Q&A: Does the world need ‘carbon capture and storage’ to re…

Summary

<p>When carbon dioxide (CO2) is released from a factory or power plant, the gas can be captured and permanently stored…</p> <p>The post <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-does-the-world-need-carbon-capture-and-storage-to-reach-net-zero">Q&A: Does the world need ‘carbon capture and storage’ to reach net-zero?</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org">Carbon Brief</a>.</p>

<div class="print-share wp-block">
<button class="g-button g-button--secondary g-button--icon" type="button"><span class="g-button__content">Print article</span><span class="g-button__icon"><svg fill="none" height="24" viewBox="0 0 24 24" width="24" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
<path d="M20.1253 6.9375H18.5625V3.75C18.5625 3.60082 18.5032 3.45774 18.3977 3.35225C18.2923 3.24676 18.1492 3.1875 18 3.1875H6C5.85082 3.1875 5.70774 3.24676 5.60225 3.35225C5.49676 3.45774 5.4375 3.60082 5.4375 3.75V6.9375H3.87469C2.66906 6.9375 1.6875 7.86281 1.6875 9V16.5C1.6875 16.6492 1.74676 16.7923 1.85225 16.8977C1.95774 17.0032 2.10082 17.0625 2.25 17.0625H5.4375V20.25C5.4375 20.3992 5.49676 20.5423 5.60225 20.6477C5.70774 20.7532 5.85082 20.8125 6 20.8125H18C18.1492 20.8125 18.2923 20.7532 18.3977 20.6477C18.5032 20.5423 18.5625 20.3992 18.5625 20.25V17.0625H21.75C21.8992 17.0625 22.0423 17.0032 22.1477 16.8977C22.2532 16.7923 22.3125 16.6492 22.3125 16.5V9C22.3125 7.86281 21.3309 6.9375 20.1253 6.9375ZM6.5625 4.3125H17.4375V6.9375H6.5625V4.3125ZM17.4375 19.6875H6.5625V14.8125H17.4375V19.6875ZM21.1875 15.9375H18.5625V14.25C18.5625 14.1008 18.5032 13.9577 18.3977 13.8523C18.2923 13.7468 18.1492 13.6875 18 13.6875H6C5.85082 13.6875 5.70774 13.7468 5.60225 13.8523C5.49676 13.9577 5.4375 14.1008 5.4375 14.25V15.9375H2.8125V9C2.8125 8.48344 3.28875 8.0625 3.87469 8.0625H20.1253C20.7113 8.0625 21.1875 8.48344 21.1875 9V15.9375ZM18.5625 10.875C18.5625 11.0604 18.5075 11.2417 18.4045 11.3958C18.3015 11.55 18.1551 11.6702 17.9838 11.7411C17.8125 11.8121 17.624 11.8307 17.4421 11.7945C17.2602 11.7583 17.0932 11.669 16.9621 11.5379C16.831 11.4068 16.7417 11.2398 16.7055 11.0579C16.6693 10.876 16.6879 10.6875 16.7589 10.5162C16.8298 10.3449 16.95 10.1985 17.1042 10.0955C17.2583 9.99248 17.4396 9.9375 17.625 9.9375C17.8736 9.9375 18.1121 10.0363 18.2879 10.2121C18.4637 10.3879 18.5625 10.6264 18.5625 10.875Z" fill="currentColor">
</svg></span></button> <button class="g-button g-button--secondary g-button--icon" type="button"><span class="g-button__content">Share</span><span class="g-button__icon"><svg fill="none" height="24" viewBox="0 0 24 24" width="24" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
<path d="M22.1475 10.1025L14.6475 2.60249C14.5688 2.52393 14.4686 2.47043 14.3596 2.44877C14.2505 2.42711 14.1375 2.43825 14.0348 2.48078C13.9321 2.52331 13.8443 2.59533 13.7824 2.68774C13.7206 2.78016 13.6876 2.88881 13.6875 2.99999V6.95624C8.57999 7.29281 2.40092 12.1125 1.69405 18.2681C1.67109 18.4641 1.71058 18.6624 1.80688 18.8346C1.90318 19.0069 2.05138 19.1444 2.23038 19.2275C2.40937 19.3106 2.61003 19.3351 2.80377 19.2975C2.99751 19.2599 3.17444 19.1621 3.30936 19.0181C4.36499 17.8922 8.15624 14.3062 13.6875 14.0747V18C13.6876 18.1112 13.7206 18.2198 13.7824 18.3122C13.8443 18.4047 13.9321 18.4767 14.0348 18.5192C14.1375 18.5617 14.2505 18.5729 14.3596 18.5512C14.4686 18.5296 14.5688 18.4761 14.6475 18.3975L22.1475 10.8975C22.2528 10.792 22.312 10.6491 22.312 10.5C22.312 10.3509 22.2528 10.208 22.1475 10.1025ZM14.8125 16.6425V13.5C14.8125 13.3508 14.7532 13.2077 14.6477 13.1022C14.5422 12.9968 14.3992 12.9375 14.25 12.9375C11.6503 12.9375 9.11624 13.6172 6.71999 14.9578C5.32332 15.7424 4.03681 16.7086 2.89405 17.8312C3.33467 15.3412 4.78405 12.9562 7.01905 11.0559C9.23155 9.18187 11.9334 8.06249 14.25 8.06249C14.3992 8.06249 14.5422 8.00323 14.6477 7.89774C14.7532 7.79225 14.8125 7.64918 14.8125 7.49999V4.35843L20.954 10.5L14.8125 16.6425Z" fill="currentColor">
</svg></span></button> </div>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">When carbon dioxide (CO2) is released from a factory or power plant, the gas can be captured and permanently stored underground, preventing it from driving climate change.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This is the idea underpinning carbon capture and storage (CCS), a technology that is at the heart of many nations’ <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-025-02043-4.pdf">net-zero plans</a>.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Influential organisations, <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FullReport.pdf">including</a> the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/">Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a> (IPCC), describe CCS as “critical” for cutting emissions from key sectors – and for helping to avoid dangerous global warming.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">In particular, capturing CO2 is seen as one of the only viable options for decarbonising some of the world’s highest-emitting industries, such as <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-why-cement-emissions-matter-for-climate-change/">cement</a> production.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The UK, for example, has <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-reignites-industrial-heartlands-10-days-out-from-the-international-investment-summit">committed</a> to investing as much as £21.7bn over the coming decades in its nascent CCS industry, as part of the nation’s <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-the-uk-governments-carbon-budget-delivery-plan-for-2035/">net-zero strategy</a>.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Yet, in the UK and elsewhere, there has been a <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20240926201852/https://www.campaigncc.org/sites/data/files/sites/data/files/Docs/letter_to_sos_-_blue_hydrogen_and_ccus.pdf">backlash</a> against plans for CCS.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Citing <a href="https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-12/Assessing-the-relative-costs-of-high-CCS-and-low-CCS-pathways-to-1-5-degrees.pdf">high costs</a>, ties to the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112500187X?dgcid=author">fossil-fuel industry</a> and a “<a href="https://thebulletin.org/2022/09/plagued-by-failures-carbon-capture-is-no-climate-solution/">history of poor performance</a>”, critics describe CCS as a “<a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/comment-carbon-capture-storage-is-dangerous-distraction-its-time-imagine-world-2023-12-11/">dangerous distraction</a>” or a “<a href="https://earthjustice.org/article/carbon-capture-the-fossil-fuel-industrys-false-climate-solution">false climate solution</a>”. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Time and again, the outlook for the roll-out of CCS has been scaled back, as the technology has failed to deliver as quickly as expected – and as policy support has wavered.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Furthermore, critics state that the technology remains “<a href="https://ieefa.org/ccs">unproven</a>” on the scale required to make a meaningful impact on global emissions.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">In this Q&A, Carbon Brief explores the role CCS is expected to play in achieving net-zero, its record to date and the reasons it has been criticised, using the UK as an example.</p>

