CCU vs CCS: A balancing act of needs?

The ongoing discourse between carbon capture and utilisation (CCU) and carbon capture and storage (CCS) has been reignited in the industrial gases sector, as experts assess the role each plays in reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2).

In a webinar held today, November 1st, industry leaders explored the strengths and limitations of both approaches, underlining the need for balanced, case-specific solutions. Azin Eskandari, Business Development Manager Europe at Nippon Gases, and Bjorn Utgard, VP of Strategy EMEA at Skytree, shared insights into how each model can support a transition to lower emissions and sustainable business practices.

The case for carbon utilisation

Eskandari explained that CCU, which converts captured CO2 into products such as fuels, chemicals and construction materials, offers a dual benefit of emission reduction and economic gain. 

“Choosing between carbon utilisation or sequestration depends, frankly, on objective visibility and knowing the specific needs of the customer in reducing CO2 emissions,” she said. Utilisation, she argued, is particularly suited to sectors like aviation and construction, where it helps develop circular economy practices by creating value from CO2.

“For example, aviation fuel and construction materials through CO2-cured concrete, it supports the circular economy and reduces the carbon footprint of certain products, potentially creating new markets for low-carbon materials,” Eskandari highlighted. However, she also raised concerns about the “significant energy requirement” to convert CO2, especially in processes involving chemical transformations. The feasibility of CCU hinges on access to renewable energy sources; otherwise, she warned, the carbon reduction potential might be compromised.

The stability of carbon storage

While CCU promotes economic growth through the creation of new products, CCS offers a more straightforward solution by permanently storing CO2 in reservoirs such as saline aquifers or forest soils. 

Eskandari explained that “carbon sequestration has a more immediate and direct impact on reducing atmospheric CO2 flow by ensuring that captured carbon remains isolated and cannot re-enter the atmosphere.” 

In sectors with high emissions, like power generation and heavy industry, sequestration remains a crucial tool for reaching Net Zero targets, particularly when direct emission reductions are not viable.

Yet, the challenge with CCS, she noted, is primarily financial. “The main challenge with sequestration is first and last, the cost – always the cost,” Eskandari said, highlighting the infrastructure investment required, including transport and long-term monitoring. Despite these hurdles, she expressed confidence that CCS will play a “significant role” in the short term, while CCU could drive long-term benefits if clean energy costs continue to decline.

Direct air capture: A key player in the utilisation landscape

Direct air capture (DAC) emerged as a focal technology in the debate, bridging the two camps by providing atmospheric CO2 for utilisation and storage. DAC technology captures CO2 directly from the air, offering a renewable source that avoids the limitations of point-source capture, especially in instances where traditional CO2 sources are depleting.

Bjorn Utgard, VP of Strategy EMEA at Skytree, a company innovating in DAC technology, explained, “Utilisation is the gateway to large-scale engineered sequestration.” DAC enables a consistent supply of atmospheric CO2 that can support industries ranging from food and beverage to pharmaceuticals. 

Utilisation, he said, “is not a climate solution” if CO2 originates from fossil fuels, as it only delays emissions. However, atmospheric CO2 provides a “closed-loop” opportunity where emissions can be captured, used, and recycled without adding to the overall atmospheric load.

Utgard pointed out that global demand for CO2 spans multiple sectors, including greenhouse agriculture, water processing and welding, making DAC a viable solution for industries facing CO2 supply risks. 

“If you look around the world [and] in the US, the industrial CO2 gas market is more than 10 million tonnes a year,” he observed. DAC is gaining traction as sequestration efforts at high-emission facilities, like fertiliser plants, reduce CO2 availability, creating shortages in regions like the US Northeast, Iceland, and Australia.

Skytree’s strategy mirrors the growth trajectory of solar technology, focusing on scaling up production and rolling out DAC installations that could eventually meet industrial demand at large volumes. Utgard described the approach as “building parks, not plants,” which enables rapid adaptation and optimisation of DAC machines.

Balancing needs and pioneering markets

Eskandari and Utgard both acknowledged the evolving dynamics between CCS and CCU, with each solution meeting specific needs. Skytree, for instance, sees great potential in power-to-X projects, where DAC-captured CO2 can create synthetic fuels, like methanol and aviation fuels. 

“We’re also being contracted for power-to-X projects, where developers are looking to produce synthetic methane, methanol, aviation fuels, which can be transported to energy-importing nations,” said Utgard, noting countries like Japan as potential beneficiaries.

With increasing regulatory support and policy initiatives, the experts foresee a balanced approach where CCS addresses immediate emission needs, while CCU fosters economic opportunities. Eskandari concluded, “In the short term, sequestration offers more immediate reduction in atmospheric CO2 levels…while, in the long term, utilisation could have a more positive impact in creating sustainable economic models for CO2.”