This report has been updated. Click here to view latest edition.
If you have previously purchased the archived report below then please use the download links on the right to download the files.
Märkte für Kohlendioxidentfernung (CDR) 2023-2040: Technologien, Akteure und Prognosen
Marktaussichten, detaillierte Prognosen, Unternehmensprofile und Benchmarking negativer Emissionstechnologien (NETs), die die Kohlendioxidentfernung (CDR) fördern, von naturbasierten bis hin zu technischen Lösungen.
Show All
Description
Contents, Table & Figures List
FAQs
Pricing
Related Content
Meeting net-zero emissions targets will, above all, require swift and meaningful emissions reductions, which are expected to come from efforts such as fossil fuel replacement and efficiency improvement. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that removing carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere will be needed to avoid global warming beyond 1.5-2°C. Estimates vary, but climate scenarios suggest that it will be almost impossible to meet the targets set out by the Paris Agreement without leveraging carbon dioxide removal (CDR) solutions. For this reason, negative emissions technologies (NETs) have been receiving increased attention from researchers, governments, investors, entrepreneurs, and various corporations with ambitious climate goals.
This report provides a comprehensive outlook of the emerging CDR industry, with an in-depth analysis of the technological, economic, regulatory, and environmental aspects that are shaping this market. In it, IDTechEx focuses on technologies that actively draw CO₂ from the atmosphere and sequester it into carbon sinks, namely:
1. Direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), which leverages chemical processes to capture CO₂ directly from the air and sequester it in geologic formations or durable products.
2. Biomass with carbon removal and storage (BiCRS), which uses biomass to produce energy (also known as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage or BECCS) or durable products, such as biochar and construction materials, while locking most of the carbon captured during photosynthesis. It includes bio-oil underground injection.
3. Land-based CDR methods that leverage biological processes to increase carbon stocks in soils, forests, and other terrestrial ecosystems, i.e. afforestation and reforestation and soil carbon sequestration techniques.
4. Mineralization NETs that enhance natural mineral processes that permanently bind CO₂ from the atmosphere with rocks through enhanced rock weathering, carbonation of mineral wastes, and oxide looping.
5. Ocean-based CDR methods that strengthen the ocean carbon pump through ocean alkalinity enhancement, electrochemical direct ocean capture, artificial upwelling/downwelling, coastal blue carbon, algae cultivation/marine permaculture, and ocean fertilization.
Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies that are covered in this IDTechEx report. Source: IDTechEx.
These CDR technologies are at vastly different stages of readiness. Some are nearly ready for large-scale deployment, whilst others require basic scientific research.
Engineered versus nature-based CDR solutions
Nature-based solutions, particularly land-based, dominate the supply of CDR today due to their low cost and high maturity, but they are hard to monitor, and the permanence of carbon sequestration is still uncertain. Methodologies to ensure that the amount and permanence of removals are quantified robustly and transparently are needed. On the other hand, DACCS and BECCS, which are often referred to as 'engineered' CDR solutions, are easier to monitor and quantify net emissions, but their cost is still the main drawback for widespread adoption.
Despite limited current capacity, there has been much interest in DACCS as a solution to permanently remove CO₂ from the atmosphere and reverse climate change. DACCS is immediate, measurable, allows for permanent storage, can be located practically anywhere, and is likely to cause minimal ecosystem impacts.
However, the rate at which DACCS can be scaled-up is likely a limiting factor. The large energy inputs, requiring substantial low-carbon energy resources, the high cost, and the sorbent requirements are foreseeable challenges. The industry is aiming for the ambitious target of gigatonne-scale of DACCS removals by 2050. To make this happen, corporate action, investments, policy shapers, and regulatory guidelines need to come together to bring down the costs.
