We need to talk about CCS

This post is the first part of our four-part CCS Explainer series. In upcoming blog posts, we will explore what CCS is, why it is needed and the challenges it faces. As a way of introduction, today’s post this post will explain why CCS is an indispensable climate mitigation technology – even if it isn’t the sexiest solution on the shelf.

Global warming is rampant. This summer has once again been the hottest on record, with average temperatures in Europe reaching an unprecedented increase of 1.54°C compared to pre-industrial levels[1]. The effects are already clear: increasingly destructive wildfires worldwide, the growing threat of drought across Southern Europe, and the floods that ravaged central Europe in September. What were once theories of the future have become today’s reality, and climate change can no longer be ignored.

These changes are directly driven by rising concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere. Since the dawn of the industrial era roughly 270 years ago, human activity has steadily increased CO2 levels from approximately 280 parts per million (ppm) to 419.3 ppm in 2023[2]. In short, to confront the climate crisis, we must stop emitting CO2 and work to reduce its current concentration in order to mitigate the historical impact of human activity.

Don’t forget about ‘hard-to-abate’ sectors

4,200+ Cement Plant Stock Photos, Pictures & Royalty-Free ...

A crucial aspect of addressing the climate crisis is the promotion and scaling up of carbon-free technologies, such as heat pumps and electric vehicles (EVs), and transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. In fact, the majority of the EU’s emissions are likely to be eliminated through these methods, along with energy efficiency practices and behavioural changes. However, these measures alone have limits and will have little to no effect on decarbonising certain industrial sectors—particularly the so-called "hard-to-abate" sectors.

Although this term lacks a precise, universal definition, it generally refers to industries where fuel switching and electrification can only provide part of the solution. This is usually due to one of two key reasons:

  1. The process requires high heat, traditionally produced by fuel combustion, that at present remains challenging to obtain using renewable energy sources.
  2. The manufacturing process unavoidably releases CO2 as part of its normal functioning (process emissions).

Fuel combustion for industrial processes

The first category includes industries where current production methods require significant heat—often exceeding 1,000°C. At present, alternative heating solutions are either underdeveloped, prohibitively expensive, or impractical for large-scale implementation. In these cases, the ultimate goal is to achieve zero greenhouse gas emissions, but within the current framework, this is not feasible. Pursuing these alternatives in the short term would have devastating impacts on the industries and hinder the EU's ability to reach Net-Zero by 2050. Sectors such as steel and aluminum fall into this category.

In the long term, renewable hydrogen could offer a solution, but its usefulness is still limited, and its deployment remains a challenge. In these sectors, there are no perfect answers. The most cost-effective and efficient tool for decarbonisation is carbon capture and storage (CCS)[3]. Given the urgent need to achieve climate neutrality within a timeframe that can prevent climate catastrophe, we cannot afford to dismiss any viable solution in the hope that a better one will emerge later. Now is the time to pursue multiple pathways to Net-Zero and support technologies that can deliver the emissions reductions we need, in case more promising approaches fail to materialise.

Process emissions

The most compelling argument in favour of carbon capture and storage (CCS) is its ability to address process emissions. These emissions are unavoidable by-products of the production process itself, not related to energy inputs. This is especially true for industries like cement, lime, and waste-to-energy, which all release CO2 as a result of how their products are made. These sectors are fundamental to any modern society, and it would be highly detrimental for the EU to curtail their output due to their inherent emissions. At the same time, the EU is legally committed to reaching Net-Zero by 2050 and cannot afford to take actions that hinder this target. This contradiction must be resolved for the EU to meet its climate goals without crippling key industries. CCS offers a safe, scalable solution by capturing these emissions and storing them underground—essentially returning the CO2 to where it was originally extracted.

All this doesn't mean we should stop exploring other options. If a new production process is developed that eliminates the need for CCS, it should absolutely be pursued. However, in the meantime, we cannot afford to dismiss CCS out of fear over how it might be applied. According to the IPCC, CCS is a critical technology for the decarbonisation of hard-to-abate sectors and it sees very few chances of achieving climate neutrality without it[4]. In some instances, it can reduce the cost of decarbonisation while speeding up the process.

Let’s make CCS happen and work to take our anthropogenic emissions back out of the atmosphere, rather than waiting in vain for silver bullets.

 

[1] Based on Copernicus data: https://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-summer-2024-hottest-record-globally-and-europe#:~:text=The%20global%2Daverage%20temperature%20for%20boreal%20summer%20(June%E2%80%93August,2023%20(0.66%C2%B0C).

[2] https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide#:~:text=Before%20the%20Industrial%20Revolution%20started,was%20280%20ppm%20or%20less.

[3] CCUS vision paper, 2023 https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/75b4ad48-262d-455d-997a-7d5b1f4cf69c/library/594e5e2f-1d3b-4e9d-afaa-6f6657c7ee3a/details

[4] IPCC AR6 synthesis report: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf