The European Green Deal is a pact that looks to improve the well-being and health of citizens and future generations by providing a range of basic necessities, such as fresh air, clean water, healthy soil, healthy and affordable food, cleaner energy, future-proof jobs, and much more.
It bases much of this on the European Union (EU) becoming greener. Recently, the European Commission released a series of new rules focused on corporate responsibility that aims to strengthen the path toward its carbon-neutral goal.
How will these changes affect life in the EU? We review the upcoming EU rules on green claims and greenwashing and what they mean.
What Is the European Green Deal policy?
The European Union (EU) and European Parliament recognize that climate change and environmental degradation threaten all life in Europe and worldwide. To help get past these challenges and improve the chances of a clean, safe world for future generations, all 27 EU Member States agreed to the European Green Deal.
This environmental agreement will help convert the EU into a modern, resource-efficient, and competitive economy by ensuring:
- A reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions by 55% of 1990 levels by 2030
- Zero greenhouse gas emissions (GHG emissions) by 2050
- Economic growth becomes decoupled from resource use
- No person or place is left behind economically or ecologically
- EU’s energy independence
- Job creation and growth
- An improvement in the overall health and well-being of EU citizens
Financing for the European Green Deal will come from dipping into one-third of the 1.8 trillion euro ($2.022 trillion) investments from the NextGenerationEU Recovery Plan and the EU’s seven-year budget.
What Is the New EU Environmental Legislation?
Newly proposed legislation for the European Green Deal focuses heavily on green claims. Green claims are any claim an organization makes that it’s taking action to combat GHG emissions and to help slow climate change.
Currently, EU laws don’t regulate environmental claims, which leads to inconsistencies with regard to the handling of these claims among Member States.
The changes would also better define green claims. They would be defined as: “any message or representation, which is not mandatory under Union law or national law, including text, pictorial, graphic or symbolic representation, in any form, including labels, brand names, company names or product names, in the context of a commercial communication, which states or implies that a product or trader has a positive or no impact on the environment or is less damaging to the environment than other products or traders, respectively, or has improved their impact over time.”
This is all in an attempt to prevent greenwashing — when an organization focuses more on marketing itself as environmentally friendly than minimizing its environmental impact.
Let’s review the main proposed changes.
Rules for Methodology
To help ensure all green claims are valid and harmonious across the EU, EU Member States must validate environmental claims through science-based methodologies.
Accepted methodologies are expected to have to follow these basic guidelines:
- They must be based on widely recognized scientific evidence and state-of-the-art technical knowledge and account for relevant international standards. Claims are not allowed if no recognized scientific method exists or there’s insufficient evidence to assess environmental impacts and aspects.
- They must assess environmental impact throughout the product’s life cycle.
- They must account for the composition of products, the materials they use when producing products, the amount of emissions created during production, the use of the product, and the product’s durability, reparability, and end-of-life aspects.
- They must assess if achieving positive environmental impacts, aspects, or performance significantly increases any other negative environmental impact.
- They must be third-party accessible with a reasonable access fee, if applicable.
- They require regular review from a third party that can account for technical and scientific progress and the development of relevant international standards.
Rules on Green Claims
source
So, what will be considered valid green claims under these proposed rules? While nothing is official yet, the green claims directives will be as follows:
- They can only make environmental claims substantiated through an approved methodology that meets specific criteria, which we’ll cover later.
- They cannot make positive environmental claims if a product has a positive and negative environmental impact. They may publicize the positive claim, but they must also communicate the negative impact clearly and understandably.
- They must make the information on the assessment on which the environmental claim is based available
With regard to the final bullet point, the information on the assessment that should be made available includes:
- Information about the product or activities of the trader subject to the claim; Environmental aspects, environmental impacts, or environmental performance the claim covers
- Methodology used
- Underlying studies or calculations they used to analyze, measure, and monitor the claim’s environmental impact
- A brief explanation of how they improved environmental performance via a weblink, QR code, or equivalent
There also needs to be a review of the accuracy of their environmental claims every five years at minimum.
Rules on Comparative Environmental Claims
Organizations can make comparative environmental claims as a part of marketing efforts, but experts anticipate the new rules to crack down on such claims. Some of the proposals include:
- Organizations must utilize the identical methodology as the products or traders they compare themselves to.
- Organizations must generate or source the data to substantiate comparative claims equivalently to ensure comparability.
- Organizations must account for the most significant stages along the value chain for all products and traders compared.
Rules on Forward-Looking Claims
Organizations may also claim anticipated environmental benefits under the newly proposed green claims directive. However, authorities would require these future-looking claims to follow specific guidelines, including:
- They must include commitments and milestones that they need to achieve within clearly specified time frames.
- They must indicate a baseline year for all targets, the desired result compared to the baseline year, and the target year to achieve the claim. For example, they might say something like, “We commit to making a 50% reduction in emissions by 2035 compared to our 1990 levels.”
- They cannot include previously achieved targets.
Rules on Enforcement
The proposed rules will also include how they will expose non-compliant organizations. In the proposed rules, public authorities would require Member States to perform compliance monitoring:
- As part of their regular checks
- In cases where they have sufficient reason to believe an environmental claim may infringe upon the rules
- If complaints arise
If an organization makes non-compliant environmental claims, the proposed rule changes would require it to fix the issues quickly. Once the organization receives a non-compliance notification, it would have 10 business days to respond with substantiation.
If the organization doesn’t provide a timely or satisfactory answer, regulatory officials will require it to modify the offending claim or cease all communication of it immediately as consumer protection. The trader will have 30 business days to implement corrective actions.
