Standard content for Members only

To continue reading this article, please login to your Utility Week account, Start 14 day trial or Become a member.

If your organisation already has a corporate membership and you haven’t activated it simply follow the register link below. Check here.

Become a member

Start 14 day trial

Login Register

The National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) has advised the government to avoid “picking winners” among greenhouse gas removal technologies and to rapidly introduce market frameworks to support various options.

The NIC wants the government to commit to deploying five to ten megatonnes of engineered removals of carbon dioxide by 2030, rising to between 40 and 100 megatonnes by 2050.

It estimates that the market could generate revenues of £2 billion a year by 2030, which it envisages being paid for by polluters eventually, with government support in the development stage.

Ultimately the NIC believes engineered removals will represent “a whole new infrastructure sector”, which could reach revenues matching that of the UK’s water sector by 2050.

In November 2020, the NIC was asked by government to provide recommendations on technologies to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, as well as the policies needed to incentivise this and a timetable for their implementation.

In its report, published today (28 July) the NIC urges the government to support both direct air capture and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, while also mentioning several other technologies at earlier stages of development that could eventually form part of the mix.

The report acknowledges concerns around both core technologies, in terms of the uncertainty of costs, the need for further development and their potential impacts on the wider environment.

However, it insists that reaching net zero by 2050 will be impossible without engineered removals in the hardest to decarbonise areas.

Given the clear need to develop this market, the NIC urges the government to take action early, adding: “Too often, the UK has been too slow to deliver new infrastructure. With engineered removals, government has a chance to get ahead, act decisively, and deliver the sector in a well-managed way.”

It adds that early movement could also create a “comparative advantage”, with the prospect of other countries needing to procure the knowledge and skills the UK develops.

It recommends that government should support the development of this new sector in the short term with policies that create demand through obligations on polluting industries, which will over time enable a competitive market to develop.

The NIC envisages that government exploring various mechanisms of support, including staged competitions to progress emerging technologies to commercial readiness; direct investment, possibly through the UK Infrastructure Bank and eventually competitive auctions for contracts, with thought given to linking the contracts to a market-based mechanism, such as the UK Emission Trading Scheme.

The report stresses that robust independent regulation must also be put in place from the start to help build public and investor confidence.

The NIC also caveats that engineered removals must not impede progress on cutting emissions. The report acknowledges the need for nature-based solutions but says this was outside the scope of its review.

Sir John Armitt, chair of the NIC, said:  “Taking steps to clean our air is something we’re going to have to get used to, just as we already manage our wastewater and household refuse. While engineered removals will not be everyone’s favourite device in the toolkit, they are there for the hardest jobs. And in the overall project of mitigating our impact on the planet for the sake of generations to come, we need every tool we can find.

“But to get close to having the sector operating where and when we need it to, the government needs to get ahead of the game now. The adaptive approach to market building we recommend will create the best environment for emerging technologies to develop quickly and show their worth, avoiding the need for government to pick winners. We know from the dramatic fall in the cost of renewables that this approach works and we must apply the lessons learned to this novel, but necessary, technology.”