Carbon capture is vital in tackling the climate crisis | Letters

George Monbiot suggests that we can solve climate change without carbon capture and storage (The great carbon capture con: behold the wasted billions Burnham could claw back, 8 July). Physics says otherwise. The world is going to generate more carbon dioxide than we can safely dump into the atmosphere, and we can’t rely on our stressed biosphere and oceans to mop up the excess. Stopping global warming will therefore require capturing and durably disposing of carbon dioxide on a huge scale, which right now means injecting it back underground.

Where George does make a good point is in questioning whether carbon dioxide disposal should for ever be paid for using public money. Why should private companies be allowed to make large profits taking carbon out of the ground while the taxpayer foots the bill to put it back? The obvious solution: require those who extract fossil fuels to pay for the disposal of the carbon dioxide their products generate. If the fraction they store rises to 100% by mid-century, fossil fuel use would cause no further warming thereafter.

The government has a golden opportunity to transform the global climate conversation. If it must consent the Jackdaw gasfield, make the licence conditional on an obligation to store a rising fraction of the carbon dioxide that gas will generate. Jackdaw would then be the first producing gasfield in the world that is demonstrably aligned with the goals of the Paris agreement, which would also address the supreme court ruling.

Crucially, this also forces the issue for other producers. If all new fossil fuel production were licensed on these terms, the industry would be brought into line with our climate goals. There is a public consultation on Jackdaw open until 10 August: if you like the idea of fossil fuels that don’t cause global warming, now is the time to say so.
Prof Myles Allen
University of Oxford
Stephanie Loo
Carbon Balance Initiative
Toby Lockwood
Clean Air Task Force

Independent academic evidence is clear on the need for carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the Climate Change Committee (CCC) and the International Energy Agency all recognise CCUS as essential to reaching our climate targets. For industries like cement – 8% of global emissions – CCUS is the only viable route to decarbonisation.

Claims that CCUS will cost £264bn don’t reflect reality, and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero does not recognise this figure. By comparison, the CCC’s seventh carbon budget estimates the cost of reaching net zero will be around 0.2% of UK GDP annually on average, with private investment doing the heavy lifting.

CCUS is vital for the UK’s resilience, energy security and industrial competitiveness. It supports a renewables-led electricity system, providing flexible low-carbon generation when wind and solar output is low. It’s also crucial for safeguarding industries such as cement, chemicals and refining, helping them remain in the UK and compete as global demand for low-carbon products increases.

As with any nascent industry, government support is needed to get initial projects moving, reduce costs and build the market. We’ve seen demand for low-carbon cement from Europe’s first cement plant with carbon capture and storage, as well as demand for greenhouse gas removal credits.

The East Coast Cluster and HyNet CCUS projects are under construction, supporting £4bn in supply-chain activity, with over 300 UK subcontractors and 5,500 jobs. There is an important debate about value for money and delivery, but it must be grounded in evidence.
Olivia Powis
CEO, Carbon Capture and Storage Association