<div class="article-summary__content">
<p></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="#what-is-ccs">What is CCS?</a></li>
<li><a href="#how-much-ccs-capacity-has-been-built-so-far">How much CCS capacity has been built so far?</a></li>
<li><a href="#what-role-is-ccs-expected-to-play-in-reaching-net-zero">What role is CCS expected to play in reaching net-zero?</a></li>
<li><a href="#why-is-ccs-controversial">Why is CCS controversial?</a></li>
<li><a href="#what-are-the-uks-plans-for-scaling-up-ccs">What are the UK’s plans for scaling up CCS?</a></li>
</ul>
</div>

</div>

<div class="article-contents__title__icon">
<svg fill="none" height="32" viewBox="0 0 32 32" width="32" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
<path d="M29 6.25H20C19.2027 6.25059 18.4184 6.45185 17.7194 6.83523C17.0204 7.21861 16.4291 7.77178 16 8.44375C15.5709 7.77178 14.9796 7.21861 14.2806 6.83523C13.5816 6.45185 12.7973 6.25059 12 6.25H3C2.80109 6.25 2.61032 6.32902 2.46967 6.46967C2.32902 6.61032 2.25 6.80109 2.25 7V25C2.25 25.1989 2.32902 25.3897 2.46967 25.5303C2.61032 25.671 2.80109 25.75 3 25.75H12C12.862 25.75 13.6886 26.0924 14.2981 26.7019C14.9076 27.3114 15.25 28.138 15.25 29C15.25 29.1989 15.329 29.3897 15.4697 29.5303C15.6103 29.671 15.8011 29.75 16 29.75C16.1989 29.75 16.3897 29.671 16.5303 29.5303C16.671 29.3897 16.75 29.1989 16.75 29C16.75 28.138 17.0924 27.3114 17.7019 26.7019C18.3114 26.0924 19.138 25.75 20 25.75H29C29.1989 25.75 29.3897 25.671 29.5303 25.5303C29.671 25.3897 29.75 25.1989 29.75 25V7C29.75 6.80109 29.671 6.61032 29.5303 6.46967C29.3897 6.32902 29.1989 6.25 29 6.25ZM12 24.25H3.75V7.75H12C12.862 7.75 13.6886 8.09241 14.2981 8.7019C14.9076 9.3114 15.25 10.138 15.25 11V25.5387C14.3709 24.7101 13.2081 24.249 12 24.25ZM28.25 24.25H20C18.7917 24.2495 17.629 24.711 16.75 25.54V11C16.75 10.138 17.0924 9.3114 17.7019 8.7019C18.3114 8.09241 19.138 7.75 20 7.75H28.25V24.25ZM20 11.25H25C25.1989 11.25 25.3897 11.329 25.5303 11.4697C25.671 11.6103 25.75 11.8011 25.75 12C25.75 12.1989 25.671 12.3897 25.5303 12.5303C25.3897 12.671 25.1989 12.75 25 12.75H20C19.8011 12.75 19.6103 12.671 19.4697 12.5303C19.329 12.3897 19.25 12.1989 19.25 12C19.25 11.8011 19.329 11.6103 19.4697 11.4697C19.6103 11.329 19.8011 11.25 20 11.25ZM25.75 16C25.75 16.1989 25.671 16.3897 25.5303 16.5303C25.3897 16.671 25.1989 16.75 25 16.75H20C19.8011 16.75 19.6103 16.671 19.4697 16.5303C19.329 16.3897 19.25 16.1989 19.25 16C19.25 15.8011 19.329 15.6103 19.4697 15.4697C19.6103 15.329 19.8011 15.25 20 15.25H25C25.1989 15.25 25.3897 15.329 25.5303 15.4697C25.671 15.6103 25.75 15.8011 25.75 16ZM25.75 20C25.75 20.1989 25.671 20.3897 25.5303 20.5303C25.3897 20.671 25.1989 20.75 25 20.75H20C19.8011 20.75 19.6103 20.671 19.4697 20.5303C19.329 20.3897 19.25 20.1989 19.25 20C19.25 19.8011 19.329 19.6103 19.4697 19.4697C19.6103 19.329 19.8011 19.25 20 19.25H25C25.1989 19.25 25.3897 19.329 25.5303 19.4697C25.671 19.6103 25.75 19.8011 25.75 20Z" fill="currentColor">
</svg> </div>

<div class="article-contents__title__text">
Article Contents </div>

</div>

<a class="g-button g-button--secondary article-contents__toggle article-contents__toggle--open g-button--primary g-button--icon"><span class="g-button__content">Expand<span> menu</span></span><span class="g-button__icon"><svg fill="none" height="28" viewBox="0 0 28 28" width="28" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
<path d="M24.9375 14C24.9375 14.3481 24.7992 14.6819 24.5531 14.9281C24.3069 15.1742 23.9731 15.3125 23.625 15.3125H4.375C4.0269 15.3125 3.69306 15.1742 3.44692 14.9281C3.20078 14.6819 3.0625 14.3481 3.0625 14C3.0625 13.6519 3.20078 13.3181 3.44692 13.0719C3.69306 12.8258 4.0269 12.6875 4.375 12.6875H23.625C23.9731 12.6875 24.3069 12.8258 24.5531 13.0719C24.7992 13.3181 24.9375 13.6519 24.9375 14ZM4.375 8.3125H23.625C23.9731 8.3125 24.3069 8.17422 24.5531 7.92808C24.7992 7.68194 24.9375 7.3481 24.9375 7C24.9375 6.6519 24.7992 6.31806 24.5531 6.07192C24.3069 5.82578 23.9731 5.6875 23.625 5.6875H4.375C4.0269 5.6875 3.69306 5.82578 3.44692 6.07192C3.20078 6.31806 3.0625 6.6519 3.0625 7C3.0625 7.3481 3.20078 7.68194 3.44692 7.92808C3.69306 8.17422 4.0269 8.3125 4.375 8.3125ZM23.625 19.6875H4.375C4.0269 19.6875 3.69306 19.8258 3.44692 20.0719C3.20078 20.3181 3.0625 20.6519 3.0625 21C3.0625 21.3481 3.20078 21.6819 3.44692 21.9281C3.69306 22.1742 4.0269 22.3125 4.375 22.3125H23.625C23.9731 22.3125 24.3069 22.1742 24.5531 21.9281C24.7992 21.6819 24.9375 21.3481 24.9375 21C24.9375 20.6519 24.7992 20.3181 24.5531 20.0719C24.3069 19.8258 23.9731 19.6875 23.625 19.6875Z" fill="currentColor">
</svg></span></a> <a class="g-button g-button--secondary article-contents__toggle article-contents__toggle--close g-button--primary g-button--icon" hidden="hidden"><span class="g-button__content">Close</span><span class="g-button__icon"><svg fill="none" height="24" viewBox="0 0 24 24" width="24" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
<path d="M19.5459 17.954C19.7572 18.1653 19.876 18.452 19.876 18.7509C19.876 19.0497 19.7572 19.3364 19.5459 19.5477C19.3346 19.7591 19.0479 19.8778 18.749 19.8778C18.4501 19.8778 18.1635 19.7591 17.9521 19.5477L12 13.5937L6.0459 19.5459C5.83455 19.7572 5.54791 19.8759 5.24902 19.8759C4.95014 19.8759 4.66349 19.7572 4.45215 19.5459C4.2408 19.3345 4.12207 19.0479 4.12207 18.749C4.12207 18.4501 4.2408 18.1635 4.45215 17.9521L10.4062 11.9999L4.45402 6.04586C4.24268 5.83451 4.12395 5.54787 4.12395 5.24898C4.12395 4.9501 4.24268 4.66345 4.45402 4.45211C4.66537 4.24076 4.95201 4.12203 5.2509 4.12203C5.54978 4.12203 5.83643 4.24076 6.04777 4.45211L12 10.4062L17.954 4.45117C18.1654 4.23983 18.452 4.12109 18.7509 4.12109C19.0498 4.12109 19.3364 4.23983 19.5478 4.45117C19.7591 4.66251 19.8778 4.94916 19.8778 5.24804C19.8778 5.54693 19.7591 5.83358 19.5478 6.04492L13.5937 11.9999L19.5459 17.954Z" fill="currentColor">
</svg></span></a>
</div>

