geoscientist at the University of Texas-Austin who has researched CCS since 1998, affirmed: “It’s ready to go, technologically. We know how to do this process.” Yet Danny Cullenward, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania’s Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, pointed out that “what is not well-established and basically doesn’t exist at scale is the commercial experience doing this” and proving it is cost-effective across diverse locations.

CCS traces its origins to the 1960s, when oil companies began injecting CO2 into depleted fields for enhanced oil recovery. The first large-scale emission-reduction project launched in Norway in 1996. By 2020, 26 operational commercial facilities existed worldwide; as of last summer, that number nearly tripled. Currently, 77 operating plants capture 64 million tons annually, far short of the International Energy Agency’s projection of 7.6 gigatons per year by 2050—a gap requiring a 119-fold increase.

Starting this week, European fertilizer giant Yara will open Europe’s largest carbon capture project at its Sluiskil plant in the Netherlands. The facility will capture 800,000 metric tons of CO2 annually, liquefy it, and ship it to Norway’s Atlantic coast for storage 2,600 meters beneath the seabed. However, meeting the UN’s lower-bound target of 350 gigatons would require roughly 5,800 additional Yara-sized plants.

Researchers also warned that global CCS storage capacity may be far more limited than previously thought. While earlier estimates placed potential storage between 10,000 and 40,000 gigatons, a new study published in Nature found the realistic figure is approximately 1,460 gigatons—meaning most climate scenarios relying heavily on CCS would exceed planetary storage limits within 250 years.

Cullenward criticized climate models for underestimating renewable energy and overrelying on unproven technologies. “If you tell a model to solve an impossible problem, it’s like pouring water down a flight of stairs—it’s going to find the fastest way to get to the bottom,” he explained.

The debate also includes concerns about moral hazard and fossil fuel industry ties. In 2023, about 80% of global CCS capacity supported enhanced oil recovery, which ultimately increases emissions. Still, advocates argue CCS remains essential for hard-to-abate sectors like cement production. As Cullenward concluded, “I don’t think we’re going to get to five or 10 or 20 gigatons a year of carbon removal. But we may need to get as much as we can.”