Why Carbon Capture Can’t Conceivably Solve Climate Change — ProPublicaSearch ProPublica SearchClose<br>ProPublica is a nonprofit, investigative newsroom that exposes corruption. We report in all 50 states and partner with local newsrooms. Our work spurs real-world impact and has received numerous awards, including nine Pulitzer Prizes.
Topics We Cover<br>See All<br>Abortion<br>Civil Rights<br>Courts<br>Criminal Justice<br>Debt<br>Democracy<br>Education<br>Environment<br>Health Care<br>Health Insurance<br>Immigration<br>Labor<br>Mental Health<br>Military<br>Police<br>Politics<br>Pregnancy<br>Prison<br>Racial Justice<br>Regulation<br>Sex and Gender<br>Technology
Our Biggest Series<br>See All<br>Life of the Mother<br>How Abortion Bans Lead to Preventable Deaths
The New Immigration<br>How Recent Arrivals at the Border Have Changed the Country and Its Attitudes
Friends of the Court<br>SCOTUS Justices' Beneficial Relationships With Billionaire Donors
False Promises<br>Why carbon capture and storage won’t fix our climate crisis.<br>by Katie Worth and Lucas Waldron, ProPublica; additional reporting by Amy Westervelt and Maddie Stone, Drilled; illustration and animation by Case Jernigan for ProPublica; design by Anna Donlan, ProPublica June 25, 2026
Carbon Captured How the fossil fuel industry influenced climate research<br>An investigative series by ProPublica and Drilled
For more than 40 years, oil companies have been funding research at prestigious universities into climate change “solutions” that would not require the public to stop using oil and gas. Among their favored fixes is carbon capture and storage.<br>An investigation by ProPublica and Drilled has found that boosters of CCS have ignored evidence of the technology’s limitations, or overstated its potential, and convinced the world it could be effective.<br>They’ve promoted this idea despite the fact that for CCS to work at the scale now envisioned, the world would need to devote almost unimaginable resources. Even if that were done, it might still prove impossible to trap so much carbon dioxide inside the earth.<br>Optimism has reigned, however, because small tests have worked and because slow global response to climate change has left few other options.
Projections for carbon storage<br>Actual carbon<br>storage
In 2008, the International Energy Agency projected that to stave off dangerous levels of warming, we would have to be burying around 1.6 billion tons , or 1,600 megatons, of CO2 per year by 2025.
Since then, its optimistic projections have continued.
But deployment of the technology has never come close to those ambitions.
Right now, globally, we’re permanently burying less CO2 than a single large power plant can emit in a year.<br>Some experts point to the CO2 that gets pumped into the ground to help extract oil as proof CCS works. But that process, called enhanced oil recovery, isn’t designed to function the same way and isn’t monitored as stringently.<br>Global leaders are betting on carbon capture working now more than ever.<br>The models used in the latest United Nations assessment presume the technology succeeds.<br>IEA representatives and U.N. modelers say their projections reflect what the world has to do to achieve its goals of averting extreme warming.
To make CCS work, we would need to capture CO2 pollution in four ways:
-->Trap it from smoke stacks.
Absorb it from the air with fast-growing grasses or trees,
then capture it from those plants when they are burned for fuel.
Scrub it from the air, often using giant fans.
Then we would pump all of it into porous rock deep beneath the earth’s surface.
The U.N. analysis now suggests that countries must inject 6 billion tons of CO2 underground each year by the middle of the century.
Getting 6 billion tons of CO2 a year out of the atmosphere, though, is a daunting task.
Imagine the neighborhoods and parks near oil, gas or coal-fired industrial plants.
We would need to add equipment to capture the CO2 from each facility, in some cases doubling its land footprint.
And we would need to devote about 768,000 square miles of land worldwide to growing those carbon-absorbing plants.
That would cover an area roughly the size of Mexico — and compete for valuable land used to grow food or sustain forests.
If all of this works, and the CO2 is successfully captured, it must then be moved to a place where it can be buried.
In the U.S. alone, this could require building more than 68,000 miles of new pipelines in a little more than two decades.
25,000 miles<br>-->That’s more than double the distance to fly around the earth.
48,000 miles<br>-->And longer than the country’s entire interstate highway system.
Globally, pipelines could tally in the hundreds of thousands of miles.
To cross the oceans, we would need at least 85 specially built tankers to move the high-pressured gas. As of April, there were only three ships in the world equipped to do that.
-->
To cross the oceans, we would need at least 85 specially built tankers to move the high-pressured gas. As of April, there were only three ships in the...