This enforcement aims to ensure all environmental labels and claims are credible and trustworthy, allowing consumers to make more educated purchasing decisions.
What Are the Current EU Environmental Policies?
The current European Green Deal may not be as extensive as the proposed regulation changes. However, it still looks to take on climate change and help prevent the potential global existential crisis it causes.
To help with this, the European Commission has adopted many climate-focused initiatives and policies, such as:
- Reducing car emissions by 55% by 2030
- Reducing van emissions by 50% by 2030
- Reducing all new-car emissions to 0% by 2035
- Performing energy-efficiency-improving renovations on 35 million buildings by 2030
- Reaching 40% renewable energy by 2030
- Reaching 36% to 39% energy efficiency by 2030
- Restoring Europe’s forests, soils, wetlands, and peatlands to increase carbon absorption to 310 megatonnes (Mt)
What Is the New EU Sustainability Directive?
The EU requires large companies and all listed companies — listed micro-enterprises are excluded — to disclose what they view as risks and opportunities associated with social and environmental issues. They must also disclose their activities’ impact on people and the environment.
This disclosure helps investors, civil society organizations, consumers, and other stakeholders evaluate companies’ sustainability performance as part of the European Green Deal.
In January 2023, the new Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) was enacted. This new directive modernizes and strengthens the social and environmental information companies must report. A broader set of large companies and listed SMEs — approximately 50,000 companies — must now report on sustainability.
To be affected by this new reporting directive, a company must meet at least two of the three following criteria: employ 250-plus people, have assets totaling at least 20 million euros, and have turnover totaling at least 40 million euros.
Companies will begin applying the new reporting rules in the 2024 financial year for reports published in 2025. Until then, the current Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) national law will remain in force, requiring affected organizations to report on environmental protection (Scope 3 emissions included), social responsibility, the treatment of employees, human rights, anti-bribery and anti-corruption, and company board diversity.
Once the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) begins in 2024, corporations will have to report on all information in the current NFRD plus:
- Double materiality, including the company’s sustainability and climate risk, and the impact the company has on society and the environment
- Material-topic-selection process for stakeholders
- More forward-looking information, including organizational climate targets and its progress toward the targets
- Information regarding intangible items, including social, human, and intellectual matters
- Reports aligning with the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) and European Union’s Taxonomy Regulation
Upcoming EU Rules on Green Claims Seek to Elevate Corporate Responsibility
To accelerate the battle against climate change and global warming, the EU continues updating policies and proposals to the existing European Green Deal. The latest proposals focus on empowering European organizations to improve their climate-neutral reporting and to make this a common practice among more European companies.
These upcoming EU rules on green claims and greenwashing may help Europe get on track and remain on a path to help reverse climate change. You can also do your part to help this process by offsetting your carbon footprint by purchasing voluntary carbon credit from Terrapass. We offer a wide range of options for businesses and individuals.
Choose the right option for you, and start offsetting your carbon footprint today.
Brought to you by terrapass.com
Featured image:
The post Upcoming EU Rules on Green Claims and What They Mean appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
Google Inks Waste-to-Carbon Deal to Remove 200K Tons of CO₂ With AI and Biochar
Google has signed a major deal to buy carbon removal credits from an affiliate of AMP Robotics. The agreement targets the removal of 200,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) by 2030. It is one of Google’s largest carbon removal purchases to date.
The project uses artificial intelligence (AI) to sort municipal solid waste. Organic waste is separated before it reaches landfills. Instead of decomposing and releasing methane, the waste is turned into biochar. Biochar is a stable material that can store carbon for hundreds of years.
The deal shows how large companies are moving beyond simple offsets. They are now funding durable carbon removal solutions that can scale over time.
AI + Biochar: Turning Trash into Carbon Storage
The project’s approach tackles two problems at once. It reduces methane emissions in the short term. It also removes carbon dioxide for the long term. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas. In the United States, landfilled waste is the third-largest source of human-caused methane emissions, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Reilly O’Hara, Program Manager, Carbon Removal at Google, remarked:
“Beyond the carbon removal itself, we are excited to explore the dual-action impact of AMP’s approach on methane – a superpollutant 80x more potent than CO2. By diverting organic matter before it decomposes and utilizing biochar in landfill soil covers to neutralize existing gases, this partnership could serve as a blueprint for eliminating emissions at the source, leveraging existing industry, and creating a scalable model for the circular economy.”
The AMP system uses AI to identify and sort materials from mixed waste streams. The company says its platform has already identified more than 200 billion items and processed 2.9 million tons of recyclables globally.
In this project, the system will process up to 540,000 tons of waste per year in Virginia. At least 50% of this waste will be diverted from landfills. Each ton of waste diverted can reduce or remove more than 0.7 tons of CO₂e. That adds up to over 378,000 tons of CO₂ avoided or removed each year. This is equal to taking about 88,000 cars off the road annually.
The project is backed by a 20-year contract with a regional waste authority serving 1.2 million people. Over time, AMP aims to convert 5 million tons of organic waste into biochar over 20 years.
image here….
Biochar also has added uses. It can be used in landfills to reduce odors and control pollution. It may also be used in construction and cement. This creates new value streams while storing carbon.
Carbon Removal Market Gains Momentum
The deal reflects a wider shift in the carbon market. Companies are now focusing on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) instead of traditional offsets. Carbon removal captures CO₂ from the atmosphere and stores it for long periods.
The market is still small but growing fast. A coalition backed by major companies, including Google, has committed to spending $1 billion on carbon removal credits by 2030.
Recent deals show rising demand:
- Google agreed to buy 100,000 tons of carbon removal credits from an agricultural biochar project in India.
- It also signed a deal for 50,000 tons of removal credits using underground waste storage technology.
Prices for high-quality removal credits remain high. Some deals have reached around $362 per ton, reflecting early-stage technology and limited supply.