<div class="article-contents__content" hidden="hidden">
<ul class="article-contents__list article-contents__list--columns-1">
<li class="article-contents__item article-contents__item--level-2">
<a href="#what-is-ccs">
<span>What is CCS?</span> </a>
</li>
<li class="article-contents__item article-contents__item--level-2">
<a href="#how-much-ccs-capacity-has-been-built-so-far">
<span>How much CCS capacity has been built so far?</span> </a>
</li>
<li class="article-contents__item article-contents__item--level-2">
<a href="#what-role-is-ccs-expected-to-play-in-reaching-net-zero">
<span>What role is CCS expected to play in reaching net-zero?</span> </a>
</li>
<li class="article-contents__item article-contents__item--level-2">
<a href="#why-is-ccs-controversial">
<span>Why is CCS controversial?</span> </a>
</li>
<li class="article-contents__item article-contents__item--level-2">
<a href="#what-are-the-uks-plans-for-scaling-up-ccs">
<span>What are the UK’s plans for scaling up CCS?</span> </a>
</li>
</ul>
</div>

</div>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">CCS involves capturing CO2 emissions released from a large source, such as a gas power plant or a <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-why-cement-emissions-matter-for-climate-change/">cement factory</a>.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The CO2 is separated from the facility’s exhaust stream, <a href="https://www.shell.com/what-we-do/carbon-capture-and-storage.html#iframe=L3dlYmFwcHMvQ0NTX0dsb2JlLw==">generally using</a> a chemical solvent, before being compressed into a liquid and transported via pipeline or vehicle. The CO2 is then stored by injecting it into underground reservoirs, such as depleted oil fields or <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0016236124008925">saline aquifers</a>.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The term “CCUS” is sometimes also used, referring to the “utilisation” of CO2 to make products, including <a href="https://www.iea.org/energy-system/carbon-capture-utilisation-and-storage/co2-capture-and-utilisation">fertilisers</a>, <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/ccus-in-clean-energy-transitions/ccus-in-the-transition-to-net-zero-emissions">fuels</a> or building materials. Such uses do not <a href="https://www.iea.org/energy-system/carbon-capture-utilisation-and-storage/co2-capture-and-utilisation">necessarily</a> lead to permanent emissions cuts, as the CO2 can end up later <a href="https://www.iea.org/commentaries/can-co2-eor-really-provide-carbon-negative-oil">being released</a> back into the atmosphere. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">(“CCS” is used in this Q&A, unless quoting another organisation that specifically refers to “CCUS”.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The infographic below shows the stages of capturing CO2 and transporting it to be either stored or used in other applications.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image alignwide size-full"><img alt="Infographic showing the stages of capturing, transporting and then storing or using CO2." class="wp-image-80609" height="519" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/image-17.png" width="2048" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Infographic adapted by Carbon Brief from the IEA.</figcaption></figure>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Carbon capture technology was <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095809922001357#b0075">originally</a> rolled out at US and Canadian oil wells in the early 1970s as a way to achieve “<a href="https://www.energy.gov/fecm/enhanced-oil-recovery">enhanced oil recovery</a>”. This involves injecting captured CO2 into depleted wells – a process that <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/storing-co2-through-enhanced-oil-recovery">stores</a> CO2, but also helps to extract more oil.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This remains, by far, the most significant end use for captured CO2 worldwide, with around three-quarters of it used for this purpose. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Moreover, most of the CO2 currently captured is a <a href="https://www2.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/climateChange/CCS/RemovalCO2NaturalGas.html">by-product</a> of gas purification – the process by which fossil fuels such as methane are separated from other, unwanted substances. Selling this CO2 can make such gas projects more economically viable.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Therefore, as shown in the chart below, which is based on <a href="https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-product/ccus-projects-database#">International Energy Agency (IEA) data</a>, the majority of CO2 that is both captured and used today helps the fossil-fuel industry to extract and sell more oil and gas.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">CCS was <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1750583620306642">first proposed</a> as a way to deal with CO2 emissions in a 1976 <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/bf00162777">academic article</a>, which imagined injecting the captured gas into the ocean.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">It is only since the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590332221005418#bib6">early 2000s</a> that CCS has gained traction as a proposed climate solution, with a 2005 “<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/srccs_wholereport-1.pdf">special report</a>” by the IPCC exploring the topic. At that time, the authors note there were just three small-scale projects trying to capture and permanently store CO2.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Installing CCS at factories or power plants and permanently storing the CO2 would mean that, in theory, such facilities could continue using fossil fuels without contributing to climate change. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Such applications are often mentioned alongside two related technologies, both of which could be used to “suck” CO2 out of the atmosphere and, thus, deliver “<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/negative-emissions-scientists-debate-role-of-co2-removal-in-tackling-climate-change">negative emissions</a>”.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">One is <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/beccs-the-story-of-climate-changes-saviour-technology/">bioenergy with carbon capture and storage</a> (BECCS). Crops absorb CO2 as they grow and BECCS  involves a power plant burning these crops, then storing the resulting CO2. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The other technology is <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/direct-co2-capture-machines-could-use-quarter-global-energy-in-2100/">direct air carbon capture and storage</a> (DACCS). </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">These technologies are classed as “<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-the-current-state-of-carbon-dioxide-removal-around-the-world">CO2 removal</a>”, as they involve absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere using plants or machines and then storing it permanently.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">By contrast, CCS installed at a factory is considered a way to avoid CO2 emitted by that specific facility from entering the atmosphere. This Q&A focuses on such applications, which account for the vast majority of existing and planned CCS.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img alt="Extract from study by Marchetti, C. (1977), saying: The problem of CO2 control in the atmosphere is tackled by proposing a kind of ‘fuel cycle’ for fossil fuels where CO2 is partially or totally collected at certain transformation points and properly disposed of. CO2 is disposed of by injection into suitable sinking thermohaline currents that carry and spread it into the deep ocean that has a very large equilibrium capacity. The Mediterranean undercurrent entering the Atlantic at Gibraltar has been identified as one such current; it would have sufficient capacity to deal with all CO2 produced in Europe even in the year 2100." class="wp-image-80611" height="624" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/image-19-1024x624.png" width="1024" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">First mention in the academic literature of capturing and storing CO2 for climate change mitigation. Source: Marchetti, C. (1977).</figcaption></figure>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="how-much-ccs-capacity-has-been-built-so-far">How much CCS capacity has been built so far?</h2>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">As of February 2026, there were a total of 75 operational CCS projects around the world. As noted above, <a href="https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/f065ae5e-94ed-4fcb-8f17-8ceffde8bdd2/TheOilandGasIndustryinNetZeroTransitions.pdf">almost all</a> of them are at fossil-fuel extraction and processing sites, according to the IEA’s <a href="https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-product/ccus-projects-database#">database</a>. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Together, these projects capture 62.5m tonnes of CO2 (MtCO2) each year. This is equivalent to the annual <a href="https://zenodo.org/records/14054503">greenhouse gas emissions</a> of Ecuador.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">(This compares with the <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/around-the-world-in-22-carbon-capture-projects/">22 CCS projects</a>, promising to capture 40MtCO2 annually, that were operational or under construction as of 2014.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">As the chart below shows, the amount of CO2 currently being captured and stored is a tiny fraction of the total emissions from fossil-fuel use.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="Annual global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, compared to amount captured and stored. A square chart visually compares total fossil CO2 at 38.1bn to a tiny 0.06bn captured and stored. CCS projects currently capture less than 0.2% of the world's fossil-fuel emissions. Source: IEA, Global Carbon Budget." class="wp-image-80629" height="2643" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/ccs-projects-current_2-scaled.png" width="3000" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">“CO2 captured and stored” includes all projects that capture CO2 and use it for enhanced oil recovery, store it permanently underground or use it “with significant climate benefits”, according to the IEA.