Hot air: carbon removals risk high costs and underdelivery in the UK

This report by Ember evaluates the financial risks and technical viability of announced greenhouse gas removal (GGR) projects in the UK, specifically focusing on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage in the power sector (power-BECCS) and direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). The analysis finds that these technologies are currently unproven at commercial scale, face significant delivery delays, and could require billions in public subsidies, potentially diverting funds from more effective decarbonisation methods like renewables and heat pumps.

• The UK government's expectations for near-term carbon removals have been significantly reduced due to project delays. The 2023 Carbon Budget Delivery Plan estimated that BECCS and DACCS would remove 5.6 MtCO2 annually by 2030, but the 2025 plan lowered the expected volume for all greenhouse gas removals in 2030 to 0.7 MtCO2.
• A single proposed power-BECCS project at the Drax biomass power station could require £30 billion in public subsidies (in 2023 prices), which exceeds the UK Government's total announced funding of up to £21.7 billion for all carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS) and hydrogen projects over 25 years.
• There is a high level of uncertainty regarding the delivery of UK carbon removal projects, as no project has reached commercial scale or begun construction as of November 2025. Most announced projects are either undisclosed, cancelled, or delayed, such as the Drax project, which was pushed from 2027 to 2030.
• Direct air capture (DAC) costs remain significantly higher than the UK Government's target of £200 per tonne of CO2 removed. Pilot projects in the UK averaged £28,000 in funding per tonne of carbon captured between 2020 and 2025, and international projects like Climeworks' Orca and Mammoth facilities in Iceland reported costs between $600 and $1,000 per tonne as of March 2025.
• The validity of power-BECCS as a genuine carbon removal method is disputed because the carbon payback period for woody biomass feedstock can take decades. Additionally, Drax imported over 99% of its feedstock in 2024, contradicting recommendations from the Climate Change Committee and Dr Alan Whitehead to source feedstock domestically to reduce supply chain emissions.
• Ember argues that the UK should prioritise proven, affordable decarbonisation technologies—such as wind, solar, grid improvements, heat pumps, and electric vehicles—over unproven carbon removals to avoid wasting limited public funds and risking the overshooting of carbon budgets.

APA

Murdoch, J. (2025). Hot air: carbon removals risk high costs and underdelivery in the UK. Ember. https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2025/11/GGRS-Short-Analysis.pdf

Chicago

Murdoch, Josie. Hot air: carbon removals risk high costs and underdelivery in the UK. Ember, 2025. https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2025/11/GGRS-Short-Analysis.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Murdoch |first1=Josie |title=Hot air: carbon removals risk high costs and underdelivery in the UK |publisher=Ember |date=27 November 2025 |url=https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2025/11/GGRS-Short-Analysis.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{murdoch2025hot, author = {Murdoch, Josie}, title = {{Hot air: carbon removals risk high costs and underdelivery in the UK}}, institution = {Ember}, year = {2025}, month = nov, url = {https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2025/11/GGRS-Short-Analysis.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }