Rate and growth limits for carbon capture and storage

Abstract CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) in geological reservoirs is expected to play a large role in low-emissions scenarios from multi-sector human Earth system models. Yet these scenarios have often projected near-term CCS deployments that far exceed what is currently planned, l et al one operational. They have also failed to consider regional differences in capacity to deploy large-scale CO 2 capture, transport, and subsurface injection. Here, we update a leading integrated energy-economy-land model by recalibrating maximum deployments to publicly announced CCS projects through to 2030. We also quantify a range of regionally explicit future scaling and maximum injection rates for the overall CCS value chain and evaluate their implications for emissions trajectories, energy mix, use of rate-limited storage capacity, and mitigation costs. Under limited CCS growth rates, deployment at mid-century and 2100 could be reduced by a factor of 7 relative to a scenario that does not consider injectivity or growth rate limits. However, sustained efforts to rapidly scale CCS could reduce transition costs by nearly $11 trillion (20%) globally, with cost reductions most heavily concentrated in regions such as China and India. Delayed mitigation combined with slower-than-expected CCS deployment could result in large and prolonged temperature overshoot. Conversely, there are lower peak and long-term temperatures with aggressive emissions cuts in anticipation of slow CCS scaling that subsequently far exceeds expectations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2025-05-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/add9af
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.85

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rate and growth limits for carbon capture and storage

Zachary H. Thomas, Jay Fuhrman, Gokul Iyer, Haewon McJeon et al.
4 citations
Environmental Research Letters
Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
2.85
article

Rate and growth limits for carbon capture and storage

Zachary H. Thomas, Jay Fuhrman, Gokul Iyer, Haewon McJeon, Jae Edmonds, Joe Lane, Morgan R. Edwards
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Abstract CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) in geological reservoirs is expected to play a large role in low-emissions scenarios from multi-sector human Earth system models. Yet these scenarios have often projected near-term CCS deployments that far exceed what is currently planned, l et al one operational. They have also failed to consider regional differences in capacity to deploy large-scale CO 2 capture, transport, and subsurface injection. Here, we update a leading integrated energy-economy-land model by recalibrating maximum deployments to publicly announced CCS projects through to 2030. We also quantify a range of regionally explicit future scaling and maximum injection rates for the overall CCS value chain and evaluate their implications for emissions trajectories, energy mix, use of rate-limited storage capacity, and mitigation costs. Under limited CCS growth rates, deployment at mid-century and 2100 could be reduced by a factor of 7 relative to a scenario that does not consider injectivity or growth rate limits. However, sustained efforts to rapidly scale CCS could reduce transition costs by nearly $11 trillion (20%) globally, with cost reductions most heavily concentrated in regions such as China and India. Delayed mitigation combined with slower-than-expected CCS deployment could result in large and prolonged temperature overshoot. Conversely, there are lower peak and long-term temperatures with aggressive emissions cuts in anticipation of slow CCS scaling that subsequently far exceeds expectations.

Environmental Research LettersVol. 20(6)
Joint Global Change Research Institute (US), University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US), Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KR), The University of Queensland (AU), University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, National Research Foundation of Korea
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
2.85
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.