Carbon Capture: The $600-per-Ton Challenge Facing Climate Action
Current carbon capture efforts remove approximately 45 million tons of CO₂ annually—equivalent to the emissions of 10 million cars. Yet, a significant barrier remains: Direct Air Capture (DAC) technology costs around $600 per ton of CO₂ captured. Understanding this cost dynamic is essential for effective climate strategy.
Breaking Down Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
- Capture:
Amine scrubbing dominates the sector, accounting for 90% of projects. This method involves flue gases passing through liquid solvents that chemically bind with CO₂. Emerging technologies such as Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and DAC extract CO₂ directly from the atmosphere but incur substantially higher energy and cost demands. - Storage:
Captured CO₂ is primarily sequestered deep underground—typically over 2,500 feet—into saline aquifers or depleted oil fields, exemplified by Norway’s Sleipner project. - Utilization (CCUS):
Approximately 90% of captured CO₂ is currently used for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR), a process that remains controversial but provides vital funding for innovation. Alternative uses, including concrete curing, jet fuel production, and manufacturing baking soda, represent less than 10% of CO₂ utilization and have yet to scale meaningfully.
The Cost Conundrum: Why $600 per Ton Matters
The high cost of DAC stems from the extremely low concentration of CO₂ in ambient air—roughly 300 times more dilute than typical industrial emissions. Despite this, BECCS holds promise by enabling "negative emissions" through the permanent storage of CO₂ generated from biomass combustion. Policy mechanisms such as the U.S. tax credit of $85 per ton aim to improve CCS’s economic feasibility.
The Critical Question for Climate Policy
Is carbon capture and storage a necessary transitional solution or a diversion from renewable energy investments? CCS is indispensable for decarbonizing hard-to-abate sectors like cement and steel manufacturing, but renewables must remain the foundation of climate efforts.
Stakeholder Perspectives:
- Option 1: Invest in CCS as the only viable path to decarbonize heavy industry.
- Option 2: Prioritize renewable energy deployment and view CCS as a temporary fossil fuel subsidy.
How do you assess the future role of CCS in the global energy transition?
