Authors: Walter Machava, Thanatat Angsuprabha, March, 2025
1 Description and History
1.1 Definition and Basic Principles
Definition
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a technological process designed to mitigate climate change by reducing the release of carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the atmosphere1. CCS intercepts CO₂ emissions from industrial facilities or power plants and stores them securely to prevent accumulation in the atmosphere2. By addressing the main driver of anthropogenic climate change—excess CO₂—CCS has emerged as a significant strategy within broader greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction efforts3. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has identified CCS as an essential tool in limiting global temperature rise under the Paris Agreement4.
Basic Principles
The CCS process typically involves three key stages:
Capture: CO₂ is separated from flue gas or industrial streams using methods such as post-combustion capture, pre-combustion capture, or oxy-fuel combustion5.
Transport: After capture, CO₂ is compressed and transferred to suitable storage sites, commonly via pipelines but also potentially by ship or other means2.
Storage: The compressed CO₂ is injected into underground geological formations, such as depleted oil or gas fields or deep saline aquifers. These formations are selected for their impermeable cap rock layers, which minimize the risk of leakage3.
By effectively capturing and storing CO₂ from high-emission sources, CCS is widely recognized as a pivotal approach for nations aiming to meet long-term GHG reduction targets2.
1.2 Early History: Initial Motivations and Technological Origins
Scientific & Environmental Drivers
The growing awareness of global warming and climate change during the 1970s and 1980s spurred interest in methods to reduce carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions3. Scientific reports from this period highlighted the significant role of CO₂ in the greenhouse effect, which led policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers to seek technological solutions for mitigating its release5. Early discussions on carbon management laid the foundation for broader strategies, ultimately contributing to the development of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)2. Regulatory frameworks also began emerging, including the 1990 U.S. Clean Air Act Amendments, which promoted CO₂ emission reductions.
Technological Roots
Before CCS was formally recognized as a climate mitigation strategy, industries such as chemical production and natural gas processing already employed CO₂ separation techniques3. In chemical manufacturing, CO₂ removal was crucial for ensuring product purity and maintaining process efficiency. Similarly, natural gas processing often involved “sweetening,” a step where CO₂ and hydrogen sulfide are separated to meet pipeline specifications5. These established practices provided a technological foundation that was later adapted and refined for large-scale CCS, transforming what were once merely industrial gas-treatment methods into a vital tool for climate change mitigation2.
1.3 Key Milestones and Developments
Pioneering Projects (1980s–1990s)
During the 1980s and 1990s, early laboratory and pilot studies conducted by universities and government research agencies formed the foundation for modern CCS technology (IPCC, 2005). Researchers explored methods for injecting CO₂ into underground formations, seeking to validate the feasibility of long-term geological storage. These initial trials tested the integrity of potential storage sites and laid the groundwork for larger-scale demonstration projects2.
Major Demonstration Projects
Several landmark initiatives in the late 1990s and early 2000s showcased the commercial-scale viability of CCS:
Sleipner Project (Norway): Initiated in 1996, it was one of the first large-scale efforts to inject and store CO₂ beneath the North Sea. By demonstrating the stability and safety of offshore storage, Sleipner became a global reference point for CCS efficacy2.
Weyburn-Midale Project (Canada): Begun in 2000, this project injected CO₂ for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) while simultaneously monitoring the potential for secure, long-term carbon storage. Its findings contributed critical data on storage integrity, CO₂ migration, and best practices for monitoring, reporting, and verification3.
Gorgon Project (Australia): Launched in 2020, the Gorgon Project is one of the largest CCS projects worldwide, aiming to store approximately 4 million tons of CO₂ annually. Despite challenges, it represents a significant step in global CCS efforts2.
International Collaborations
Beyond individual national projects, several international initiatives have propelled CCS forward:
IEAGHG (IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme): Conducts technical studies and promotes information exchange on CCS technologies, fostering collaboration among member countries.
Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum: Brings together governments, industries, and researchers to coordinate research efforts, develop best practices, and advance policy frameworks that encourage CCS deployment2.
EU CCS Directive (2009): Established a legal framework for CO₂ storage, ensuring environmental safety and setting the stage for wider CCS adoption in Europe.
These collaborative efforts have accelerated knowledge sharing, supported large-scale projects, and promoted a clearer understanding of both the opportunities and challenges of CCS on a global scale2.