</figcaption></figure>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">In a 2020 <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/ccus-in-clean-energy-transitions">report</a>, the IEA explained that the “story of CCUS has largely been one of unmet expectations: its potential to mitigate climate change has been recognised for decades, but deployment has been slow”.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">A <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590332221005418#bib6">wave of interest</a> in CCS in the <a href="https://www.airclim.org/sites/default/files/acidnews_pdf/an1-19.pdf">2000s</a>, largely from countries in <a href="https://idric.org/wp-content/uploads/MIP4.3_The-resurrection-of-CCS.pdf">Europe</a> and North America, focused on enabling coal power plants to continue operating with lower emissions. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This interest largely petered out, as plummeting renewable energy costs weakened the case for coal plants with CCS. Today, there are <a href="https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-product/ccus-projects-database#">only seven</a> operating CCS-coal plants worldwide – five in China, one in the US and one in Canada.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Yet the <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/interactive-the-paris-agreement-on-climate-change/">Paris Agreement</a> in 2015 – and the national net-zero targets that <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-the-uk-becomes-first-major-economy-to-set-net-zero-climate-goal/">followed</a> – highlighted the need for deep emissions cuts in sectors that <a href="https://theconversation.com/relying-on-carbon-capture-and-storage-may-be-a-dangerous-trap-for-uk-industry-197545">previously expected</a> to continue emitting for decades. This, once again, has <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590332221005418#bib6">fuelled interest</a> in the use of CCS.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">In recent years, there has also been growing interest in<strong> </strong>producing <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-does-the-world-need-hydrogen-to-solve-climate-change/">low-carbon “blue” hydrogen</a> from gas with CCS. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Hydrogen is <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-does-the-world-need-hydrogen-to-solve-climate-change/">widely seen</a> as key for decarbonising <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s44359-025-00050-4">certain sectors</a> – particularly in industry – but <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-can-green-hydrogen-grow-fast-enough-for-1-5c/">analyses suggest</a> that it may be difficult to make sufficient “green” hydrogen using renewable power on the timescales required.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">As the map below shows, most CCS capacity is based in the US and Canada, with other major fossil-fuel producers such as Norway, Brazil and the Gulf states also contributing.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="World map showing CCS facilities are currently concentrated in oil-and-gas producing nations. The US has the highest capacity at 26.8 MtCO2, followed by Brazil (14.2), Canada (10), and China (7). Source: IEA." class="wp-image-80628" height="2067" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/ccs-facilities-are-c_3-scaled.png" width="3000" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Projects listed in the <a href="https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-product/ccus-projects-database#">IEA CCUS database</a> as split between two countries are divided equally between them. This includes projects that only store CO2, but it excludes projects that only transport CO2. DACCS projects are excluded.</figcaption></figure>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">A surge of projects have entered the global CCS pipeline in recent years. According to the <a href="https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-product/ccus-projects-database#">IEA</a>, 93.7MtCO2 of capture or storage capacity is under construction as of February 2026 and another 1,279.6MtCO2 is in the “planning” stages.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">“Planned” projects include any initiative at early concept, feasibility or engineering study stages and the industry has a <a href="https://drilled.media/news/ccs-debunker">long history</a> of projects being cancelled or delayed. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Nevertheless, this pipeline of projects could lead to a large expansion of facilities dedicated to permanent CO2 storage that does not involve extracting more oil.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The planned projects – if they are realised – would also include significant growth in sectors where CCS is virtually non-existent, such as steel, hydrogen and cement production, as shown in the chart below.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="Global CCS capacity in different sectors, MtCO2, with projects planned for operation by 2030. Planned capacity dominates across all sectors, led by CO2 storage at nearly 400 MtCO2. CCS capacity would see significant growth if 'planned' projects go ahead. Source: IEA" class="wp-image-80637" height="1282" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/ccs-capacity-would-g-1-scaled.png" width="3000" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">A project is considered “under construction” by the IEA if a final investment decision has been announced and construction is on-going or imminent. A project is considered “planned” if it is at concept, feasibility or engineering study stage.</figcaption></figure>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="what-role-is-ccs-expected-to-play-in-reaching-net-zero">What role is CCS expected to play in reaching net-zero?</h2>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">It will be impossible to stop dangerous climate change unless the world reaches net-zero emissions, <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-the-ipccs-sixth-assessment-report-on-climate-science/">according</a> to the IPCC. The amount of global warming – and whether the <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/interactive-the-paris-agreement-on-climate-change/">Paris Agreement</a> temperature target can be met – depends on when net-zero is reached.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph"><a href="https://www.ief.org/_resources/files/reports/outlook-comparison-report.pdf">Many global pathways</a> that have been set out for achieving net-zero, including a majority of the <a href="https://data.ece.iiasa.ac.at/ar6/#/workspaces/2123">IPCC-assessed pathways</a> where global warming is limited to 1.5C, rely on the use of CCS at fossil-fuel plants and industrial sites.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">“These models have been quite instrumental in bringing CCS back onto the agenda,” <a href="https://www.lucsus.lu.se/lina-lefstad">Lina Lefstad</a>, an ecological economist at <a href="https://www.lucsus.lu.se/">Lund University</a>, tells Carbon Brief. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Influential organisations relying on CCS in their net-zero scenarios range from the  <a href="https://www.irena.org/">International Renewable Energy Agency</a> (IRENA) through to the oil company <a href="https://www.shell.com/news-and-insights/scenarios/the-2025-energy-security-scenarios.html">Shell</a>. The IEA has <a href="https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/181b48b4-323f-454d-96fb-0bb1889d96a9/CCUS_in_clean_energy_transitions.pdf">stated</a> that net-zero would be “virtually impossible” without CCS.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">These scenarios often include 10s to 100s of times more CCS capacity being built in the coming decades. The IEA <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/ccus">includes</a> 1.7GtCO2 being captured by 2035 in its net-zero scenario – nearly 30 times more than is captured today.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">(Some of the much higher numbers in scenarios assessed by the IPCC have been dismissed by experts as <a href="https://x.com/Peters_Glen/status/1732740118832611499?s=20">implausible</a>, especially given the <a href="https://bsky.app/profile/glenpeters.bsky.social/post/3kquf3uqtic24">slow rollout</a> of CCS to date.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">When considering CCS for both emissions cuts and removals, <a href="https://www.strath.ac.uk/staff/robertsjendr/">Dr Jennifer Roberts</a>, a researcher at the University of Strathclyde and deputy director at the <a href="https://ukccsrc.ac.uk/">UK Carbon Capture and Storage Research Centre</a> (UKCCSRC), tells Carbon Brief the situation is clear:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p class="is-style-typestyle-large wp-block-paragraph">“From an IPCC climate modelling perspective…reaching net-zero without CCS is far more expensive, disruptive and potentially out of reach.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-how-integrated-assessment-models-are-used-to-study-climate-change/">does not mean</a> that it would be impossible to reach net-zero without using CCS. However, net-zero <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/world-can-limit-global-warming-to-onepointfive-without-beccs/">scenarios</a> that use little or no CCS rely on dramatic changes elsewhere, such as <a href="https://iiasa.ac.at/models-tools-data/led">much lower</a> global energy demand.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Net-zero scenarios often include a crucial role for CCS in “<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/major-emitters-may-retain-or-expand-fossil-fuels-despite-net-zero-plans/">hard-to-abate</a>” sectors, referring to activities that lack available, low-cost options to fully decarbonise. In particular, CCS is <a href="https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8ad619b9-17aa-473d-8a2f-4b90846f5c19/NetZeroRoadmap_AGlobalPathwaytoKeepthe1.5CGoalinReach-2023Update.pdf">widely</a> <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590332221005418#bib6">seen</a> as vital for decarbonising parts of heavy industry. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The IPCC <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/carbon-briefs-definitive-guide-to-the-entire-ipcc-sixth-assessment-cycle">sixth assessment report</a> (AR6) summary for policymakers <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FullReport.pdf">calls</a> CCS a “critical mitigation option” for some sectors, including cement and chemicals. The technical summary of the AR6 Working Group III report <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FullReport.pdf">says</a> that “CCS will be required to mitigate remaining CO2” in industrial sectors.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The IEA <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/about-ccus">describes</a> CCS as “virtually the only technology” that can significantly cut <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-why-cement-emissions-matter-for-climate-change/">cement</a> emissions, which account for <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/global-cement-production-has-plateaued-over-the-last-decade">around 7%</a> of the global total. (Much of this CO2 comes from chemical processes, meaning it would still be released if the industry was electrified.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Yet, the understanding of “hard-to-abate” emissions is <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/major-emitters-may-retain-or-expand-fossil-fuels-despite-net-zero-plans/">changing</a>, as alternatives to CCS become cheaper and <a href="https://www.irena.org/Publications/2024/Apr/Decarbonising-hard-to-abate-sectors-with-renewables-Perspectives-for-the-G7#:~:text=Copy%20url%20Copied-,Decarbonising%20hard%2Dto%2Dabate%20sectors%20with%20renewables%3A%20Perspectives%20for,%2C%20steel%2C%20chemicals%20and%20petrochemicals.">increasingly available</a>. As a result, CCS has become a less attractive option in some sectors, as well as being seen as less vital in some others.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Carbon Brief analysis shows that the IEA has reduced its outlook for CCS in the power sector by a third, compared to its expectations in 2021, as the chart below shows. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This <a href="https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8ad619b9-17aa-473d-8a2f-4b90846f5c19/NetZeroRoadmap_AGlobalPathwaytoKeepthe1.5CGoalinReach-2023Update.pdf">reflects</a> both slow progress in deploying CCS and <a href="https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2024/Sep/IRENA_Renewable_power_generation_costs_in_2023.pdf">rapid cost reductions</a> in renewables, which make running gas or coal power plants less attractive.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img alt="Projected global capacity of coal and gas power plants with CCS, GW, in IEA net-zero scenarios from 2021 through to 2025. Following years of very slow growth, the IEA has significantly scaled back its outlook for CCS in the power sector. Projected 2050 capacity drops from ~400 GW in the 2021 scenario to ~240 GW in the 2025 scenario. Source: IEA" class="wp-image-80630" height="667" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/following-years-of-v_1-1024x667.png" width="1024" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Data comes from <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2025">IEA world energy outlooks</a> between 2021-2025. </figcaption></figure>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">(Even prior to this adjustment, the IEA’s net-zero scenario was already at the <a href="https://www.iea.org/commentaries/a-closer-look-at-the-modelling-behind-our-global-roadmap-to-net-zero-emissions-by-2050">lower end</a> of CCS use, compared to those assessed by the IPCC.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This declining role for CCS in the power sector would mean its use is more concentrated in industry. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Industrial sectors – particularly cement, steel and chemicals – account for 60% of the CO2 captured in 2050 under the IEA’s net-zero scenario, as shown in the figure below. The remaining 40% is roughly split between electricity generation and blue hydrogen production.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Climate NGOs Bellona and E3G have stressed that with “limited public funding, infrastructure constraints and political attention, prioritisation is essential” for CCS. Their “<a href="https://www.e3g.org/publications/carbon-capture-and-storage-ladder-2026-update">CCS ladder</a>” places CCS in cement and lime production at the top – with the highest “climate value” – while power CCS has “low and decreasing value”.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Despite this, the focus of the CCS sector so far <a href="https://www.iea.org/commentaries/it-is-time-for-ccus-to-deliver">has not been</a> in heavy industry, which represents less than 10% of announced capacity.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Another key consideration is the role governments are assigning to CCS in their national net-zero strategies. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">One <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-025-02043-4.pdf">study</a> found that 33 of the 67 long-term net-zero strategies submitted to the UN by governments, with a further 10 indicating some potential use. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">It concluded that high-income countries that produce a lot of oil and gas, such as Canada and Norway, showed the “firmest commitment” to capturing and storing CO2.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Nations have <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop28-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-dubai/">agreed</a> at UN climate talks to “phase down” coal power that is “<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-why-defining-the-phaseout-of-unabated-fossil-fuels-is-so-important-at-cop28/">unabated</a>”. This is generally understood to mean coal power without CCS – leaving space to develop “abated” coal plants. This could allow China, for example, to continue using its sizable coal fleet with CCS to reduce emissions.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="why-is-ccs-controversial">Why is CCS controversial?</h2>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Despite its role in many net-zero scenarios, CCS remains a highly contested technology. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">It has long been <a href="https://biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/carbon-capture-and-storage/pdfs/CCS-explainer.pdf">framed</a> in some circles as a “<a href="https://www.desmog.com/carbon-capture-and-storage-technology/">false solution</a>” to climate change, that is <a href="https://influencemap.org/report/CCS-and-Corporate-Policy-Engagement-24754">backed</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112500187X?dgcid=author">lobbied for</a> by fossil-fuel companies to “<a href="https://foe.scot/press-release/cost-of-carbon-capture-failures-revealed/">delay</a>” the clean-energy transition. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Critics argue that CCS is <a href="https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-12/Assessing-the-relative-costs-of-high-CCS-and-low-CCS-pathways-to-1-5-degrees.pdf">expensive</a> – especially compared to increasingly cheap wind and solar power – in part because it <a href="https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/if-fossil-fuel-power-plant-uses-carbon-capture-and-storage-what-percent-energy-it-makes">significantly increases</a> the energy requirements of a facility. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">A University of Oxford <a href="https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-12/Assessing-the-relative-costs-of-high-CCS-and-low-CCS-pathways-to-1-5-degrees.pdf">working paper</a> published in 2023 concluded that a “low-CCS” pathway to net-zero emissions would cost around $1tn less a year compared to a “high-CCS” pathway. The researchers stated that “no evidence is found for technological learning or associated cost reductions” in the development of CCS to date. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">(They added that CCS is “still likely necessary” for cement and chemical production.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Pointing to the limited progress in scaling up the technology so far, some question whether CCS can play the role envisaged in many net-zero scenarios.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Responding to the IPCC’s most recent report, for example, the <a href="https://www.ciel.org/">Centre for International Environmental Law</a> <a href="https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Lost-in-Translation-Lessons-from-the-IPCCs-Sixth-Assessment.pdf">stated</a> that “abated fossil fuels only exist in models”. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Proponents of CCS contest the notion that CCS is “untested” or “unreliable”, <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/posts/laszlo-varro-57123b3_ccs-carboncapture-lowcarbonsolutions-activity-7406739076600705025-LgUs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android&rcm=ACoAAAL7qHQBAyJW0oiRL6RFnZ3OBIpxayxUBHQ">pointing to</a> some projects that have been operating for many years. Moreover, most of the component parts that make up a working CCS project are in wide use for other purposes.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Yet, another key criticism levelled at CCS projects is that they simply do not capture enough CO2, diminishing their role as a climate solution.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">There is a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1750583620306642">widespread view</a> that CCS projects should aim to capture at least 90% of the CO2 being emitted. <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/post-combustion-carbon-dioxide-capture-best-available-techniques-bat">UK guidelines</a> are <a href="https://ukccsrc.ac.uk/ccs-needs-to-be-done-properly-and-ramped-up-quickly-if-fossil-fuel-use-is-to-be-continued-and-the-planet-saved/">among those</a> targeting a higher capture rate of 95%.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The <a href="https://ieefa.org/">Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis</a> (IEEFA) has <a href="https://ieefa.org/sites/default/files/2024-02/fact-sheet-CCS-ADR.pdf">assessed</a> the performance of existing projects. Its 2023 <a href="https://ieefa.org/sites/default/files/2024-01/Blue%20Hydrogen%20Not%20Clean%20Not%20Low%20Carbon_September%202023_0.pdf">analysis</a> is shown in the chart below.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The thinktank concluded that, in reality, most existing CCS projects are far below such capture rates, meaning they continue to emit significant amounts of CO2. (Capture is the <a href="https://www.woodmac.com/news/opinion/ccus-project-costs/">most expensive</a> part of the CCS process.)</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="Carbon capture rate, %, across existing CCS facilities. Highest capture rates range from 17% for steel to 80% for hydrogen. Many CCS projects are currently falling far short of a 95% CO2 capture rate. Source: IEEFA analyses based on publicly available data" class="wp-image-80631" height="1388" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/many-ccs-projects-ar_1-scaled.png" width="3000" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Based on data analysed by <a href="https://ieefa.org/ccs">IEEFA</a> from the following projects: Petra Nova and Boundary Dam coal plants, US and Canada; Terrell, Lost Cabin, Shute Creek and Century Plant gas processing facilities, US, and Gorgon, Australia; Quest, Air Liquide and Air Products hydrogen production projects, US and Canada; Great Plains Synfuel and Coffeyville gasification projects, US; Enid and PCS Nitrogen fertiliser projects, US; Bonanza Bio Energy ethanol production, US; and Emirates Steel/Al Reyadah steel project, United Arab Emirates. </figcaption></figure>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Once the CO2 is captured, it must be stored. The IPCC says there is ample global geological storage available for CO2. It also says that, as long as sites are “appropriately selected and managed”, CO2 “can be permanently isolated from the atmosphere”.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Nevertheless, critics have <a href="https://ieefa.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/2024Conf%20The%20carbon%20dioxide%20disposal%20chain.pdf">noted</a> that even relatively low rates of leakage along the transportation and storage chain could have a big climate impact when deployed at scale.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The continued use of gas in gas-CCS or blue hydrogen projects also brings risks of <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-what-does-bidens-lng-pause-mean-for-global-emissions/">upstream emissions</a> more broadly, such as methane leaks. (See: <a href="#what-are-the-uks-plans-for-scaling-up-ccs">What are the UK’s plans for scaling up CCS?</a>)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Considering these factors, in 2023 <a href="https://climateanalytics.org/">Climate Analytics</a> <a href="https://climateanalytics.org/publications/unabated-the-carbon-capture-and-storage-86-billion-tonne-carbon-bomb-aimed-at-derailing-a-fossil-phase-out">assessed</a> a “high CCS pathway” from the IPCC database. It concluded that if CO2 was captured at rates seen in existing facilities – around 50% – and upstream emissions remain high, CCS use could see an extra 86GtCO2e emitted by 2050. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The report found that even the IEA’s net-zero scenario, which relies on “more limited fossil CCS use”, could result in an additional 16GtCO2e due to “underperforming fossil CCS”.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">All of this calls into question many uses of CCS, according to <a href="https://ieefa.org/people/andrew-reid">Andrew Reid</a>, energy finance analyst at IEEFA: “Is there really any point in trying to decarbonise fossil fuels, which comes with significant technical, timing and additional cost risk?” Reid tells Carbon Brief:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p class="is-style-typestyle-large wp-block-paragraph">“As for cement and chemicals, again, there are alternatives, but these are nascent and expensive. CCS may be a solution here and if investment is going to be made in any area, it most likely should be these.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">On the other hand, CCS advocates <a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-carbon-capture-and-storage-is-controversial-but-its-going-to-be-crucial-230122#:~:text=Critics%20of%20carbon%20capture%20argue,and%20delay%20the%20full%20transition.">argue</a> that gas, for example, is likely to be an important, “<a href="https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/fuelling-the-future/the-role-of-gas-in-generating-electricity/">dispatchable</a>” part of many electricity systems as nations transition to clean energy.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph"><a href="https://edinburghcentre.org/team/prof-stuart-hazeldine">Prof Stuart Haszeldine</a>, a CCS researcher at the <a href="https://edinburghcentre.org/">University of Edinburgh</a>, explains this position to Carbon Brief:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p class="is-style-typestyle-large wp-block-paragraph">“If we’re going to burn gas, then we should be fitting CCS on that…Otherwise we’re just going to say it’s OK for us to burn lots of gas and carry on emitting.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">There is also a line of <a href="https://www.slowboring.com/p/beating-climate-change-absolutely">argument</a> referred to – <a href="https://www.edrc.ac.uk/news-blog/techno-optimism-alone-wont-fix-climate-change/">sometimes pejoratively</a> – as “techno-optimism”, which often stresses CCS as a core climate solution. This was exemplified by a <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-brief/uk-labour-defends-net-zero-policies-after-blair-criticism/">controversial</a> <a href="https://institute.global/insights/climate-and-energy/the-climate-paradox-why-we-need-to-reset-action-on-climate-change">report</a> on climate action in 2025 by the <a href="https://institute.global/">Tony Blair Institute for Global Change</a> (TBI), in which the former UK prime minister wrote that CCS should be “at the centre of the battle”.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This diverges from the IPCC’s <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/figures/summary-for-policymakers/figure-spm-7/">conclusion</a> that, while CCS will likely have a role in achieving net-zero emissions, its contribution will be dwarfed by that of renewables.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">CCS also attracts criticism due to its connection to the fossil-fuel industry. <a href="https://www.strath.ac.uk/staff/robertsjendr/">Dr Jen Roberts</a> at the UKCCSRC tells Carbon Brief that she agrees these links make for complicated messaging:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p class="is-style-typestyle-large wp-block-paragraph">“CCS is critical for net-zero, but is intrinsically tied with an industry sector that is climate polluting and historically anti-climate lobbying.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Roberts says careful policymaking, including the development of business models and standards, can support CCS in <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/major-emitters-may-retain-or-expand-fossil-fuels-despite-net-zero-plans/">hard-to-abate</a> sectors where it is most needed. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Some experts suggest that governments <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aca4e8">should require</a> companies to capture and store their emissions under the “<a href="https://www.e3g.org/publications/making-carbon-capture-work-in-the-eu/">polluter pays</a>” principle.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Roberts also notes that fossil-fuel companies have the experience and the workforce needed to scale up CCS. “Oil and gas companies can evidence a track record in multi-million or billion-dollar subsurface engineering projects,” Roberts adds.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Despite the fossil-fuel industry’s <a href="https://www.shell.com/news-and-insights/scenarios/the-energy-security-scenarios.html">apparent</a> <a href="https://influencemap.org/report/CCS-and-Corporate-Policy-Engagement-24754">support</a> for CCS, one 2021 <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590332221005418#bib6">study</a> co-authored by Haszeldine noted that they had, in fact, invested relatively small amounts in the technology, compared to renewables and <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-can-nature-based-solutions-help-address-climate-change">nature-based solutions</a>.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Lina Lefstad at Lund University questions whether the fossil-fuel industry stands to benefit financially through the deployment of CCS as much as some critics imply:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p class="is-style-typestyle-large wp-block-paragraph">“People seem really worried that the fossil-fuel industry is going to come out the winner again, but if that was the case I think we would have large-scale CCS by now.”</p>
