The significant growth of carbon capture and storage technologies is crucial to achieve the goals set by the Paris Climate Agreement. However, a recent study from Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden and the University of Bergen in Norway indicates that without substantial efforts, this technology will not develop quickly enough to reach the target of 2°C. Even with extensive efforts, it is doubtful that it can accelerate enough to meet the 1.5°C goal.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology aims to trap carbon dioxide and store it deep underground. Some CCS methods, such as bioenergy with CCS (BECCS) and direct air capture and storage (DACCS), can even result in negative emissions, effectively reversing emissions from fossil fuel combustion. CCS plays a crucial role in various climate action strategies, particularly those aiming for net-zero emissions. Nonetheless, its current application remains minimal.
“CCS is vital for achieving negative emissions and is crucial in reducing carbon outputs from some of the most polluting industries. However, our findings reveal that substantial efforts are essential to link today’s demonstration projects with the extensive deployment necessary to combat climate change,” states Jessica Jewell, an Associate Professor at Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden.
The recent study, titled ‘Feasible deployment of carbon capture and storage and the requirements of climate targets,’ performed an in-depth examination of both past and projected growth of CCS to assess whether it can grow sufficiently to meet the Paris Climate Agreement. The results suggest that throughout the 21st century, a maximum of 600 Gigatons (Gt) of carbon dioxide can be captured and stored with CCS.
“Our analysis indicates that it is unlikely to sequester more than 600 Gt during the 21st century. This is in stark contrast to various climate mitigation scenarios presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which sometimes require capturing and storing over 1000 Gt of CO2 by century’s end. While this overall figure is important, it’s also crucial to understand when we can start utilizing the technology at a large scale—the later we implement CCS, the slimmer our chances of limiting temperature increases to 1.5°C or 2°C. This emphasizes why much of our research concentrated on how rapidly CCS can grow,” explains Tsimafei Kazlou, a PhD candidate at the University of Bergen in Norway and the lead author of the study.
Reduction in CCS failure rates is essential
The study stresses the importance of boosting the number of functional CCS projects and reducing failure rates to ensure this technology begins to thrive this decade. Presently, CCS development is largely influenced by policies such as the EU Net-Zero Industry Act and the Inflation Reduction Act in the US. If all existing plans are executed, the CCS capacity could increase eightfold by 2030.
“Despite the ambitious CCS plans, there are significant doubts about their feasibility. Approximately 15 years ago, during a similar surge of interest in CCS, planned projects faced a failure rate of nearly 90%. If historical failure rates persist, by 2030, the capacity may increase at most to twice its current level, which would not suffice for meeting climate goals,” warns Tsimafei Kazlou.
CCS is a promising technology but faces challenges
Like many technologies, CCS develops non-linearly, and we can learn from the experiences of other technologies. Even if CCS takes off by 2030, hurdles will continue. In the next decade, it would need to expand at a rate comparable to the rapid growth of wind power in the early 2000s to achieve the necessary carbon reductions for limiting the global temperature increase to 2°C by 2100. Beginning in the 2040s, CCS must match the peak growth that nuclear energy saw during the 1970s and 1980s.
“The encouraging aspect is that if CCS can grow as quickly as other low-carbon technologies, reaching the 2°C target could potentially be achieved (though just barely). The negative aspect is that the 1.5°C target will likely remain unattainable,” states Jessica Jewell.
The authors emphasize the necessity of strong policy support for CCS, alongside a swift scale-up of alternative decarbonization technologies to meet climate targets.
“The rapid implementation of CCS needs robust support mechanisms to ensure the financial viability of these projects. Simultaneously, our results indicate that since we can only rely on CCS for capturing and storing 600 Gt of CO2 over the 21st century, it’s imperative that other low-carbon technologies, such as solar and wind energy, grow even more rapidly,” concludes Aleh Cherp, a Professor at Central European University in Austria.