2 Economic Performance
2.1 Overview of CCS Costs and Investment Trends
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is widely regarded as a promising climate mitigation strategy, but its economic feasibility remains a key challenge. The costs associated with CCS implementation vary significantly based on technology type, scale, and location. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2021), the average cost of capturing CO₂ from industrial sources ranges between $40–$120 per ton, while the cost for power generation facilities can be $50–$150 per ton. Transport and storage add further costs, estimated at $10–$20 per to depending on the distance and storage site characteristics6.
Despite high upfront investment, CCS deployment has increased due to government incentives and private sector interest. As of 2023, more than 30 commercial-scale CCS facilities are in operation worldwide, with over $40 billion in funding committed to future projects6. The United States, Canada, and the European Union have taken a leading role in supporting CCS through carbon pricing, tax incentives (e.g., 45Q tax credit in the U.S.), and direct funding programs7.
2.2 Cost Breakdown and Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE)
The Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) is a key economic metric used to assess the financial viability of power generation technologies, including CCS-equipped plants. A study by Rubin et al. (2015) found that integrating CCS into coal-fired power plants increases LCOE by 60%–80%, making it significantly more expensive than renewable energy alternatives like wind or solar.
CCS cost components include:
Capture costs: The largest expense, accounting for 65%–75% of total CCS costs8.
Transport costs: Pipeline construction and operational costs vary by geography9.
Storage costs: Depend on reservoir depth, geological suitability, and monitoring requirements10.
2.3 CCS in Industrial Sectors:
Cost vs. Benefits
While CCS in power generation remains costly, its application in hard-to-abate industries (e.g., cement, steel, and chemicals) is considered more economically viable. Industries with limited alternatives for deep decarbonization benefit from CCS despite high costs11. Key examples include:
Cement industry: CCS can reduce CO₂ emissions by up to 95%, with estimated costs of $50–$90 per ton12.
Steel production: CCS is integrated into Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) processes, with costs around $80–$120 per ton13.
Hydrogen production: Blue hydrogen (hydrogen produced with CCS) costs 20%–30% less than green hydrogen from renewables14 .
2.4 Economic Incentives and Market Mechanisms
Governments and financial institutions play a crucial role in making CCS economically viable. Several mechanisms help offset high costs:
Carbon pricing & taxes: The European Emissions Trading System (ETS) imposes a CO₂ price of €85–€100 per ton, improving CCS competitiveness (European Commission, 2022).
Tax credits & subsidies: The U.S. 45Q tax credit provides up to $85 per ton of captured CO₂15.
Public-private partnerships: Government funding initiatives such as the EU Innovation Fund support large-scale CCS projects7.
2.5 Future Cost Reductions and Economic Outlook
Technological advancements, economies of scale, and policy support are expected to drive CCS cost reductions. The IEA (2023) predicts that:
– By 2030, CCS costs could decline by 20%–30% due to efficiency improvements.
– By 2050, widespread CCS adoption could contribute to 10%–15% of global CO₂ reductions, making it a critical part of net-zero pathways.
CCS remains a key decarbonization tool in industrial sectors where emissions are difficult to eliminate. Future deployment depends on policy support, cost reductions, and integration with carbon markets.
3 Ecological Performance
3.1 Environmental Benefits of CCS
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) plays a crucial role in mitigating climate change by significantly reducing carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from industrial processes and power generation. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2022) states that CCS could contribute to a 15% reduction in global CO₂ emissions by 2050, positioning it as a vital tool for achieving net-zero targets. Key ecological benefits of CCS include:
Reduction of CO₂ emissions: By capturing CO₂ at its source, CCS prevents millions of tons of greenhouse gases from entering the atmosphere5.
Mitigation of ocean acidification: Excess atmospheric CO₂ dissolves in oceans, forming carbonic acid. By curbing CO₂emissions, CCS reduces the rate of ocean acidification, helping marine ecosystems4.
Preservation of air quality: Unlike conventional fossil fuel use, which emits pollutants such as sulfur oxides (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), CCS-equipped plants can be optimized to minimize these harmful emissions13.
3.2 Carbon Storage and Long-Term Environmental Impact
The long-term effectiveness of CCS hinges on the stability of CO₂ storage sites. Geological sequestration is the most widely used method, involving the injection of CO₂ into underground formations such as deep saline aquifers, depleted oil and gas reservoirs, and basalt formations10. These formations provide secure storage by trapping CO₂ beneath impermeable rock layers.