</blockquote>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="what-are-the-uks-plans-for-scaling-up-ccs">What are the UK’s plans for scaling up CCS?</h2>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The UK government has committed “up to” £21.7bn of funding over 25 years to support the nation’s first five CCS projects and to make the nation an “early leader” in the sector.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This package, supported by both the former <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/carbon-capture-usage-and-storage-net-zero-investment-roadmap/ccus-net-zero-investment-roadmap-capturing-carbon-and-a-global-opportunity">Conservative</a> and current <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/04/labour-to-commit-almost-22bn-to-fund-carbon-capture-and-storage-projects">Labour</a> governments, is intended to help create “clusters” of connected facilities across industrial areas of the UK.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph"><a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/06/13/miliband-latest-vanity-project-net-zero-labour-defence-uk/">Some</a> have <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-7485622502111694849-2N5H?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAA1v0pMBogd6fbOc1JkfSwxwGbH7OUqpRMI">suggested</a> that this represents a large pot of government spending, which could be raided to support more pressing priorities. Indeed, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jul/02/infrastructure-cuts-starmer-pay-defence-will-uk-10000-jobs-analysis-shows">media coverage</a> often <a href="https://www.thetimes.com/article/fe3f6c31-5135-4e69-beef-ce1a0fb6eccd">points</a> to CCS funding as a potential target for government cuts, or as a way to boost, say, military spending.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This is in spite of the fact that three quarters of the funding is expected to <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5901/cmselect/cmpubacc/351/report.html">come from</a> levies on consumers, rather than government budgets.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The first two CCS clusters, which are currently set to be deployed in the late-2020s, are the <a href="https://eastcoastcluster.co.uk/">East Coast Cluster</a> in north-east England and <a href="https://hynet.co.uk/">HyNet</a> in north-west England and north Wales. The second two, scheduled for around 2030, are <a href="https://theacornproject.uk/projects">Acorn</a> in north-east Scotland and <a href="https://www.vikingccs.co.uk/">Viking</a> in the Humber.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The projects are expected to include blue-hydrogen production, gas power with CCS and industrial uses. The CO2 captured would be pumped into offshore <a href="https://www.lyellcollection.org/doi/abs/10.1144/geoenergy2024-012">saline aquifers</a> and depleted gas fields.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Former UK energy secretary Ed Miliband has <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-10-07/debates/B6C03540-3DF0-4CFB-9858-8CD26B53C69F/CarbonCaptureUsageAndStorage#:~:text=This%20investment%20is%20the%20right,are%20those%20who%20doubt%20that">stated</a> that CCS will “unlock” hard-to-abate sectors and play an “important role” in achieving <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-the-uk-plans-to-reach-clean-power-by-2030/">clean power by 2030</a>.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">This position is supported by the UK government’s climate advisors at the <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/">Climate Change Committee</a> (CCC), who have <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/ccc-uk-must-cut-emissions-78-by-2035-to-be-on-course-for-net-zero-goal">consistently</a> <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-10-07/debates/B6C03540-3DF0-4CFB-9858-8CD26B53C69F/CarbonCaptureUsageAndStorage#:~:text=This%20investment%20is%20the%20right,are%20those%20who%20doubt%20that">stressed</a> that CCS is “essential” for net-zero. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">In the CCC’s most recent <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/the-seventh-carbon-budget/">net-zero pathway</a>, released as part of its <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/ccc-reducing-emissions-87-by-2040-would-help-cut-household-costs-by-1400/">seventh carbon budget advice</a>, CCS contributes 2% of emissions cuts in 2030 and 8% in 2050, as shown in the chart below. (If CO2 removals using BECCS are included, this increases to 15% in 2050.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The CCC maintains that it “cannot see a route to net-zero that does not include CCS”. Nevertheless, the committee has downgraded its expectations for CCS in recent years. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Between the CCC’s sixth and seventh carbon budget advice, its recommendations for power and industry CCS capacity dropped from 46MtCO2 to 41MtCO2. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/jamie-tarlton-79492168/?originalSubdomain=uk">Dr Jamie Tarlton</a>, the committee’s CCS lead, addressed this at a <a href="https://ukccsrc.ac.uk/ukccsrc-spring-conference-2025-strathclyde-24-25-march-2025/">conference</a> in March 2025, stating that it was “partly because we see more opportunities for decarbonising the other sectors and reducing those residual emissions than we saw five years ago”.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">More recently, the UK government also <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-the-uk-governments-carbon-budget-delivery-plan-for-2035/">scaled back</a> its expectations for industrial CCS in its latest <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6901d0c2a6048928d3fc2b55/carbon-budget-and-growth-delivery-plan-report.pdf">carbon budget delivery plan</a> for 2035, bringing it more in line with the CCC’s net-zero pathway. It still <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6901d0c2a6048928d3fc2b55/carbon-budget-and-growth-delivery-plan-report.pdf">describes</a> CCS as “part of the most cost-effective route to net-zero”.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The UK’s CCS plans have <a href="https://carbontracker.org/reports/kind-of-blue/">drawn</a> <a href="https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/net-zero-teesside/?utm_source=backer_social&amp;utm_campaign=net-zero-teesside&amp;utm_reference=d0c3c03435853ad26af0b7a66741847a&amp;utm_medium=clipboard_copy&amp;utm_content=post_pledge_page">criticism</a>. A September 2024 <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20240926201852/https://www.campaigncc.org/sites/data/files/sites/data/files/Docs/letter_to_sos_-_blue_hydrogen_and_ccus.pdf">letter</a> to Miliband signed by 22 scientists and activists expressed concern about “locking the UK into a fossil-fuel based pathway”. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">They note that the gas-CCS power plants and blue hydrogen facilities initially backed by the government would leave the UK reliant on gas imports, as <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-nine-false-or-misleading-myths-about-north-sea-oil-and-gas">North Sea</a> production declines. This could be expensive and result in “upstream” emissions due to methane leaks.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">(At the end of 2025, BP <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c865jwpw9p4o">withdrew</a> its involvement in one of the blue hydrogen facilities at the Teesside site. A data centre is <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyv0xezmyeo">planned</a> for the site instead.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Net Zero Teesside, a gas-CCS power plant in the East Coast Cluster run by BP and Equinor, has been <a href="https://www.ftbchambers.co.uk/news/news-view/court-of-appeal-dismisses-dr-boswells-challenge-to-net-zero-teesside">unsuccessfully</a> <a href="https://www.leighday.co.uk/news/news/2025-news/legal-claim-opposing-teesside-power-station-to-be-heard-at-court-of-appeal/">challenged in court</a> over its emissions savings. The challenge was <a href="https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/net-zero-teesside/?utm_source=backer_social&amp;utm_campaign=net-zero-teesside&amp;utm_reference=d0c3c03435853ad26af0b7a66741847a&amp;utm_medium=clipboard_copy&amp;utm_content=post_pledge_page">based</a> on the idea that potential upstream emissions could significantly exceed any emissions cuts from CCS use.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">According to a <a href="https://carbontracker.org/reports/kind-of-blue/">report</a> by <a href="https://carbontracker.org/">Carbon Tracker</a>, the lifecycle emissions of Net Zero Teesside gas-CCS power plant would depend heavily on where it sources its fuel.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The project could cut emissions by around three-quarters, relative to an unabated gas plant, says the report. But it adds that if the plant relies on imported gas with high upstream emissions, then it might only cut emissions by a quarter.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">(Most of the upstream emissions from imported gas would be released overseas, meaning they would not be counted in the UK’s official emissions inventory.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Besides driving “<a href="https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/a-22bn-question-aligning-uk-ccs-policy-with-essential-progress-on-emissions-and-energy-resilience/">gas dependence</a>” in the UK, the government’s approach has drawn criticism for failing to ensure that CCS is prioritised in the industries that are hardest to decarbonise.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">A <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5901/cmselect/cmpubacc/351/report.html#:~:text=In%20introducing%20its%20current%20CCUS,to%20support%20the%20first%20projects.">report</a> by the <a href="https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/Public-Accounts-Committee/">Public Accounts Committee</a> in early 2025 took aim at the government’s cluster-based approach. It said this “does not ensure that financial support for CCUS is directed at the sectors which will need it most” – highlighting cement production.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">(Of the CO2 captured in the CCC’s <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/the-seventh-carbon-budget/">net-zero pathway</a> in 2050, around 40% is in the industrial and waste sectors, while the remaining 60% is from gas power plants and the production of fuels such as hydrogen.)</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-boswell-5b241320/?originalSubdomain=uk">Dr Andrew Boswell</a>, the energy analyst who challenged Net Zero Teesside in court, says he is “more nuanced” when it comes to applications of CCS that do not involve gas. “There may be a case for cement, lime and waste…However, the case is unproven,” he tells Carbon Brief.</p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The Public Accounts Committee report also criticised the “high-risk” approach of using public funds for CCS projects, as well as slow progress in developing the technology. </p>

