Capturing carbon

CCS, CCUS and BECCS, ….. and a penguin extra

[Welcome to new subscribers – including another surge from North America. Just a reminder that this Substack is aimed at supporting students and teachers of A Level Geography (hence the title of the Substack) – an examination course for 17–18-year-olds in UK and international schools around the world. Others hopefully may find it interesting and useful – so, again, Bienvenue, Bienvenido, Willkommen, Benvenuto, Witaj, Dobro pozalovat etc. etc. ]

Key terms

Carbon capture and storage (CCS)

The process of capturing carbon dioxide (CO₂), such as in flue gases from fossil fuel power plants, and storing it underground.

Carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS)

The same notion as CCS, but instead of storing the captured carbon dioxide underground, it is used in industrial processes.

Bioenergy carbon capture and storage (BECCS)

Rather than using the CCS process from fossil fuel power stations, it is used from power plants burning biomass.

The need to meet net zero carbon emissions by 2050 requires a complete overhaul of how we meet our basic needs - the cars we drive, the homes we live in, and the way our energy is created. To achieve such an energy transition, focus has been placed on renewable technologies like wind and solar power. These alternatives to fossil fuels can produce electricity without any direct carbon emissions. They also suffer from the problem of being intermittent - they only produce energy when the sun shines or the wind blows.

Hence, some people state that there is still a place for fossil fuels in a future energy strategy. If so, we will need a means of stopping the carbon released when fossil fuels are burned.

CCS

One method identified is carbon capture and storage (CCS). This technology provides a method of capturing carbon dioxide in the flue gases of power plants by absorbing the gas with an amine solution and then recovering pure carbon dioxide by heating the solution. The aim is to be able to capture up to 90% of the carbon dioxide released. This carbon dioxide can then be transported and placed into permanent storage. This can be achieved by injecting the carbon dioxide underground into stable geological features, such as gas fields that have already been exploited for power generation.

CCS is still at a very early stage of development. The Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute suggests that in 2022 there were only 30 active carbon capture and storage facilities globally, and some of these are small demonstration sites.

Costs are also very high. The International Energy Agency estimates the cost to remove carbon dioxide from flue gases of power plants to be between 40 and 120 US dollars per tonne of carbon dioxide. The UK emits around 53.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year from power stations. Costs might come down as the technology is developed and more power plants adopt it. However, this will have to be paid for, which could lead to an increase in energy bills, and so could prove unpopular.

CCUS

Other options being explored include using the carbon dioxide in industrial processes rather than storing it (CCUS). This could help create a more circular economy if the waste gases from energy generation can be used as a material in, for example, plastic production. This is part of the thinking behind the UK government’s focus on creating regional ‘clusters’ for carbon capture. Ideally, the company using the captured carbon dioxide would be as close as possible to where it was produced, so that transport costs can be kept low.

BECCS

A third option is the use of carbon capture and storage with bioenergy (wood, and waste from agriculture or crops grown for their energy content) rather than fossil fuels (BECCS) – see graphic below. As plants take up carbon dioxide from the air while they are growing, the net result is negative carbon emissions whilst also getting energy generation. This seems like a win–win but, the technology has not yet been demonstrated at scale and there have been concerns raised about the amount of land that would be required to grow the biomass needed, potentially competing with food production.

The problem of intermittency

One of the main arguments against CCS is that we should not be focusing on keeping fossil fuel infrastructure and then capturing the carbon emissions. Instead, we should not be emitting the carbon in the first place. The longer we continue burning fossil fuels while we wait for CCS to scale up, the bigger the problem we are leaving ourselves in the future. A more rapid decarbonisation now could leave us in a better position than if we lock ourselves into continued reliance on fossil fuels.

To do this, we would need alternative solutions to the problem of intermittent renewable energy. Battery storage may offer a solution to this. If we can generate large amounts of renewable energy when the sun is shining, we could use batteries to store the energy for periods where renewable generation is low. This approach would still leave us with problems - for example, the cost and sourcing of materials (including the use of rare earths – very much in the news currently) to make the batteries. The UK government is supporting the development of the battery storage industry so we will see in the coming years which technology proves best at decarbonising our energy generation.

The UK

The UK government has pledged nearly £22 billion for CCS projects. This funding is aimed at supporting two major carbon capture clusters in Merseyside and Teesside (NW and NE England respectively), which are expected to create thousands of jobs, attract private investment, and help the UK meet its climate net zero goal.

The UK has one of the largest CO₂ storage capacities in the world, with plans to develop CCS into a national asset that could boost the economy by up to £5 billion per year by 2050. The government aims to establish four CCS clusters by 2030, storing 20 to 30 megatonnes of CO₂ annually, while delivering 50,000 jobs and supporting industrial decarbonisation.

The oil company BP is also investing in CCS, with its Northern Endurance Partnership project in the North Sea (managed from Peterhead in Scotland), which plans to inject up to 4 million metric tonnes of CO₂ under the sea annually over a 25-year span, with full operations expected by 2028.

The USA

In contrast to the UK, the Trump administration has decided to close several climate and clean energy policies including CCS. There are currently 800 proposed carbon-removal schemes funded by venture capitalists and tax offset policies of major corporations. However, they can only scale up if they have government backing (which is something the Biden administration was prepared to do). However, in May 2025, the White House cancelled $3.7 billion in clean energy projects. Trump’s policies are limiting how much deployment of CCS could happen in the next few years.

And, finally, a treat - a carbon connection: penguin poo

A new study has revealed the connection between penguin guano (poo) and atmospheric chemistry in Antarctica. Researchers from the University of Helsinki and Aerodyne Research, have found that penguin colonies are a significant source of ammonia, a critical ingredient in forming cloud condensation nuclei in the region. In clean, remote environments like Antarctica, gases such as sulphuric acid and ammonia are critical for creating condensation nuclei around which water vapour condenses to form clouds.

Penguin colonies are hotspots for ammonia emissions. As the birds nest and defecate in concentrated areas, their guano accumulates in the surrounding soil. This ornithogenic soil continues to emit ammonia long after the penguins leave. During the southern summer, when photochemical activity is high and marine emissions of sulphur compounds are abundant, this ammonia becomes especially potent. These particles can grow large enough to influence cloud formation, particularly in the low-aerosol environment of Antarctica. In essence, penguin colonies act as biological aerosol factories.

Climate change threatens penguin populations by melting sea ice, disrupting their food web, and degrading their breeding grounds. A decline in penguins could reduce atmospheric ammonia, lowering concentrations of condensation nuclei and suppressing cloud formation. Fewer clouds could mean more solar radiation reaches the surface, exacerbating regional warming – a positive feedback loop.

This is a strong example of how closely climate and ecology are interconnected.