Applications of CCS Technology: From Power Plants to Industrial Processes

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has evolved from an experimental concept to a practical climate solution now deployed across multiple sectors worldwide. Originally developed for natural gas processing, CCS has expanded to address emissions from power generation, heavy industry, and even hydrocarbon recovery operations. Understanding how and where CCS is applied helps clarify both its potential and its limitations in the global fight against climate change.

Why CCS matters for power generation 🔗

The power sector represents one of the largest sources of global CO₂ emissions, making it a primary target for CCS deployment. Coal and natural gas-fired power plants release massive quantities of greenhouse gases during electricity generation, and retrofitting these facilities with carbon capture technology can significantly reduce their climate impact.

CCS in power generation works by separating CO₂ from the flue gases produced during combustion. The captured carbon is then compressed and transported for permanent underground storage or utilization. While the technology doesn’t capture 100% of emissions-most systems are designed to capture around 90%-it substantially reduces the carbon footprint of fossil fuel-based electricity.

Pioneering power plant projects 🔗

The first commercial-scale CCS power project launched in 2014 at SaskPower’s Boundary Dam facility in Saskatchewan, Canada. This coal-fired plant demonstrated that carbon capture technology could work at industrial scale, and by May 2024, the project had captured and stored over 6 million tonnes of CO₂.

Several other power sector projects have followed. In China, facilities at Jinjie and Taizhou have begun capturing emissions from coal plants. In the United States, federal funding is supporting multiple power plant CCS demonstrations, including projects at combined cycle gas turbine facilities in Texas and California, as well as coal plants in North Dakota and Wyoming.

Looking ahead, planned projects include the Net Zero Teesside facility in the UK, which aims to capture 2 million tonnes of CO₂ annually from a gas-fired power plant, and the Drax BECCS project, targeting 8 million tonnes per year from a bioenergy plant.

Industrial applications: tackling hard-to-abate emissions 🔗

Beyond power generation, CCS offers critical solutions for heavy industries where emissions are particularly difficult to eliminate. Manufacturing processes for cement, steel, and chemicals produce substantial CO₂ emissions-both from burning fuel for heat and from the chemical reactions inherent in production.

Cement production 🔗

Global cement manufacturing accounts for approximately 8% of worldwide CO₂ emissions. Much of this comes from “process emissions”-the CO₂ released when limestone is heated to produce clinite, the key ingredient in cement. Unlike fuel-related emissions, which could theoretically be addressed by switching to renewable energy, these process emissions cannot be eliminated without fundamentally changing cement chemistry or capturing the CO₂.

The cement industry is now seeing its first commercial-scale CCS projects. Heidelberg Materials’ Brevik plant in Norway reached mechanical completion in late 2024 and represents the world’s first industrial-scale carbon capture facility at a cement plant. The project uses chemical absorption technology to capture approximately 400,000 tonnes of CO₂ annually, which is then transported by ship for permanent storage beneath the North Sea.

Other cement CCS projects are advancing globally. Heidelberg Materials is developing facilities at plants in Sweden, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and the UK, while various technologies including oxyfuel combustion and calcium looping are being tested at pilot scale.

Steel and chemicals 🔗

The steel industry presents similar challenges, with emissions arising from both fuel combustion and the use of coal as a reducing agent in blast furnaces. CCS was first deployed on a steel plant in 2016 at Emirates Steel Industries in Abu Dhabi, capturing CO₂ for use in enhanced oil recovery.

Chemical production facilities, particularly those manufacturing hydrogen, ammonia, and fertilizers, have been among the earliest adopters of CCS technology. Natural gas processing plants, where CO₂ must be separated from raw gas anyway, represent the lowest-cost CCS application and account for the majority of current operational capacity worldwide.

Enhanced hydrocarbon recovery: bridging economics and climate 🔗

One of the most established uses of captured CO₂ involves injecting it into partially depleted oil reservoirs to extract additional petroleum-a technique known as enhanced oil recovery (EOR). This application has been practiced since the 1970s and currently accounts for approximately 80% of all CO₂ captured annually.

EOR works by injecting supercritical CO₂ into aging oil fields, where it mixes with remaining oil and reduces its viscosity, allowing more petroleum to flow to production wells. While most of the injected CO₂ remains underground-effectively stored-this application creates a fundamental tension between climate goals and continued fossil fuel production.

The EOR dilemma 🔗

From an economic perspective, EOR provides crucial revenue that helps offset the high costs of carbon capture. Selling CO₂ to oil producers has made many early CCS projects financially viable. However, using captured carbon to extract more fossil fuels raises legitimate concerns about whether this genuinely advances decarbonization goals.

The counterargument is that EOR at least sequesters CO₂ that would otherwise enter the atmosphere, while the revenue generated supports the development and deployment of carbon capture technology. The current rates of oil and gas use are incompatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C, and using CCS on refineries or for EOR should not become justification for continued high levels of fossil fuel production.

