Is CCS expensive?
30th May 2020
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is needed as part of the toolkit of technologies to achieve net-zero emissions by mid-century. Yet, texts and commentary about CCS often include qualifiers that are related to the expenditures necessary to deploy it; ‘costly’, ‘exorbitantly expensive’, ‘unaffordable’, ‘uneconomical’. As such, the argument most often brought forward against deployment of CCS is that it is an expensive way of reducing emissions.
- To reach net-zero emissions by mid-century and achieve global climate change targets all decarbonisation options are needed.
- Carbon capture and storage (CCS) plays an important role reducing emissions to net-zero and limiting the overall system cost of decarbonisation.
- With versatile applications, CCS cost differs across its variety of industrial and power-related applications – there is no singular cost of CCS.
- Considering the urgency of the climate crisis, cost should not be a deterrent to investing in CCS nor dictate sequencing of the deployment of decarbonisation options. Instead, deployment will lead to cost reductions.
- A value on carbon is needed to support the business case for large-scale CCS deployment and overcome the technology ‘valley of death’.
The content within the Global CCS Institute Publications, Reports and Research Library is provided for information purposes only. We make every effort and take reasonable care to keep the content of this section up-to-date and error-free. However, we make no claim as to its accuracy, currency or reliability.
Content and material featured within this section of our website includes reports and research published by third parties. The content and material may include opinions and recommendations of third parties that do not reflect those held by the Global CCS Institute.