At the same time, developers are working to scale production and lower costs. Biochar is seen as one of the more practical options today because it uses existing waste streams and proven processes.
Methane Matters: Quick Wins for the Climate
One reason this deal matters is its focus on methane. Methane causes much faster warming than CO₂ in the short term. Reducing methane can deliver quick climate benefits.
Waste is a major methane source. When organic waste breaks down in landfills, it releases methane gas. By diverting this waste early, AMP’s system prevents methane from forming at all.
This makes waste-based carbon removal different from many other methods. It combines emissions avoidance and carbon removal in one process.
This dual benefit is attracting attention from companies and policymakers. Many climate strategies now include methane reduction as a priority. Technologies that can do both removal and avoidance may scale faster than single-purpose solutions.
Beyond market impact, the deal highlights how Google is managing its rising emissions.
How This Fits Google’s Climate Strategy
The deal is part of Google’s wider plan to reduce its climate impact. The company has set a goal to reach net-zero emissions across its operations and value chain by 2030. It also aims to run on 24/7 carbon-free energy by 2030, meaning every hour of electricity use is matched with clean energy.

However, Google’s emissions have risen in recent years. In its 2024 environmental report, the company noted around 11.5 million tonnes of ambition-based CO₂e emissions. This marks an 11% rise from 2023 and is about 51% higher than in 2019. The increase shows ongoing growth in energy use, mainly from AI-powered data centers and expanded infrastructure.

