Can we bury our way out of the climate crisis using carbon capture?

Nature · Published 3 October 2026 Swipe more like this →

In short: Carbon capture and storage (CCS) promises to trap emissions before they reach our atmosphere, locking them deep underground. While the technology offers a potential lifeline for heavy industry, it faces steep economic hurdles, efficiency challenges, and skepticism about whether it truly offsets our reliance on fossil fuels.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a suite of technologies designed to intercept carbon dioxide (CO2) from industrial sources, such as power plants or cement factories, before it enters the atmosphere. The process typically involves three stages: capturing the gas, compressing it into a liquid-like state, and transporting it via pipeline to be injected more than 2,500 feet underground into geological formations like saline aquifers or depleted oil reservoirs. The goal is to create a closed loop where carbon extracted as fuel is returned to the Earth.

Technically, there are several ways to capture CO2. Post-combustion capture uses chemical solvents to scrub emissions from flue gas, while pre-combustion methods process fuel into syngas before burning. Oxyfuel combustion burns fuel in pure oxygen, simplifying separation but requiring extreme temperatures between 1,650 and 2,480 °C. Despite these options, the economics remain difficult. Adding CCS to a power plant can nearly double electricity costs, meaning the technology currently relies heavily on government subsidies or carbon taxes to be viable.

A major point of contention is the role of enhanced oil recovery (EOR), where captured CO2 is pumped into oil wells to flush out remaining reserves. While this provides an economic incentive for companies to capture carbon, critics argue it perpetuates fossil fuel dependence. Furthermore, CCS is not a panacea; it is energy-intensive and has struggled to scale. As of 2024, only 44 plants were operating globally, capturing roughly one-thousandth of total emissions. While it may serve as a niche solution for hard-to-abate industries like cement, many experts suggest that renewable alternatives like wind and solar remain more cost-effective and efficient for general power generation.

Direct air capture (DAC) represents a more ambitious, albeit expensive, frontier. Unlike point-source capture, DAC uses massive fans to pull CO2 directly from the ambient air. Because the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is roughly 300 times lower than in a smokestack, the process is significantly less efficient and requires vast amounts of energy. Consequently, while CCS and its variants offer a potential tool for climate mitigation, their ultimate effectiveness depends on overcoming significant technical, economic, and systemic barriers.

General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.

Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?

Related

• Could a global waste disposal service for carbon stall climate change?
• We can stop global warming without banning fossil fuels by using carbon takeback obligations.
• To cool the planet, we must master the art of locking carbon underground
• Can carbon itself be used to capture carbon dioxide?
• Can we bury our carbon footprint deep beneath the ocean floor?
• Carlsbad Cavern was eaten out from below by sulfuric acid
• Darwin could not explain why animal fossils seemed to appear from nowhere
• After the dinosaurs died, sharks ruled the seas and jungles reached the poles
• A feud between two Victorian geologists took a third period to settle
• How a Washington think tank became a global powerhouse for foreign policy strategy
• Deep beneath the ocean, hidden lakes of hypersaline brine host life without the sun.
• Wispy cirrus clouds are seeded mostly by airborne mineral dust

More in Earth science · More in Nature · Latest · A–Z · All topics