
Canadian Carbon Capture Facility Eyes Industry And Power Plants
Carbon capture is alive and well. A Canadian company is opening a plant this month to manufacture carbon capture filters for commercial-scale projects. This is potentially a huge win for industry, bringing carbon capture closer than ever before.
We need to reduce heat-trapping emissions across all sectors to save the planet. Carbon capture allows businesses to continue doing what they do, but with a much smaller footprint. This helps countries and companies reach their goals of becoming carbon-neutral. Some methods, such as Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage and Direct Air Capture, can remove atmospheric CO2, especially for industries that are hard to decarbonize.
'Carbon management is a necessity, not a nice-to-have,' says Claude Letourneau, chief executive of Svante Inc. in Montreal, in a virtual conversation with me. 'We're building a factory now that will meet the demand.'
Savante's new manufacturing facility is located in Vancouver, Canada. The company already works with Chevron and Delek and will partner with Mercer International, a pulp and paper enterprise. In the long term, it has its eye on power plants. Its technology can prevent CO2 from escaping or capture it from the atmosphere. This is known as biogenic CO2 removal, and the formal title of the CO2 capture process is Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage.
"Biogenic" CO2 refers to carbon dioxide originating from natural sources such as plants and trees, rather than fossil fuels. For example, trees absorb CO2 from the air. But if they are cut down and used to make paper, the same CO2 is released. Enter biogenic CO2 removal.
In contrast, direct air capture can remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Once snagged, the challenge is sequestering or using it to create industrial materials like cement or steel. It's an emerging and expensive technology. For example, Swiss-based Climeworks has a project going in Iceland, which will capture and store 36,000 metric tons annually of CO2. Microsoft Corp. and Shopify want to use their services.
If a mill burns waste wood to generate energy, it releases CO2. However, don't worry; operators can store that CO2 underground or reuse it to make such things as hydrogen to produce fuels and chemicals. If the companies employing this method wish to be even more eco-friendly, they should plant trees to replace those they cut down. Therefore, the pulp and paper industry can indeed achieve carbon neutrality.
'Biogenic emissions stem from natural sources like wood and plants. It is preferred for circular reuse because it represents carbon already in the above-ground ecosystem,' says Letourneau. 'By contrast, anthropogenic CO2, produced by fossil fuels or industrial processes, represents net-new carbon drawn out of the ground. Most captured anthropogenic CO2 will have to be safely sequestered.' What About The Cost?
20250415 - Burnaby, BC Chung Chow photo For Stefan Labbe Svante, carbon capture and removal company. ... More The smaller carbon removal machine. Copyright Chung Chow. All Rights Reserved. Restriction-Free Use
Letourneau says implementing these technologies is affordable. The average North American releases about 15 tons of CO2 annually. Svante's technology can remove carbon for $150 per ton. At this price, the average North American would pay $2,250 per year on carbon management—a comparable number to what we each pay for waste management. Most people don't complain about the cost of that service.
Moreover, the Biden Administration estimated the social cost of carbon to be $190 per ton, although some experts assert it is significantly higher. The social cost of carbon refers to the economic damage caused by each additional ton of CO2 in the atmosphere. This includes crop damage, losses from natural disasters, and health impacts from extreme weather.
Investing in carbon management makes sense as long as carbon mitigation costs are lower than the social cost. 'Governments can uniquely address the gap between the true social cost of carbon and what companies must pay today to emit freely. Emitting carbon is like using a credit card—the bill must be paid sooner or later. Failure to act now means acting in the future will only be more expensive,' says Letourneau.
Biogenic carbon dioxide removal technologies are high-priced. That's because it takes a lot of energy to capture, compress, and transport the CO2. Meanwhile, storing CO2 underground requires geological surveys and secure storage sites.
However, the technology can also be utilized for power generation and cement production. The Norcem Brevik plant in Norway is one of the world's first full-scale carbon capture projects in the cement sector, aiming to capture 400,000 tons of CO2 annually this year. The Boundary Dam in Saskatchewan, Canada, captures 1 million tons annually of CO2 from a coal-powered plant.
Meanwhile, Section 45Q of the U.S. tax code can help fund biogenic carbon dioxide removal. This federal tax credit incentivizes companies to capture and store CO2 underground or produce cement and steel.
Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage projects in the industrial and power sectors qualify if they store 12,500 tons annually. The credit is $85 per ton if the CO2 is stored underground and $60 per ton if it is utilized to create other products. That can make carbon-negative industrial output financially viable.
'One day, you will buy any product with a logo that gives the carbon intensity, just like buying food provides the calorie count,' says Letourneau. 'Once we reach that level, we can monetize the CO2.'