Because of this, Google is using carbon removal to address emissions it cannot fully eliminate. The company has said it will rely on high-quality carbon removal credits instead of traditional offsets. These credits must remove carbon from the atmosphere and store it for long periods.
The tech giant is also a founding member of Frontier, a coalition of companies committed to spending $1 billion on carbon removal by 2030. The group helps fund early-stage technologies and scale supply.
This strategy reflects a broader shift among tech companies. As energy use grows, especially from AI and cloud computing, firms are investing more in carbon removal to meet climate targets.
Carbon Removal Demand Surges, But Supply Falls Short
The Google–AMP deal shows how fast the carbon removal market is growing. But the market is still far from the scale needed to meet climate goals. Today, global emissions remain high at about 38 gigatonnes of CO₂ in 2024, according to the International Energy Agency.
To balance these emissions, demand for carbon removal is rising quickly. Estimates show the market could reach 40 to 200 million tonnes of CO₂ removal per year by 2030, and as much as 80 to 900 million tonnes by 2040. This could create a $10 billion to $40 billion market by 2030, growing to as much as $135 billion by 2040.

At the same time, supply is still limited. Current announced projects may only deliver around 33 million tonnes by 2030, far below expected demand. This gap is one reason large buyers like Google are signing long-term deals early. These agreements help scale new technologies and secure future supply.
Long-term, carbon removal will play a major role in climate strategy. Some projections show that removal capacity must reach around 1.7 gigatonnes per year by 2050 to meet global climate targets. Carbon capture alone could deliver about 12% of total emissions reductions between 2030 and 2050, especially in heavy industries like cement and steel.

Investment is also rising fast. In the past five years, the number of carbon removal startups has grown fivefold, and venture funding has increased sevenfold. This shows strong interest from both private investors and large companies.
Closing the Carbon Gap
Still, challenges remain. Costs are high, and standards are still evolving. Some forecasts suggest the market could reach up to $100 billion per year by the early 2030s, but only if policy support and financing improve.
In this context, the Google–AMP deal reflects a clear shift. Companies are moving early to secure high-quality carbon removal. They are also helping build the market from the ground up. Waste-based solutions like biochar may scale faster because they use existing systems and deliver both methane reduction and carbon storage.
Overall, carbon removal is moving from a niche idea to a core part of climate strategy. But the gap between current supply and future demand remains large. Closing that gap will require strong investment, clear rules, and continued innovation across the sector.
The post Google Inks Waste-to-Carbon Deal to Remove 200K Tons of CO₂ With AI and Biochar appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
From Uranium to Thorium: The New Equation Driving Global Nuclear Innovation
Thorium is making a strong comeback in the global energy conversation. For decades, it remained on the sidelines while uranium dominated nuclear power. Now, the shift toward net-zero emissions is changing that story. Countries need reliable, low-carbon energy that works around the clock. As a result, advanced nuclear technologies are gaining attention again—and thorium is leading that discussion.
At the same time, rapid innovation in reactor technologies is making thorium more practical. Designs such as molten salt reactors and small modular reactors are unlocking its potential. This combination of policy support, technological progress, and climate urgency is pushing thorium from theory toward reality.
Thorium vs Uranium: A New Nuclear Equation
Thorium is a naturally occurring radioactive metal found in the Earth’s crust, but it works differently from uranium. It is not directly fissile, which means it cannot sustain a nuclear reaction on its own. Instead, thorium-232 absorbs neutrons inside a reactor and transforms into uranium-233. This new material then drives the nuclear reaction.
This process may sound complex, but it delivers clear benefits. Thorium reactors or thorium-based fuel systems are more stable under high temperatures. They also reduce the risk of catastrophic failure, such as meltdowns. In addition, they generate far less long-lived radioactive waste compared to conventional uranium reactors
Thus, the comparison between thorium and uranium is the key to this transformation. We summarize the differences in the table below:

Another factor is safety. Many thorium reactors use passive safety systems that rely on natural processes, which lowers the risk of accidents. Uranium reactors, especially older ones, depend more on active cooling and human control.
Geopolitics also plays a role. Uranium supply is concentrated in a few regions, creating risks. Thorium is more widely available, which improves energy security and reduces dependence on specific countries.
However, uranium still has a clear advantage today. Its infrastructure is already in place, and it has long powered nuclear energy. Often called “yellow gold,” it is well understood and widely used with a mature supply chain. Thorium still needs new reactor designs, fuel systems, and regulatory support, so it is more likely to complement uranium in the near term.
Advanced Reactor Technologies Unlocking Thorium
For many years, thorium remained underutilized because conventional reactors were not designed for it. Today, that is changing. New reactor technologies are making thorium more viable.
- Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs): Use liquid fuel for better heat transfer and low pressure, improving safety, efficiency, and thorium utilization.
- Advanced Heavy Water Reactors (AHWRs): Support mixed fuel use, enabling gradual thorium adoption; central to India’s nuclear strategy.
- Small Modular Reactors (SMRs): Compact and flexible systems that are easier to deploy; increasingly designed to support thorium fuel cycles.
- Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs): A type of MSR offering high efficiency and built-in safety, making them a leading thorium energy solution.
Global Thorium Reserves Highlight Long-Term Potential
Thorium’s abundance is one of its strongest advantages. According to geological assessments, these reserves could theoretically generate electricity for several centuries if fully utilized in advanced reactor systems. That makes thorium not just an alternative fuel, but a long-term energy solution.
Even when compared to rare earth elements, which total around 120 million tons globally, thorium remains highly competitive in terms of its energy potential, despite differences in extraction economics.
USGS data shows that the geographic spread of thorium further strengthens its appeal.
- Major reserves are located in India, Brazil, Australia, and the United States. India leads with approximately 850,000 tons, followed by Brazil with 630,000 tons. Australia and the United States each hold around 600,000 tons.
- In addition, countries within the Commonwealth of Independent States collectively hold about 1.5 million metric tons of thorium. This includes nations such as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Azerbaijan. This wide distribution supports global energy security by reducing reliance on a limited number of suppliers.
Regional Highlights
Asia-Pacific leads with over 55% of global share in 2025, supported by strong government backing, active research programs, and growing use of rare earth materials.
Countries like India and China are driving this growth. Rising energy demand and long-term policies are accelerating investment in thorium technologies. They are not just researching but actively preparing for deployment.
Meanwhile, North America is the fastest-growing region. Increased funding and private sector involvement are boosting innovation, especially in next-generation reactors that can use thorium fuel.
Together, this regional momentum is driving global competition and pushing the race for leadership in thorium energy.
Thorium Market Size and Demand Drivers
Market research reports indicate that the global thorium reactor market is projected to grow from $4.56 billion in 2025 to $8.97 billion by 2032, with CGAR 10.1%. This growth reflects increasing demand for clean, reliable, and low-carbon energy.

At the same time, other broader market estimates suggest the thorium sector could reach $13 billion by 2033, growing at a more moderate 4% rate. These figures include not just fuel, but also materials, reactor development, and associated technologies.

Several factors drive this growth. Governments are increasing investments in clean energy technologies. Research institutions are advancing reactor designs. At the same time, the need for energy security and reduced carbon emissions is becoming more urgent.
These converging trends are positioning thorium as a strategic energy resource. While large-scale commercialization is still ahead, the direction of growth is clear.
Competitive Landscape: A Market Defined by Innovation
The thorium market is still in its early stages, and this is reflected in its competitive landscape. Unlike mature energy sectors, it is not dominated by large-scale commercial players. Instead, it is shaped by collaboration, research, and pilot projects.
Copenhagen Atomics’ Strategic Partnership with Rare Earths Norway
As the industry evolves, partnerships are becoming increasingly important. One notable example is Copenhagen Atomics, which has signed a Letter of Intent with Rare Earths Norway. This agreement aims to secure access to thorium from the Fensfeltet deposit in Norway.
This partnership highlights a key shift in how thorium is viewed. It is now being recognized as a valuable energy resource. By integrating thorium into supply chains, companies are laying the groundwork for future commercialization.
Copenhagen Atomics is also developing modular molten salt reactors designed for mass production. This approach requires not only technological innovation but also a reliable supply of materials. Partnerships like this are critical for building that ecosystem.
Thorium molten salt reactor, with the focus on low electricity price and fast installation