Key Types of Geological Storage:
1. Saline Aquifers: These vast underground rock formations can store **thousands of gigatons of CO₂, making them one of the most viable storage options8.
2. Depleted Oil & Gas Reservoirs: Proven storage sites due to their natural ability to trap hydrocarbons for millions of years2.
3. Basalt Formations: These formations enhance permanent storage by reacting with CO₂ to form solid carbonates, significantly reducing leakage risks16.
Studies suggest that properly managed CO₂ storage sites can retain emissions for thousands to millions of years, with leakage risks estimated at less than 0.01% per year17.
Key ecological benefits of CCS include:
Despite its promise, CCS presents some ecological risks and operational challenges:
Energy Consumption: CCS increases the energy demand of fossil-fuel power plants by **20%–30%**, leading to higher resource consumption9.
Potential CO₂ Leakage: Poorly managed storage sites pose a risk of CO₂ seepage, potentially negating the climate benefits of CCS17.
Water Usage: CCS processes, especially post-combustion capture, require substantial amounts of water, raising concerns in water-scarce regions10.
Seismic Activity: The injection of CO₂ into underground formations could induce minor seismic activity, as observed in some Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) projects18.
While these challenges exist, advances in monitoring and risk assessment technologies have significantly improved the safety and effectiveness of CCS operations11.
3.3 Comparison of CCS with Alternative Climate Mitigation Strategies
CCS is frequently compared with other climate change mitigation strategies, each offering distinct benefits and limitations:
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2021), CCS should be deployed alongside renewable energy and Direct Air Capture (DAC) to optimize global decarbonization efforts, as no single strategy is sufficient to achieve net-zero emissions
3.4 Future Outlook for CCS and Environmental Sustainability
Future advancements in **carbon mineralization, bioenergy with CCS (BECCS), and direct air capture (DAC)** are expected to enhance the ecological benefits of CCS. The IPCC (2022) emphasizes that **integrating CCS with renewables and hydrogen production** will help reduce its carbon footprint and make it more economically viable.
Key drivers for the future of CCS include:
Improved monitoring and verification systems to prevent leakage and ensure storage integrity. Advancements in low-carbon energy integration to reduce CCS’s overall energy demand. Stronger international regulatory frameworks to enhance environmental safety and scalability.
Despite its challenges, CCS remains an essential tool for reducing industrial CO₂ emissions and achieving long-term climate goals.
4 Social Impact
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology has significant social implications, ranging from public acceptance to its impact on job creation, health, and environmental justice. Understanding the social dimensions of CCS is crucial to its successful implementation.
4.1 Public Perception and Acceptance
The level of societal acceptance of CCS varies across regions and is influenced by factors such as environmental awareness, perceived risks, and governmental support. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2022), public perception of CCS is often mixed; while some view it as an essential tool for mitigating climate change, others are skeptical due to concerns about long-term storage safety and environmental risks.
A survey conducted by Upham & Roberts (2011) found that public acceptance of CCS is higher when:
- The benefits are well-communicated.
- The technology is linked to renewable energy integration.
- The public is involved in decision-making processes.
However, misinformation and limited public awareness can lead to opposition, as seen in past CCS projects where communities resisted CO₂ storage sites due to perceived risks of leakage and seismic activity19.
4.2 Job Creation and Economic Opportunities
CCS has the potential to generate employment, particularly in engineering, construction, and monitoring sectors. The Global CCS Institute (2023) estimates that large-scale CCS deployment could create up to 100,000 jobs worldwide by 2040. Key employment areas include:
- CCS facility construction and operation
- Pipeline and transport infrastructure
- CO₂ monitoring and verification services
Moreover, CCS can support employment in industries transitioning from fossil fuels to low-carbon technologies, ensuring a just transition for workers in carbon-intensive sectors20.
4.3 Health and Safety Considerations
By reducing CO₂ emissions, CCS contributes to improved air quality, indirectly lowering respiratory diseases caused by fossil fuel combustion. According to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2022), air pollution is responsible for approximately 7 million premature deaths annually, and CCS can help mitigate this by reducing greenhouse gas emissions21.