The paper mill is a test case. If the partnership between Svante and Mercer succeeds, capturing carbon at scale for industrial purposes will improve and expand, and new use cases, including power plants, will be found. Economies will grow while ecologies are preserved, giving an infusion to this technology.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mismatched financial expectations? How to cope in a relationship where one partner out-earns the other
For some, the road to marriage can look financially lopsided. Those in their 30s earning their fair share — say, more than $100,000 a year — may be used to covering 100% of their individual household expenses. However, it doesn't typically feel good when a fiancé refuses to contribute, claiming their money is only for 'fun,' not 'responsibilities.' This is particularly troubling given cost of living increases and how those are reflected in the cost of non-negotiable spending. According to Statistics Canada, the average household spent about $76,750 annually on expenses in 2023, including housing, transportation and food, the three largest categories. In a two-person household, those costs can quickly add up. And when only one person is footing the bill, the financial and emotional burden becomes even heavier. Don't Miss Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich — and 'anyone' can do it The Canadian economy is showing signs of softening amid Trump's tariffs — protect your wallet with these 5 essential money moves (most of which you can complete in just minutes) I'm almost 50 and don't have enough retirement savings. What should I do? Don't panic. Here are 6 solid ways you can catch up The red flags of an unequal dynamic While differences in income are normal, refusing to contribute entirely can trigger long-term problems. When one partner sacrifices and handles 100% of the financial responsibilities, their personal finances may suffer down the road, while the other partner gains. This creates several challenges: Budget strain: Even with a six-figure salary, carrying the full weight of household costs limits your ability to save, invest or spend on yourself. Lifestyle imbalance and negative emotions: When one person is financially constrained while the other uses their full income for leisure, it can foster resentment. Power imbalance: Financial inequality can also seep into decision-making. The partner who pays for everything may feel overburdened and unheard, while the non-contributing partner may avoid accountability. Future financial insecurity: Without shared financial planning, big goals — from buying a home to starting a family — may be delayed or derailed entirely. It's about more than just paying the bills: Aligning your values, goals and decisions is important in a successful relationship. How to address it before saying 'I do' Before walking down the aisle, a couple in this situation needs to have a candid conversation in a productive, structured way. If you see yourself as the "giving" half of your relationship, here are a few practical steps to take to hopefully see change. 1. Have a values-based conversation Frame the conversation not as a confrontation, but as a shared planning session for your future. You can try something like: 'I want us to feel like we're building something together. Can we talk about how we want to manage money as a team?' Focus on shared goals, like housing, travel, kids and retirement, and how to achieve them together. Read more: 'You're going to live on beans and rice': This senior told Dave Ramsey she has debt and zero savings — 2. Consider financial counseling If emotions are running high, a third party can help. Premarital or financial counselling can uncover deeper money beliefs and create shared understanding. Resources, like the Canadian Association for Financial Empowerment, can help you locate professionals near you. You can also seek help from a financial advisor, who can look at you and your partner's financial health and find ways to be more reasonable with your money, like finding ways to save for the future, while also finding avenues for realistic, personal indulgences. 3. Propose a fair cost-sharing model A practical approach is using a cost-sharing model like a proportional contribution one. Under this, you'd figure out the proportion of total household income you each bring in. This system keeps contributions equitable while acknowledging income disparities. For example, say you earn 70% of your combined income and your partner earns 30%. You'd each contribute these proportions toward shared costs. So, if those costs are $65,000 annually, you'd pay $45,500 per year, while your partner would pay $19,500 per year. You can also look into a budgeting app, which can help bolster more thoughtful money management and create an actionable and trackable plan moving forward. 4. Set boundaries and deadlines If your partner continues to resist contributing, it's worth asking yourself if this is a difference in values or a refusal to partner in life. Marriage is a financial partnership as much as an emotional one. Put yourself first by setting a deadline to revisit the conversation and being honest with yourself about your limits. What To Read Next Here's how to retire in 10 short years no matter where you live in Canada — even if you're starting with $0 savings Here are 5 expenses that Canadians (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? Are you rich enough to join the top 1%? Here's the net worth you need to rank among Canada's wealthiest — plus a few strategies to build that first-class portfolio Pet owners, here's how you can get up to 90% cashback on expensive emergency veterinary bills — and you can even get a free quote in 30 seconds 1. Statistics Canada: Survey of Household Spending, 2023 (May 21, 2025) This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Ag Growth International Second Quarter 2025 Earnings: Beats Expectations
Ag Growth International (TSE:AFN) Second Quarter 2025 Results Key Financial Results Revenue: CA$348.6m (flat on 2Q 2024). Net income: CA$24.5m (up from CA$7.39m loss in 2Q 2024). Profit margin: 7.0% (up from net loss in 2Q 2024). EPS: CA$1.31 (up from CA$0.39 loss in 2Q 2024). This technology could replace computers: discover the 20 stocks are working to make quantum computing a reality. All figures shown in the chart above are for the trailing 12 month (TTM) period Ag Growth International Revenues and Earnings Beat Expectations Revenue exceeded analyst estimates by 7.2%. Earnings per share (EPS) also surpassed analyst estimates by 152%. Looking ahead, revenue is forecast to grow 5.6% p.a. on average during the next 3 years, compared to a 11% growth forecast for the Machinery industry in Canada. Performance of the Canadian Machinery industry. The company's share price is broadly unchanged from a week ago. Risk Analysis It is worth noting though that we have found 1 warning sign for Ag Growth International that you need to take into consideration. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Aegis Brands Second Quarter 2025 Earnings: EPS: CA$0.01 (vs CA$0.012 in 2Q 2024)
Aegis Brands (TSE:AEG) Second Quarter 2025 Results Key Financial Results Revenue: CA$4.53m (down 18% from 2Q 2024). Net income: CA$1.16m (up 13% from 2Q 2024). Profit margin: 26% (up from 19% in 2Q 2024). The increase in margin was driven by lower expenses. EPS: CA$0.01. This technology could replace computers: discover the 20 stocks are working to make quantum computing a reality. All figures shown in the chart above are for the trailing 12 month (TTM) period Aegis Brands shares are down 10.0% from a week ago. Risk Analysis You should learn about the 3 warning signs we've spotted with Aegis Brands (including 1 which is a bit concerning). Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Sign in to access your portfolio