Although BECCS has taken center stage in high-profile models projecting pathways compatible with the Paris Agreement, deployment has historically been slow, and planned capacity is modest. Despite the technologies behind BECCS being relatively mature, there is a risk that using biomass for CO₂ removal and storage may compete with agricultural land and water or negatively impact biodiversity and conservation. IDTechEx analysis has indicated that BECCS has a large potential to contribute to climate change mitigation, though not at the scale assumed in some models due to economic and environmental risk factors.
Is carbon dioxide removal deferring the problem?
There are growing concerns that valuable resources will be allocated to drawing down CO₂ from the air as opposed to preventing emissions from reaching the atmosphere in the first place. Indeed, although most of the world's mitigation efforts will need to be done by reducing emissions, there is evidence that deploying certain NETs may be more cost-effective and less disruptive than reducing some hard-to-abate emissions.
Incremental reductions in anthropogenic emissions will likely become more expensive once they reach very low levels, whilst the cost of effective NETs will likely reduce with deployment. In such a scenario, methods for reduction and removal of emissions may become competitors for an extended period. Nevertheless, a competitive scenario can be desirable as it can improve the world's ability to manage unexpected risks inherent to mitigation actions. The vast availability of low-cost mitigation solutions will only become a reality if both CDR and emission abatement solutions are developed in tandem and act as complementary components of a diverse mitigation portfolio.
Comprehensive analysis and market forecasts
This IDTechEx report assesses the CDR market in detail, evaluating the different technologies, latest advancements, and potential adoption drivers and barriers. The report also includes a granular forecast until 2040 for the deployment of seven NET categories (DACCS, BECCS, biochar, bio-oil, land-based CDR, ex situ mineralization, and ocean-based CDR), alongside exclusive analysis and interview-based company profiles.
Some of the key questions answered in this report:
- What is carbon dioxide removal?
- What is the climate impact of implementing CDR on a large scale?
- What is the readiness level of negative emissions technologies?
- Which gaps (technological, regulatory, business model) need to be addressed to enable each NET?
- What is the state of the CDR market today?
- What are the requirements (energy, land, water, feedstocks, supply chain) for the deployment of CDR methods?
- What are the key drivers and hurdles for CDR market growth?
- How much do CDR solutions cost today and may cost in the future?
- Who are the key players in the CDR space?
- What characterizes a high-quality CDR offset?
- What is needed to further develop the CDR sector?
- What is the market potential for CDR?
Key aspects
This report provides the following information:
Technology and market analysis:
- Data and context on each type of NET.
- Analysis of the challenges and opportunities in the nascent CDR market.
- State of the art and innovation in the field.
- Detailed overview of CDR technologies: land-based, mineralization-based, ocean-based, and synthetic methods for capturing carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the ambient air.
- Market potential of CDR carbon offsets.
- Key strategies for scaling long-term CDR technologies.
- The economics of scaling up CDR operations.
- Assessment of requirements (infrastructure, energy, supply chain, etc) for CDR market uptake.
- Climate benefit potential of main CDR solutions.
- Benchmarking based on factors such as technology readiness level (TRL), cost, and scale potential.
- Key regulations and policies influencing the CDR market.
Player analysis and trends:
- Primary information from key CDR-related companies.
- Analysis of CDR players' latest developments, observing projects announced, funding, trends, partnerships, and key patents.
Market forecasts and analysis:
- Granular market forecasts until 2040 for both engineered and nature-based CDR solutions, subdivided in seven technological areas.
Analyst access from IDTechEx
All report purchases include up to 30 minutes telephone time with an expert analyst who will help you link key findings in the report to the business issues you're addressing. This needs to be used within three months of purchasing the report.
