EU Pushes Costly Carbon Capture Despite Mounting Challenges

EU Pushes Costly Carbon Capture Despite Mounting Challenges

29 views

The European Union is planning a major push to cut emissions from heavy industry by investing in carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. The goal is to capture and store 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO₂) each year by 2030 and scale that to 280 million tonnes by 2040. But experts warn that the plan faces high costs, slow progress, and technical issues that could delay results.

CCS works by capturing CO₂ from factories, turning it into liquid form, and storing it underground. The CO₂ can be moved through pipelines, ships, or trucks to storage sites. Right now, Europe only has five CCS sites, and they capture just 2.7 million tonnes of CO₂ a year. Of that, over 60% is handled by Norway, which is not part of the EU. Most of Norway’s captured CO₂ comes from gas processing.

Critics say the EU is spending too much on CCS while ignoring cleaner options. A report by WWF found that EU grants for cement focus only on CCS and leave out other ways to reduce emissions, like cleaner fuels and energy efficiency.

Three major CCS projects backed by the EU—Northern Lights in Norway, Pycasso in France, and Callisto in Italy—are already showing signs of strain. They face long delays, technical limits, and unclear budgets. These issues raise doubts about how fast and how well CCS can grow.

One of the biggest projects is Northern Lights in Norway. It is run by energy giants Equinor, Shell, and TotalEnergies. The project hopes to store 1.5 million tonnes of CO₂ each year, starting with emissions from companies like Yara, Ørsted, and Heidelberg Materials. The CO₂ will be moved by ship to a site near Øygarden and then sent into storage under the sea.

Each ship carries 8,000 tonnes per trip. But only two ships are ready today. Two more will be built by 2026, though they may face delays. Storms, equipment issues, or cleaning needs could slow things down even more. CO₂ mixed with moisture can cause corrosion, so the system needs to be dried after every trip.

The first phase of Northern Lights will cost about $145 (around €128) per tonne just for transport and storage. Capturing the CO₂ at the factory adds another $30 (€27) per tonne. For a company like Yara, this means spending up to $202 million each year—nearly as much as its total earnings in Europe. Experts worry this cost will make the project hard to keep running in the long term.

In southern Europe, the Callisto project plans to build a huge CCS network across Italy and France. It’s led by Eni, Snam, and Air Liquide. The idea is to bring CO₂ from factories in both countries to a storage site in the Adriatic Sea. French CO₂ would be shipped around Italy, while Italian emissions would travel through pipelines.

This plan needs huge amounts of money from both governments and businesses. But right now, the carbon market price under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) is only €80 per tonne. That’s not enough to make CCS pay off.

Roberto Bencini from the EU Commission said the cost of moving CO₂ over long distances makes CCS “economically unjustifiable” at current carbon prices. He added that the carbon price often changes, which scares away private investors.

Eadbhard Pernot from the Zero Emissions Platform said no business wants to commit to long-term CCS plans unless the price is stable. He explained that many companies won’t invest in CCS unless they get a deal that guarantees a set price for CO₂. These are called “contracts for difference” and help reduce financial risk.

Without these fixed-price deals, experts believe many CCS projects in Europe could stall or fail. That would make it harder for the EU to reach its climate targets. Even though the EU wants to use CCS to cut emissions in tough industries like cement and steel, it may not be enough without more support and better planning.

As the EU prepares to invest billions into CCS, the question remains: Can the technology deliver fast and affordable results? Or will other clean energy options become a better path forward?