As climate policy strengthens and dedicated storage options expand, the relative importance of EOR in the CCS portfolio is expected to decline. Projects focused purely on permanent storage without oil recovery-like those in Norway and the developing European CO₂ transport and storage hubs-represent the future direction of the industry.

Carbon mineralization: permanent storage through chemistry 🔗

While most CCS projects store CO₂ as a compressed gas in underground reservoirs, an emerging approach converts captured carbon into stable solid minerals. This process, known as carbon mineralization, mimics a natural geological phenomenon that has regulated Earth’s carbon cycle for millions of years.

How mineralization works 🔗

When CO₂ comes into contact with certain rocks rich in calcium, magnesium, and iron-particularly igneous basalts and peridotites-chemical reactions form carbonate minerals like calcite and magnesite. In nature, this process takes centuries, but researchers have demonstrated it can be accelerated dramatically.

CO₂ mineralization stores carbon in solid-phase carbonate minerals that remain stable over geological timeframes-potentially millions of years. This permanence represents a significant advantage over conventional storage in sedimentary basins, which requires ongoing monitoring for potential leaks.

Early demonstrations 🔗

Iceland’s CarbFix project pioneered subsurface mineralization, first demonstrating the approach in 2012 at the Hellisheiði geothermal power plant. Researchers injected CO₂ dissolved in water into basalt rock 500 meters underground. Within two years, more than 95% of the carbon had transformed into solid minerals. The project has since stored over 100,000 tonnes of CO₂ and spawned commercial partnerships with direct air capture companies.

In Oman, the startup 44.01 has successfully mineralized CO₂ in peridotite rock, demonstrating that multiple rock types can serve as permanent carbon sinks. Their pilot project achieved 80% mineralization within just 45 days.

Scaling challenges 🔗

Despite promising results, carbon mineralization remains in early stages compared to conventional geological storage. Current ex-situ mineralization costs range from $50 to $300 per tonne of CO₂, though projections suggest costs could fall below €100 per tonne by 2050 with technological advancement.

Water requirements present another challenge-current methods are relatively water-intensive, though projects are making progress using seawater and recycled wastewater. Research continues on optimizing reaction rates, identifying ideal geological sites, and developing methods that could work at gigatonne scale.

The current state of global CCS deployment 🔗

As of 2024, commercial-scale CCS operates at approximately 50 facilities worldwide, capturing around 50 million tonnes of CO₂ annually-roughly 0.1% of global emissions. The majority of facilities are located in North America, with growing numbers in Europe, China, and the Middle East.

The project pipeline has expanded dramatically, with over 600 projects in various stages of development representing a 60% year-over-year increase. If all announced projects reach completion, global capture capacity could increase nearly tenfold.

Government support has been crucial to this growth. The United States has enhanced its 45Q tax credit for carbon capture, while the UK announced £21.7 billion in subsidies over 25 years for industrial clusters in Teesside and Merseyside. The European Union, Netherlands, and Denmark have committed billions more to CCS development.

Looking ahead 🔗

CCS technology faces significant challenges, including high costs, complex project coordination, and ongoing debates about whether it enables continued fossil fuel use. Yet modelling by the IPCC and IEA indicates CCS will likely need to contribute around 6-8% of total CO₂ mitigation to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

The technology will be most critical for sectors where alternatives are limited-particularly cement, steel, and certain chemical processes. In power generation, CCS provides one option for clean firm power alongside nuclear, geothermal, and long-duration storage, though its deployment will depend on cost competitiveness with these alternatives.

Responsible deployment requires robust regulatory frameworks addressing permitting, long-term liability, and monitoring, along with meaningful community engagement where projects are sited. The coming decade will determine whether CCS can scale from its current modest contribution to become a meaningful component of climate action.

What do you think? Given the costs and complexities involved, should governments prioritize CCS investment over expanding renewable energy, or do we need both approaches running in parallel? How can we ensure CCS technology serves genuine climate goals rather than extending the life of fossil fuel infrastructure?

References

1. https://www.wri.org/insights/carbon-capture-technology
2. https://www.catf.us/resource/carbon-capture-storage-what-can-learn-from-project-track-record/
3. https://www.powermag.com/what-comes-next-for-carbon-capture-in-the-power-industry/
4. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/cement-production-sustainable-concrete-co2-emissions/
5. https://www.globalcement.com/magazine/articles/1232-ccs-co2-capture-storage-in-cement
6. https://www.c2es.org/content/carbon-capture/
7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage
8. https://news.mongabay.com/2024/12/storing-co2-in-rock-carbon-mineralization-holds-climate-promise-but-needs-scale-up/
9. https://www.usgs.gov/index.php/centers/geology-energy-and-minerals-science-center/science/carbon-mineralization
10. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583624001403