Further information
If you have any questions about this report, please do not hesitate to contact our report team at research@IDTechEx.com or call one of our sales managers:
ASIA: +82 10 3896 6219
| 1. | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
| 1.1. | Why carbon dioxide removal (CDR)? |
| 1.2. | What is CDR and how is it different from CCUS? |
| 1.3. | The CDR technologies covered in this report (1/2) |
| 1.4. | The CDR technologies covered in this report (2/2) |
| 1.5. | The CDR business model and its challenges |
| 1.6. | Monitoring, reporting, and verification of CDR |
| 1.7. | What is needed to further develop the CDR sector? |
| 1.8. | CDR technology benchmarking |
| 1.9. | The potential of DACCS as a CDR solution |
| 1.10. | The DACCS market is nascent but growing |
| 1.11. | Direct air capture company landscape |
| 1.12. | DACCS: key messages |
| 1.13. | Biomass with carbon removal and storage (BiCRS) |
| 1.14. | The status and outlook of BECCS |
| 1.15. | Biochar and bio-oil |
| 1.16. | The state of the biochar market |
| 1.17. | Afforestation and reforestation (A/R) |
| 1.18. | Forestry offset credits are a large opportunity for CDR |
| 1.19. | Mineralization-based NETs |
| 1.20. | Ocean-based NETs |
| 1.21. | Carbon dioxide removal: Key messages |
| 1.22. | CO2 removal volume capacity forecast (Mtpa) |
| 1.23. | CO2 removal revenue forecast (million USD) |
| 1.24. | CDR market forecast: Key messages |
| 2. | INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL ANALYSIS |
| 2.1.1. | What is carbon dioxide removal (CDR)? |
| 2.1.2. | Description of the main CDR methods |
| 2.1.3. | Why carbon dioxide removal (CDR)? |
| 2.1.4. | What is the difference between CDR and CCUS? |
| 2.1.5. | The cost and abatement potential of NETs |
| 2.1.6. | CDR technology benchmarking |
| 2.1.7. | Status and potential of CDR technologies |
| 2.1.8. | How expensive is CDR today? |
| 2.1.9. | Current CDR price by company and technology |
| 2.1.10. | Potential non-carbon revenue streams of various CDR technologies |
| 2.1.11. | Geological storage is not the only permanent destination for CO₂ |
| 2.1.12. | The challenge of permanence in CDR |
| 2.1.13. | Monitoring, reporting, and verification of CDR |
| 2.1.14. | The role of policy on CDR deployment |
| 2.1.15. | CDR: deferring the problem? |
| 2.1.16. | What is needed to further develop the CDR sector? |
| 2.2. | Latest developments in the CDR industry |
| 2.2.1. | The CDR market is gaining traction |
| 2.2.2. | CDR initiatives launched at COP26 |
| 2.2.3. | The Xprize Carbon Removal: start-ups by technology |
| 2.3. | The carbon dioxide removal market |
| 2.3.1. | Carbon removal vs emission reduction offsets (1/2) |
| 2.3.2. | Carbon removal vs emission reduction offsets (2/2) |
| 2.3.3. | The state of CDR in the voluntary carbon market |
| 2.3.4. | The carbon removal market potential |
| 2.3.5. | Advanced market commitment in CDR |
| 2.3.6. | What characterizes a high-quality CDR offset? |
| 2.3.7. | The role of carbon registries in the offset market |
| 2.3.8. | Challenges in today's carbon market |
| 2.3.9. | CDR technologies: key takeaways |
| 3. | DIRECT AIR CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE (DACCS) |
| 3.1. | Introduction to direct air capture (DAC) |
| 3.1.1. | What is direct air capture (DAC)? |