India’s Thorium Strategy Sets a Global Benchmark
India stands out as one of the most advanced players in the thorium space. Its nuclear program is built around a three-stage strategy designed to fully utilize its domestic thorium reserves.
- The country’s Department of Atomic Energy and Atomic Energy Commission are leading this effort. Research institutions are developing advanced reactor designs, including the Advanced Heavy Water Reactor and molten salt systems.
- One of the key milestones is the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor at Kalpakkam, which is expected to play a crucial role in producing uranium-233 from thorium. This will enable a closed fuel cycle, improving efficiency and sustainability.
- Private sector involvement is also growing. Clean Core Thorium Energy is supplying advanced fuel for testing in existing reactors. At the same time, companies like NTPC and Larsen & Toubro are supporting large-scale deployment and infrastructure development.
India’s long-term vision is ambitious. With its vast thorium reserves, the country aims to secure an energy supply for up to 200 years. This strategy not only strengthens energy security but also positions India as a global leader in thorium technology.
Thor Energy: Leading in Fuel Development
Companies like Thor Energy are leading the way in fuel development. Their work on thorium-plutonium mixed oxide fuel and ongoing irradiation testing provides valuable real-world data. Similarly,
Other players are taking different approaches:
- Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation is integrating thorium fuel cycles into its Micro Modular Reactor design. This approach focuses on creating a fully integrated energy system.
- NRG in the Netherlands is conducting critical experiments that provide data on reactor performance and fuel behavior.
- National laboratories also play a key role. Organizations such as Atomic Energy of Canada Limited provide the expertise and facilities needed to support research and development. Their contributions are essential for advancing the technology.
Overall, the market is best described as a technology race. Companies are not competing on volume yet. Instead, they are competing to prove that their solutions work at scale.
A Strong Fit for the Net-Zero Transition
The global push for carbon neutrality is a major driver behind thorium’s rise. More than 130 countries have set or are considering net-zero targets. Achieving these goals requires a mix of energy solutions.
As we may already know, renewables like solar and wind are essential, but they are not always reliable. Their output depends on weather conditions, which creates gaps in the electricity supply. These gaps must be filled by stable, low-carbon sources.
Thorium-based nuclear power offers exactly that. It provides consistent baseload electricity without producing greenhouse gas emissions during operation. At the same time, it addresses key concerns associated with traditional nuclear energy, such as safety and waste.
This alignment with climate goals is driving interest in thorium. Governments are exploring it as part of broader energy strategies. Investors are also paying attention, recognizing its long-term potential. Simply put, this phase can be seen as a technology race. The goal is to prove that thorium systems can operate safely, efficiently, and economically at scale. Success in this area will determine the pace of market growth.
The post From Uranium to Thorium: The New Equation Driving Global Nuclear Innovation appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
Conflict in the Middle East Threatens Carbon Capture Buildout: What It Means for the Global CCUS Market?
The conflict in the Middle East is raising doubts about major carbon capture projects in the Gulf region. Carbon capture, utilization, and storage, known as CCUS, is a technology that prevents carbon dioxide (CO₂) from entering the atmosphere. It captures CO₂ from industrial sources and stores it underground or uses it in industrial processes. CCUS is seen as crucial for cutting hard‑to‑abate emissions from oil, gas, cement, and steel.
Gulf Ambitions Hit the Pause Button
Before the conflict, Gulf plans aimed for about 20 million tonnes per year (Mtpa) of CCUS capacity by 2030. This would have positioned the region as a key global hub. But Rystad Energy says this is now unlikely. The pipeline may shrink closer to the lower case of around 12 Mtpa by 2035 due to delays and repriced risk.

The Gulf’s CCUS buildout has strong logical drivers. The region has abundant oil and gas operations, and projects often connect to those facilities. However, when the upstream energy system is disrupted, CCUS plans can be delayed, pushed back, or re‑evaluated. This change affects investors’ view of CCUS as a near‑term investment in the region.
Rising Costs and Risk Reprice Carbon Capture
One major risk from prolonged conflict is rising energy costs. If energy prices jump — which often happens during regional conflict — the cost to capture and transport CO₂ also rises.
Rystad’s analysis shows that a 50 % rise in energy prices could increase capture and transport costs by about 30 %. That could push the cost of capturing a tonne of CO₂ well above the price range expected by 2030 in the European Union’s emissions trading system.
- The analysis suggests an increase from $95 per tonne to $124 per tonne using a ‘middle impact’ case, where energy prices rise about 50%.

