Carbon capture: combination, not competition

As the head of a company specialized in deploying energy transition technologies, with more than 60 years’ experience working with energy players, it is striking to see the positive change from our customers. They are now asking us spontaneously for decarbonization solutions.

Besides the clear demand for energy efficiency, carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) is among the solutions sought by major energy and industry players whose transformation is under close scrutiny. However, CCUS today commands less than unanimous support, perceived in some quarters as a "greenwashing" tool. Such criticism largely misses the point given the urgency of our situation, we should be working to combine and deploy multiple solutions, rather than pitting them against each other.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), 20% of CO2 emissions come from key industries with hard-to-abate emissions (chemicals, cement, steel); 55% of those generated by France's 50 biggest emitters are considered unavoidable. As one of the very few techniques that can limit their carbon impact, CCUS is an important driver of the energy transition. This is why many scientific models for combating climate change include a contribution from CCUS[1].

It will clearly not be enough. Such considerations should not, however, prevent or delay necessary progress. Carbon emissions, like other forms of waste, must be limited to the greatest extent possible – and beyond that, treated. In a circular economy, recycled carbon waste can be used to support new sustainable industries in building materials or synthetic fuels (SAF). The European Union has already decided that from 2050, all flights departing from the continent must be powered by at least 63% SAF – to be produced in part from captured CO2 and electricity.

CCUS can also decarbonize sectors in which the prohibitive cost of electrification prevents its rapid deployment. It thereby has a role to play in helping industries to live up to their environmental responsibilities without becoming uncompetitive; the energy transition can succeed only if it is bearable for consumers. Faced with the alternative – importing products from companies that are altogether less concerned about their environmental impact – we must not allow dogmatic worries about CCUS to deprive us of its benefits.

The demand is there, and we must step up the pace. Investment in CCUS has doubled since 2022 to reach $6.4 billion, of which the United States accounts for 45%, thanks in part to the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). European initiatives are also emerging, and France has recently opened a public consultation on CCUS. Lastly, carbon pricing is gaining ground in developed economies, and spreading elsewhere. This ecosystem favors the shift to a decarbonized world that harnesses the potential of CCUS, as we fulfill the energy transition through action.

To avoid slowing the pace of change, we must put aside sterile debates. We should avoid the kind of instability that has been known to discourage companies from taking necessary action. Support from policymakers must be sustained, and the level of available financial support adequate to offset the costs of transition. Then, as industrial-scale projects proliferate, costs fall and the market becomes competitive.

Carbon is essential to life – and damaging to it in excess. If we are to seize every opportunity on the path to a sustainable future, we must accept the contribution offered by CCUS as part of the solution. Its deployment will also highlight the CO2?emissions of client industries and, in doing so, drive their continuous improvement.

?

[1] The IEA is counting on a carbon capture capacity of 1.7 Gtpa in 2030 and 7.6 Gtpa by 2050 to achieve climate neutrality by that date.