| 3.1.2. | Why DACCS as a CDR solution? |
| 3.1.3. | The state of the DAC market |
| 3.1.4. | Momentum: private investments in DAC |
| 3.1.5. | Momentum: public investment and policy support for DAC |
| 3.1.6. | Momentum: DAC leads investor interest in CDR |
| 3.1.7. | Momentum: DAC-specific regulation |
| 3.1.8. | DAC land requirement is an advantage |
| 3.1.9. | DAC vs point-source carbon capture |
| 3.2. | DAC technologies |
| 3.2.1. | Direct air capture technologies |
| 3.2.2. | Liquid solvent-based DAC and alkali looping regeneration |
| 3.2.3. | DAC solid sorbent swing adsorption processes (1/2) |
| 3.2.4. | DAC solid sorbent swing adsorption processes (2/2) |
| 3.2.5. | Electro-swing adsorption of CO₂ for DAC |
| 3.2.6. | Solid sorbents in DAC |
| 3.2.7. | Emerging solid sorbent materials for DAC |
| 3.2.8. | Solid sorbent- vs liquid solvent-based DAC |
| 3.3. | DAC companies |
| 3.3.1. | Direct air capture companies |
| 3.3.2. | Direct air capture company landscape |
| 3.3.3. | Climeworks |
| 3.3.4. | Carbon Engineering |
| 3.3.5. | Global Thermostat |
| 3.3.6. | A comparison of the main DAC companies |
| 3.3.7. | CarbonCapture Inc. |
| 3.3.8. | Verdox |
| 3.3.9. | Mission Zero Technologies |
| 3.3.10. | Noya |
| 3.3.11. | Soletair Power |
| 3.3.12. | Hydrocell |
| 3.3.13. | Carbyon |
| 3.3.14. | Sustaera |
| 3.3.15. | Infinitree |
| 3.3.16. | Skytree |
| 3.3.17. | Prometheus Fuels |
| 3.4. | DAC challenges |
| 3.4.1. | Challenges associated with DAC technology (1/2) |
| 3.4.2. | Challenges associated with DAC technology (2/2) |
| 3.4.3. | DACCS co-location with geothermal energy |
| 3.4.4. | Will DAC be deployed in time to make a difference? |
| 3.4.5. | What can DAC learn from the wind and solar industries' scale-up? |
| 3.4.6. | What is needed for DAC to achieve the gigatonne capacity by 2050? |
| 3.5. | DAC economics |
| 3.5.1. | The economics of DAC |
| 3.5.2. | The CAPEX of DAC |
| 3.5.3. | The CAPEX of DAC: sub-system contribution |
| 3.5.4. | The OPEX of DAC |
| 3.5.5. | Levelized cost of DAC |
| 3.5.6. | Financing DAC |
| 3.5.7. | DACCS SWOT analysis |
| 3.5.8. | DACCS: summary |
| 3.5.9. | DACCS: key takeaways |
| 4. | BIOMASS WITH CARBON REMOVAL AND STORAGE (BICRS) |
| 4.1.1. | Biomass with carbon removal and storage (BiCRS) |
| 4.1.2. | BiCRS possible feedstocks |
| 4.1.3. | BiCRS conversion pathways |
| 4.1.4. | CO₂ capture technologies for BiCRS |
| 4.1.5. | The potential for BiCRS goes beyond BECCS |
| 4.1.6. | TRL of BiCRS processes and products by feedstock |
| 4.1.7. | TRL of BiCRS by feedstock: lignocellulose |
| 4.1.8. | TRL of BiCRS by feedstock: organic wastes and oil crops/waste |
| 4.1.9. | TRL of BiCRS by feedstock: algae and sugar/starch |
| 4.1.10. | TRL of BiCRS: discussion |
| 4.1.11. | The economics of BiCRS |
| 4.1.12. | The cost of BiCRS as it scales |
| 4.1.13. | Considerations in large-scale BiCRS deployment |
| 4.2. | Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) |
| 4.2.1. | Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) |
| 4.2.2. | Opportunities in BECCS: heat generation |
| 4.2.3. | Opportunities in BECCS: waste-to-energy |
| 4.2.4. | BECCUS current status |
| 4.2.5. | Trends in BECCUS projects (1/2) |
| 4.2.6. | Trends in BECCUS projects (2/2) |
| 4.2.7. | The challenges of BECCS |