Higher costs come from more expensive power, higher equipment prices, and slower supply chains. All these pressures hit CCUS projects hard because they are already more costly than conventional infrastructure.
Energy‑intensive capture systems need cheap, reliable supplies of power and materials. Rising inflation and disrupted supply chains could reduce availability and slow project build‑outs.
Longer project timelines may also raise the cost of capital. Investors typically demand higher returns when projects take longer or face greater uncertainty. In some cases, projects may only move forward if they are supported by governments or strategic partners, especially when the cost per tonne of CO₂ captured rises above key benchmarks.
Global CCUS Market Still Expanding
While the Gulf faces near‑term risks, the global CCUS market has continued to grow. A large number of projects are being developed worldwide.
As of 2025, ~628 CCUS projects are tracked globally across all stages, with potential capture capacity exceeding 416 Mtpa if completed. Operational capacity reached 64 Mtpa from 77 facilities. The breakdown by number of facilities and total capture capacity is as follows:

The market is growing because many governments and companies have adopted emission‑reduction mandates. About 63 % of industries say these mandates accelerate CCUS deployment.
- Nearly 55 % of new CCUS projects are integrated with other low‑carbon technologies like hydrogen or renewable energy.

North America leads global capacity, accounting for about 46 % of total CCUS project capacity. Europe holds around 26 %, Asia‑Pacific about 21 %, and the Middle East & Africa roughly 7 % of the total project pipeline.
The oil and gas sector remains the largest user of CCUS, making up about 53 % of the global captured CO₂. Industrial decarbonization in sectors like cement and steel now represents around 25 % of the planned capacity worldwide.

Market research also shows that the CCS market size was estimated at about USD 3.9 billion in 2025, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7 % to reach USD 6.7 billion by 2033. This growth reflects rising investments in decarbonization technologies across industrial and power sectors.
Long-Term Outlook: The Gigaton Challenge
CCUS projects are growing, but still fall far short of what climate models recommend. A recent Rystad Energy forecast suggests that global CCUS capacity could expand to more than 550 million tonnes per year by 2030. That’s more than a tenfold increase over today’s roughly 45 million tonnes per year of captured CO₂.
However, this projected expansion is still far below what many climate scenarios require. Limiting global warming to under 2 °C often needs CCUS to capture nearly 8 gigatonnes of CO₂ each year by 2050 in many energy transition models. That means growth must accelerate sharply after 2030 to meet climate goals.
The IDTechEx forecast shows a strong long‑term outlook for CCUS. It estimates global capture capacity will hit around 0.7 gigatonnes per year by 2036. This indicates rapid growth, with a CAGR over 20% from 2026 to 2036. This would place CCUS as a major technology in global decarbonization, if investment and deployment scale up quickly.
What This Means for the Gulf and the World
For the Gulf region, rising geopolitical risk is changing how CCUS projects are evaluated. Many planned build‑outs linked to oil and gas value chains may be slowed or repriced as risk premiums rise.
Some analysts now expect that Gulf CCUS capacity may align with a more cautious trajectory through the mid‑2030s rather than a rapid 2030 build‑out. Moreover, the 8 Mtpa shortfall equals 1.5% of the projected 550 Mtpa global capacity, placing intense pressure on North America and Europe to accelerate.
Rising costs from energy price shocks further complicate the equation. With Middle East & Africa capacity shrinking from 7% to ~4% of the total pipeline, US 45Q projects and EU ETS industrial clusters must find enough replacement capacity.
Still, global drivers for CCUS remain strong. Governments and companies worldwide continue to plan and build projects. New technologies and integrations with hydrogen, renewable energy, and industrial clusters could help spread costs and scale the technology.
As many countries expand their net‑zero plans, CCUS will play a key role in managing emissions that are difficult to eliminate through electrification or fuel switching alone.
In this evolving landscape, the CCUS market is poised for significant long‑term growth, but near‑term geopolitical disruptions and cost pressures will require careful planning, strong policy support, and sustained investment. Strategic partnerships and global cooperation will be key to ensuring that CCUS can meet both economic and climate goals.
The post Conflict in the Middle East Threatens Carbon Capture Buildout: What It Means for the Global CCUS Market? appeared first on Carbon Credits.
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Renewable Energy2 years ago
GAF Energy Completes Construction of Second Manufacturing Facility






