The energy-intensive industries, such as iron and steel manufacturing, oil & gas, and cement, combust huge quantities of fossil fuels and account for significant carbon emissions. The cost of carbon capture from these sources depends primarily on the properties of their flue gas streams, as costs generally fall with higher concentrations of CO2 and lower temperatures. In addition to these combustion sources, natural gas operations produce concentrated CO2 by-products for which the incremental cost of capture and compression is relatively low. Similarly, most of the hydrogen utilized in ammonia manufacture, oil refining, and other industries is derived from the decarburization of fossil fuels, which also generates a by-product stream of CO2 and presents low-cost opportunities for CCS. In addition, in 2022 according to the Energy Information Administration, CO2 emissions in China witnessed a decline of 0.2% or 23 Mt compared to the previous year. This decrease was attributed to the country’s weak economic growth and declining industrial activities. The rising level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and growing awareness for a clean environment have been a major driving factor for the CCS market. Industry players are involved in the research & development of various technologies to tackle the rising CO2 levels. However, CCS is the only and the most viable technology available currently, and on account of these factors, the CCS market is expected to grow substantially over the forecast period.
Increasing concerns regarding the detrimental effect of carbon emissions on the environment have prompted the adoption of carbon capture and storage technology. Various governments are encouraging the implementation of the CCS technology through pilot projects across various industries. This is attributed to the ability of the carbon capture and storage technology to serve as a large-scale solution for achieving high CO2 emission reduction targets and climate control goals. The European Union emerged as a global leader by developing CCS as a part of its energy and climate policy to meet the 80-95% emission reduction target by 2050. Various policies and funding programs favoring the development of more efficient and cost-effective CCS technologies are primarily driving the market in the region. Several provisions under the 2009 EU CCS directive on the geological storage of CO2 have been amended to remove legal barriers to CCS development including the movement of CO2 across Europe and the development of a dedicated transport network. The directive has further boosted the deployment of CCS technologies within the EU, requiring all new 300 MW and above combustion plants to be carbon captureready. Increasing R&D and testing of several pilot projects are expected to lower the cost of the CCS technology and enhance its commercial viability. Low-carbon investment programs such as NER300 and NER400, which have provisions for financing large-scale commercial CCS pilot projects, have accelerated the carbon capture and storage market growth. NER300 is a funding mechanism that provides 300 million carbon allowances for subsidizing the construction of CCS demonstration plants.
The cost of carbon capture & storage varies widely. It depends on the capturing technology whether it is to be added to an existing plant as a retrofit or built into a new plant, on the type of power plant (such as a "supercritical" or "ultra-supercritical" coal plant or an "integrated gas combined cycle" plant), and on the type of fuel (coal or natural gas). It also depends on the time when the carbon is being captured, such as post-combustion, pre-combustion, or oxy-fuel, in which coal is burned in pure oxygen rather than air to produce pure CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it depends on the type of CO2 transport such as pipeline, and on the type of storage such as porous underground saltwater formations, EOR projects, depleted oil & gas reservoirs, and coal seams. The comparison of different power generation technologies is undertaken based on a leveled cost of energy (LCOE) basis, which gives the average cost of producing electricity over the lifetime of a plant, including the costs of construction, financing, and operation. The major reason why CCS is expensive is that it takes a lot of equipment to capture, purify (in case the CO2 is to be sold), liquefy, transport, and bury the CO2. According to the analysis, the average capital cost of a CCS-equipped coal plant would be 76% higher than a conventional plant and the LCOE for a CCS-equipped plant would average 76% more than a conventional plant. The cost of the CCS technology along with the new plant setup is very high, which may not prove to be a viable solution for many industry players as well as countries globally. Therefore, the high cost of CCS is expected to restrain the growth of the CCS market in the near future.
This section will provide insights into the contents included in this carbon capture and storage market report and help gain clarity on the structure of the report to assist readers in navigating smoothly.
Market drivers and restraints
Key market opportunities prioritized
Latest strategic developments
Market size, estimates, and forecast from 2018 to 2030
Market estimates and forecast for product segments up to 2030
Regional market size and forecast for product segments up to 2030
Market estimates and forecast for application segments up to 2030
Regional market size and forecast for application segments up to 2030
Company financial performance
GET A FREE SAMPLE
NEED A CUSTOM REPORT?
We can customize every report - free of charge - including purchasing stand-alone sections or country-level reports, as well as offer affordable discounts for start-ups & universities.
Contact us now to get our best pricing.
ESOMAR certified & member