Do we need Carbon Capture Storage for the government's 2030 Clean Power mission?

This week contracts for the UK's first carbon capture projects in Teesside have been signed, marking a significant step forward in implementing the government's £21.7 billion carbon capture strategy.  

Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has said the investment marks a “new era for clean energy in Britain”, but a new policy briefing from UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources (ISR) critically examines the UK government’s substantial investment in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects. The analysis raises questions about the role of CCS in meeting climate targets, its economic implications, and potential broader benefits and makes seven key recommendations. 

What are the implications of new government spending on Carbon Capture and Storage? 

• While CCS has applications in decarbonising hard-to-abate sectors, the briefing highlights its contribution to achieving clean electricity by 2030 will likely be minimal. Emphasis should remain on renewables and efficiency to meet urgent climate goals. 
• CCS is expected to increase electricity costs due to its significant upfront investment and operational expenses. This raises affordability concerns, particularly for industries transitioning to sustainable practices. 
• The £21.7 billion funding allocation may fall short of what is required to fully deliver the planned projects. The success of these initiatives depends on effective public-private collaboration and efficient resource use. 
• Despite challenges, the development of CCS offers opportunities for technological innovation, cost reductions in future projects, and establishing the UK as a leader in carbon capture expertise. 

Recommendations

1. Prioritise CCS outside of the power sector. The Clean Power 2030 target can be met without significant investment in power plants with CCS. 
2. Recognise the indirect role of CCS, e.g. to produce some of the hydrogen that might be required to balance a decarbonised power system. 
3. Approach bioenergy with carbon capture (BECCS) with caution, due to risks of unsustainable biomass supply chains and life cycle emissions.  
4. Insist that early CCS projects have high levels of monitoring and transparency to drive innovation. There is a risk of poor capture performance and this will allow problems to be identified and addressed.  
5. Complement supply side decarbonisation with more action to reduce energy demand. This would reduce the amount of CCS required. 
6. Ensure value for money. Whilst the announced funding should be sufficient to get the first five projects built, the UK National Audit Office has highlighted the risks of direct contract negotiations with developers. 
7. Clarify plans for the next round of CCS projects. Follow-on projects will be required to realise wider economic benefits, but funding them could divert public investment from other important priorities. 

Authors

• Oliver Broad, Senior Research Fellow 
• Kathy Page, Policy Manager 
• Professor Jim Watson, Director of the Institute for Sustainable Resources 

Key documents 

Links 

• UK Electricity Policy to 2030: Seven Propositions 
• ISR response to government consultation ‘Transitional support mechanism for large-scale biomass electricity generators’
• ISR response to Biomass Strategy
• Nearly £22bn pledged for carbon capture projects
• Greenlight for Net Zero Teesside Power

Image

Pexels: Wolfgang Weiser

Stay informed

Get the latest updates and events from the UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources.

Sign up to our mailing list