| 4.2.8. | What is the business model for BECCS? |
| 4.2.9. | The energy and carbon efficiency of BECCS |
| 4.2.10. | Is BECCS sustainable? (1/2) |
| 4.2.11. | Is BECCS sustainable? (2/2) |
| 4.2.12. | Network connecting bioethanol plants for BECCS |
| 4.2.13. | Biorecro |
| 4.2.14. | BECCS for hydrogen production and carbon removal |
| 4.2.15. | What is biochar? |
| 4.3. | Biochar and bio-oil |
| 4.3.1. | How is biochar produced? (1/2) |
| 4.3.2. | How is biochar produced? (2/2) |
| 4.3.3. | Biochar feedstocks |
| 4.3.4. | Biochar applications |
| 4.3.5. | Economic considerations in biochar production |
| 4.3.6. | Biochar: market and business model |
| 4.3.7. | The state of the biochar market |
| 4.3.8. | Key players in biochar by technology readiness level |
| 4.3.9. | Certified biochar players |
| 4.3.10. | Takachar |
| 4.3.11. | Drivers and barriers to biochar market uptake |
| 4.3.12. | Biochar: key takeaways |
| 4.4. | Other BiCRS solutions |
| 4.4.1. | Bio-oil geological storage for CDR |
| 4.4.2. | Bio-oil-based CDR: pros and cons |
| 4.4.3. | Wood harvesting and storage (WHS) as a CDR tool |
| 4.4.4. | Bio-based construction materials as a CDR tool |
| 4.4.5. | BiCRS company landscape |
| 4.4.6. | BiCRS: key takeaways |
| 5. | NATURE-BASED CARBON DIOXIDE REMOVAL |
| 5.1. | Introduction |
| 5.2. | Land-based carbon dioxide removal |
| 5.2.1. | Why land-based carbon dioxide removal? |
| 5.3. | Land-based CDR: afforestation and reforestation |
| 5.3.1. | The CDR potential of afforestation and reforestation |
| 5.3.2. | The case for and against A/R for climate mitigation |
| 5.3.3. | Technologies in A/R: remote sensing |
| 5.3.4. | Robotics: forestry mapping with drones |
| 5.3.5. | Other companies applying robotics to A/R |
| 5.3.6. | Robotic foresters |
| 5.3.7. | Automation in forest fire detection |
| 5.3.8. | Photosynthesis enhancement |
| 5.3.9. | Forest carbon projects for carbon offset credits |
| 5.3.10. | Comparing A/R and BECCS solutions |
| 5.3.11. | Afforestation and reforestation: key takeaways |
| 5.4. | Land-based CDR: soil carbon sequestration |
| 5.4.1. | What is soil carbon sequestration (SCS)? |
| 5.4.2. | The soil carbon sequestration potential is vast |
| 5.4.3. | Agricultural management practices to improve soil carbon sequestration |
| 5.4.4. | Challenges in SCS deployment |
| 5.4.5. | The soil carbon sequestration value chain |
| 5.4.6. | The soil carbon sequestration value chain: the roles |
| 5.4.7. | Marketplaces for SCS-based CDR credits |
| 5.4.8. | Propagate Ventures |
| 5.4.9. | Soil carbon sequestration pros and cons |
| 5.4.10. | Soil carbon sequestration: key takeaways |
| 5.5. | Mineralization-based CDR |
| 5.5.1. | CO₂ mineralization is key for CDR |
| 5.5.2. | Ex situ mineralization CDR methods |
| 5.5.3. | Source materials for ex situ mineralization |
| 5.5.4. | Ex situ carbonation of mineral wastes |
| 5.5.5. | R&D developments in ex situ carbonation of mineral wastes |
| 5.5.6. | Carbin Minerals |
| 5.5.7. | Oxide looping |
| 5.5.8. | Heirloom |
| 5.5.9. | Enhanced weathering |
| 5.5.10. | Enhanced weathering attributes |
| 5.5.11. | Key companies in enhanced weathering |
| 5.5.12. | Mineralization: key takeaways |
| 5.6. | Ocean-based carbon dioxide removal |
| 5.6.1. | Why ocean-based CDR? |
