The new IPCC report reaffirms the role of CCUS in energy transitions

SPM7 shows that deploying CCUS technologies across the energy sector—in fossil energy supply, bioelectricity supply, and in industry and waste—has the potential to mitigate a small, yet very important share of emissions in 2030. Assuming that a portion of the high-cost portion of bioelectricity is BECCS then the IPCC and IEA (1.2 Gt) appear aligned on the potential contribution of CCUS to emissions reduction in 2030. CCUS is a higher cost option than other energy supply and industry and waste mitigation options, but that does not mean it is less important or less impactful. It is the only mitigation solution for certain process emissions, it is foundational to some long term carbon dioxide removal options, and, via retrofits, it is a solution to address existing emissions that may be otherwise locked in. 

IPCC scenarios are based on integrated assessment modeling and account for technology deployment. They are constrained by real world factors including cost, learning, and speed of deployment. It makes perfect sense that CCUS will have a lower potential contribution in 2030 than solar, wind, or other options. In fact, footnote 47 in the SPM explains exactly this “…Enabling conditions such as policy instruments, greater public support and technological innovation could reduce these barriers. (high confidence)”. 

Today, around 45 Mt of CO2 is captured annually and according to the IEA there are around 200 CO2 capture projects in development globally. If all of those were to go ahead, global capture capacity in 2030 will increase by around 220 Mt. 

Project development takes time, permitting takes time, and construction takes time. More investment is needed and the project pipeline needs to expand substantially. OECD countries can support deployment outside their own borders by providing multilateral development banks with funds to support CCUS development, by working bilaterally with developing countries that have high CCUS potential, and by encouraging knowledge and technology transfer. 

It is not productive to pit technologies against one another. Climate adaptation requires humanity to move at an unprecedented pace to confront the challenge of our time. Climate actions and energy transitions have a lot in common with improv. The answer should always be “yes, and…”

Energy and material efficiency are critical. 

Yes, and the roll out of renewable energy needs to be accelerated.

Yes, and new nuclear power projects need to be established to enhance base-load capacity.

Yes, and more CCUS deployment is needed to abate emissions from existing assets, reduce industrial process emissions, and support carbon dioxide removal.

Yes, and the list goes on. 

All of this requires investment, supportive policies, and most importantly action. 

We need to vote for our representation with this in mind. We need to vote with our wallets to support adaptation. We need to hold policymakers, business leaders, and ourselves accountable. 

Views expressed here are my own. Figure SPM7 sourced from Summary for Policymakers of AR6 Synthesis Report. The figure has been modified in order to display the relevant portions given Linkedin's figure size requirements. Sections "Land, Water, Food", "Settlements and Infrastructure", "Health", along with panel b) were removed. CCUS related mitigation options were underlined.