<p class="wp-block-paragraph"><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/enriquecornejo/?originalSubdomain=uk">Enrique Cornejo</a>, head of energy policy at fossil-fuel trade body <a href="https://oeuk.org.uk/">Offshore Energies UK,</a> tells Carbon Brief that the UK needs to maintain momentum and deploy CCS in order to “achieve economies of scale” and to reduce the cost of the technology more broadly:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p class="is-style-typestyle-large wp-block-paragraph">“It is indeed necessary to streamline the cluster sequencing process to ensure that emitters in sectors such as cement have a clear route to the CCS market.”</p>
</blockquote>

<section class="cards wp-block animate cards--columns-4 alignfull">
<div class="cards__inner">
<div class="cards__header">
<h2 class="cards__heading" id="related">related</h2>
</div>

<div class="cards__items">
<article class="g-card g-card--size-medium g-card--size-mobile-small g-card--row has-image has-link">
<div class="g-card__inner">

<h2 class="g-card__heading" id="qa-what-do-chinas-provincial-five-year-plans-say-about-climate-and-energy">Q&A: What do China’s provincial five-year plans say about climate and energy?</h2>
<div class="g-card__meta">

<div class="g-card__date">
18.06.2026 </div>

<div class="g-card__labels">
<a class="g-card__label" href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/topic/china-policy">China policy</a> </div>

</div>

</div>

<h2 class="g-card__heading" id="analysis-chinas-co2-climbs-2-in-early-2026-due-to-wasted-wind-and-solar">Analysis: China’s CO2 climbs 2% in early 2026 due to ‘wasted’ wind and solar</h2>
<div class="g-card__meta">

</div>

<h2 class="g-card__heading" id="qa-what-does-indias-new-paris-agreement-pledge-mean-for-climate-action">Q&A: What does India’s new Paris Agreement pledge mean for climate action?</h2>
<div class="g-card__meta">

<div class="g-card__date">
27.03.2026 </div>

<div class="g-card__labels">
<a class="g-card__label" href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/topic/emissions">Emissions</a> </div>

</div>

</div>

<h2 class="g-card__heading" id="analysis-indias-co2-emissions-in-2025-grew-at-slowest-rate-in-two-decades">Analysis: India’s CO2 emissions in 2025 grew at slowest rate in two decades</h2>
<div class="g-card__meta">

<div class="g-card__date">
26.03.2026 </div>

<div class="g-card__labels">
<a class="g-card__label" href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/topic/emissions">Emissions</a> </div>

</div>

</div>

<a class="g-card__link" href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-indias-co2-emissions-in-2025-grew-at-slowest-rate-in-two-decades"></a>

</article>
</div>
</div>
</section>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-does-the-world-need-carbon-capture-and-storage-to-reach-net-zero">Q&A: Does the world need ‘carbon capture and storage’ to reach net-zero?</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org">Carbon Brief</a>.</p>

📝 RSS Summary Only

Q&A: Does the world need ‘carbon capture and storage’ to reach net-zero?

AI Analysis

Summary

More from Carbon Brief

Q&A: What does China’s 15th five-year plan for coal mean for climate action?

Analysis: Weaker EV targets could cost UK consumers £3bn a year by 2030

Q&A: What is in China’s new five-year plan for climate change?

Factcheck: How nuclear, gas, wind and solar power are affected during heatwaves

Correcting climate ‘misperceptions’ may not boost climate action