New data has sparked alarm over the effectiveness of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, with critics accusing them of being a 'smokescreen' for expanding fossil fuel infrastructure at vast expense to taxpayers. Critics point out that £264 billion – the estimated cost of CCS in the UK by 2050 – is dwarfed by the potential benefits from investing in renewable energy sources.
The Climate Change Committee's own data reveals that the government's current £21.7 billion funding commitment supports projects capturing just over 3 million tonnes of CO2 annually, but this falls far short of ambitions outlined by the Carbon Capture and Storage Association (CCSA). The CCSA project pipeline aims for around 77 million tonnes, suggesting the overall cost could be significantly higher.
Crucially, critics argue that new gas power stations are being prioritised over retrofitting existing ones, driving up demand for imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) and increasing methane emissions. The UN Secretary General has urged policymakers to treat proposals failing to account for these impacts with extreme caution.
The International Energy Agency highlights the stark contrast between the meagre 40 megatonnes captured by global CCS initiatives in 2025, versus the 2,600 megatonnes of CO2 avoided through solar and wind power. Experts now advocate for a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy as the most cost-effective way to reduce emissions.
Long-term employment benefits of CCS are also under scrutiny, with temporary construction jobs often outweighed by smaller operational workforces and significant public subsidies required to keep facilities running.
The UK government's continued support for CCS raises questions about its commitment to meeting net zero targets. Critics argue that funds would be better spent on renewable energy sources and other carbon reduction measures, which offer more immediate and tangible benefits for both the environment and the economy.