The promise and peril of CCS – a technology that must be viewed with extreme skepticism

As the concentration of carbon (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere continues to rise, some experts believe that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) may become necessary at some point to remove some of the carbon we’ve already pumped into the atmosphere.

That, however, only becomes practical if the technology reaches a point where it can remove huge volumes of the stuff and at a reasonable cost – neither of which is currently the case. But that does not stop the fossil fuel companies from betting on CCS, not necessarily because they are concerned about a changing climate but because it gives them an excuse to carry on with their profitable business-as-usual plans.

The skeptics, however, say CCS must be viewed with extreme skepticism and only as a last resort.

The stakes, naturally, are huge for anyone who can develop, demonstrate, and deploy the technology at reasonable cost and large enough scale to make a meaningful contribution to the problem. Which explains why many large and small companies are trying, supported by generous government subsidies, corporations, and philanthropic organisations around the world.

In a 15 Dec 2023 article titled A Long-Shot Climate Bet Suddenly Turns Hot, The Wall Street Journal highlighted a
number of attempts at capturing and removing carbon, some more promising than others. It claims that serious money is going into research, development and demonstration (RD&D) for at least two obvious reasons:

– First, there is strong and growing demand from hard-to-abate sectors of the economy such as airlines (see article on page 22) who wish to meet their climate goals by buying carbon credits so that they can carry on business as usual; and

– Second, the fossil fuel industry is betting their future on being able to offset their considerable emissions by removing an equivalent amount from the atmosphere to placate their critics and the government mandates that are likely to become more stringent over time.

The WSJ article reports that companies purchased about $1.6 billion worth of carbon removal credits in the first 11 months of 2023, up from $333 million during the same period in 2022, according to CDR.fyi, a data provider.

It said, “The investments are accelerating the development of technologies that aren’t yet operational on a large scale, but could one day help neutralize the emissions companies can’t eliminate.”

According to Giana Amador, executive director of the Carbon Removal Alliance, an industry group, “We’re at this really exciting inflection point.”

The article names several companies engaged in CCS and/or direct air capture (DAC) schemes including one reportedly building a carbon removal plant in Western Texas with a $550 million investment from BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager.

“Once it is up and running in 2025, the plant will use fan-like devices roughly the size of tennis courts to pull carbon from the air and bury it underground, a process known as direct-air capture.”

Such investments are generously encouraged by the US and other governments who typically offer grants and tax credits or otherwise support the purchasing of carbon removal credits.

The article notes that CCS and DAC are: “… considered essential because the world is expected to continue burning fossil fuels for decades even in the most optimistic scenarios. Carbon removal could help neutralize those emissions, as well as some of what is already in the atmosphere, but it hasn’t been proven at anywhere near the scale that is needed.”

The efforts to date would remove perhaps as much as 5 million metric tons of carbon, which may sound like a lot but is a mere fraction of the billions of metric tons a year that need to be removed if it is to make a dent in addressing global warming.

The investment by BlackRock is nevertheless significant as it “…signals that Wall Street sees the industry as potentially lucrative.”

Describing the venture, Mark Florian, BlackRock’s global head of diversified infrastructure said, “We’re not doing it to be green.”

Reportedly BlackRock is also backing Occidental Petroleum in its first DAC plant with Climeworks, a European startup.

When operational, the scheme is expected to remove 500,000 metric tons of emissions annually, roughly the annual emissions of 100,000 gasoline-powered cars. As a point of reference, there are over 14 million cars in California alone. It is, however, a good place to start.

The WSJ article lists several companies engaged in CCS and/or DAC including:

– Graphyte, a company working with American Airlines, who claims it can remove carbon at $100 a metric ton, which is a fraction of what companies pay for direct-air capture. Airlines are among the most hard-pressed industries when it comes to reducing their carbon footprint hence likely candidates for buying offset credits; and

– Lithos, who is backed by Google’s parent company, Alphabet and Facebook’s parent Meta Platforms, which claims that the $100 a metric ton price could be within reach by 2030.

Others are removing carbon the proven, slow and old-fashioned way: by planting tens of millions of trees.

If one scheme does not work, perhaps another will, eventually. But the scale of the problem and the current costs suggest that such schemes should be viewed with extreme skepticism.

The technology is as promising as nuclear fusion, and possibly just as farfetched to be practical, economic and on a scale that would make a difference. Until then, it is better not to emit carbon when and if possible.

This article was originally published by EEnergyInformer. Republished here with permission.