| 5.6.2. | Ocean-based CDR methods |
| 5.7. | Ocean-based CDR: abiotic methods |
| 5.7.1. | Ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE) |
| 5.7.2. | Ocean alkalinity enhancement status |
| 5.7.3. | Direct ocean capture (DOC) or electrochemical ocean CDR |
| 5.7.4. | Direct ocean capture: economics and status |
| 5.7.5. | Key players in electrochemical ocean CDR methods |
| 5.7.6. | Captura |
| 5.7.7. | Artificial downwelling |
| 5.8. | Ocean-based CDR: biotic methods |
| 5.8.1. | Coastal blue carbon |
| 5.8.2. | Algal cultivation |
| 5.8.3. | Ocean fertilization |
| 5.8.4. | Artificial upwelling |
| 5.8.5. | Key biotic ocean-based CDR players |
| 5.8.6. | Running Tide |
| 5.8.7. | CarbonWave |
| 5.8.8. | The governance challenge in large-scale deployment of ocean CDR |
| 5.8.9. | Ocean-based CDR: key takeaways |
| 6. | CDR MARKET FORECASTS |
| 6.1. | Forecasting methodology and assumptions (1/2) |
| 6.2. | Forecasting methodology and assumptions (2/2) |
| 6.3. | Price estimate methodology |
| 6.4. | CDR price forecast (US$/tCO₂) |
| 6.5. | CO₂ removal volume capacity forecast (Mtpa) |
| 6.6. | CO₂ removal revenue forecast (million USD) |
| 6.7. | Engineered vs nature-based CDR: volume and revenue forecast |
| 6.8. | CDR market forecast overall discussion |
| 6.9. | DACCS removal capacity forecast (Mtpa) |
| 6.10. | DACCS revenue forecast (million USD) |
| 6.11. | DACCS market forecast discussion (1/2) |
| 6.12. | DACCS market forecast discussion (1/2) |
| 6.13. | BECCS removal capacity forecast (Mtpa) |
| 6.14. | Biochar and bio-oil removal capacity forecast (Mtpa) |
| 6.15. | BiCRS revenue forecast (million USD) |
| 6.16. | BiCRS market forecast discussion (1/2) |
| 6.17. | BiCRS market forecast discussion (2/2) |
| 6.18. | Land-based CDR retired volumes forecast (Mtpa) and corresponding revenues (million USD) |
| 6.19. | Land-based CDR market forecast discussion |
| 6.20. | Ex-situ mineralization removal capacity forecast (Mtpa) and corresponding revenues (million USD) |
| 6.21. | Ex-situ mineralization market forecast discussion |
| 6.22. | Ocean-based CDR capacity forecast (Mtpa) and corresponding revenues (million USD) |
| 6.23. | Ocean-based CDR market forecast discussion |
| 6.24. | CDR volume forecast data table (Mtpa) |
| 6.25. | CDR revenue forecast data table (million USD) |
| 7. | APPENDIX |
| 7.1. | Direct air capture projects operational and announced globally (1/3) |
| 7.2. | Direct air capture projects operational and announced globally (2/3) |
| 7.3. | Direct air capture projects operational and announced globally (3/3) |
| 7.4. | Direct air capture companies (1/2) |
| 7.5. | Direct air capture companies (2/2) |
| 7.6. | Operational and planned BiCRS projects globally (1/3) |
| 7.7. | Operational and planned BiCRS projects globally (2/3) |
| 7.8. | Operational and planned BiCRS projects globally (3/3) |
IDTechEx forecasts global carbon dioxide removal capacity to exceed the gigatonne scale by 2040.
Report Statistics
| slides | 270 |
|---|---|
| Forecasts to | 2040 |
Customer Testimonial
"The resources produced by IDTechEx are a valuable tool... Their insights and analyses provide a strong foundation for making informed, evidence-based decisions. By using their expertise, we are better positioned to align our strategies with emerging opportunities."