However, potential health risks exist, particularly in the event of CO₂ leakage. Although rare, incidents like the Lake Nyos disaster (1986), where a natural CO₂ release led to fatalities, highlight the importance of strict monitoring and regulation22.
4.4 Equity and Social Justice Issues
CCS deployment must consider environmental justice to ensure that storage sites are not disproportionately placed in disadvantaged communities. Historically, industrial projects have often been located near marginalized populations, leading to environmental injustices (Bullard, 1990). To prevent similar concerns with CCS, policymakers must ensure equitable site selection and fair compensation for affected communities.
5 Political and Legal Aspects
The development and deployment of CCS are heavily influenced by political decisions and legal frameworks at national and international levels. Policies play a crucial role in determining the viability of CCS projects.
5.1 Global Policies and Agreements
CCS has been recognized as a vital climate mitigation tool in several international agreements:
- The Paris Agreement (2015): Encourages CCS as part of national carbon reduction strategies23.
- European Green Deal (2020): Includes CCS in decarbonization plans for heavy industry1.
- U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (2022): Offers tax incentives (e.g., 45Q tax credit) for CCS adoption24.
Despite these initiatives, CCS deployment remains uneven, with some regions advancing more rapidly than others due to differing political priorities and financial incentives.
5.2 National Legal Frameworks
Countries with strong CCS policies include:
- Norway: The first country to implement a CCS tax and regulations for offshore CO₂ storage19.
- United States: Provides subsidies and tax credits to incentivize CCS projects15.
- Australia: Enforces environmental impact assessments before approving CCS storage sites6.
Conversely, some countries lack clear regulatory frameworks, hindering CCS development.
5.3 Challenges in Policy Implementation
Despite political support, several legal and regulatory challenges remain:
- Liability issues: Determining who is responsible for long-term CO₂ storage.
- Financial risks: High upfront costs require government subsidies or carbon pricing mechanisms.
- Public trust: Policies must address transparency and community engagement to gain acceptance.
To overcome these hurdles, governments must establish clear guidelines, financial incentives, and international cooperation mechanisms.
References
1 European, C. The European Green Deal. (2021).
2 International Energy, A. CCS: Status and Outlook. (2020).
3 Ipcc. IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. (2005).
4 Ipcc. Global Warming of 1.5°C: Special Report. (2018).
5 Metz, B. D., Ogunlade; de Coninck, Heleen; Loos, Manuela; Meyer, Leo. IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage., (Cambridge University Press., 2005).
6 Global, C. C. S. I. The Cost of Carbon Capture and Storage: 2022 Update. (2022).
7 Organisation for Economic, C.-o. & Development. Government Support for CCS: Policies and Mechanisms. (2022).
8 Bui, M. & et al. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): The way forward. Energy & Environmental Science 11, 1062-1074 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1039/C7EE02342A
9 Mac Dowell, N. & et al. The role of CO₂ capture and storage in climate policy. Nature Climate Change 7, 243-249 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3231
10 Global, C. C. S. I. The Cost of Carbon Capture and Storage: 2021 Update. (2021).
11 International Energy, A. The Role of CCS in Net-Zero Pathways. (2022).
12 Lechtenböhmer, S. & et al. Industrial Decarbonization: The Role of CCS. Journal of Cleaner Production 192, 15-25 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.217
13 International Energy, A. CCS: Status and Outlook. (2021).
14 Outlook, B. P. E. Energy Transition and CCS Economics. (2023).
15 Energy, U. S. D. o. U.S. Department of Energy Report on Carbon Capture and Storage. (2023).
16 Matter, J. M. & et al. Rapid carbon mineralization for permanent disposal of anthropogenic CO₂ emissions. Science 352, 1312-1314 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad8132
17 Ipcc. Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. (2022).
18 Zoback, M. D. & Gorelick, S. M. Earthquake triggering and large-scale geologic storage of carbon dioxide. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, 10164-10168 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1202473109
19 International Energy, A. Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage: A Global Perspective. (2021).
20 Global, C. C. S. I. The Role of CCS in Net-Zero Strategies. (2023).
21 World Health, O. Air Pollution and Human Health. (2022).
22 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate, C. Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. (2021).
23 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate, C. Paris Agreement and CCS Implementation Strategies. (2018).
24 International Energy, A. The Role of CCS in Net-Zero Pathways. (2023).