The Case for Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies

In this paper, we use the literature to help us better understand carbon capture costs and how these estimates fare against those of avoided costs, focusing on bioenergy carbon capture and storage (BECCS), carbon capture and storage (CCS), as well as direct air capture technologies. We approach these questions from a meta-analysis perspective. The analysis uses meta-analysis tools while applying them to numerical rather than statistical studies. Our analysis shows that avoided costs are, on average, 17.4% higher than capture costs and that the carbon intensity of the feedstock matters: the estimates for coal-based electricity generation capture costs are statistically smaller than those for natural gas or air. From a policy perspective, the literature suggests that the costs of CCS are like the 45Q subsidy of USD 50 per metric ton of carbon captured.