£22bn for 'unproven' green tech could raise bills, MPs warn
The government is committing billions of pounds to an "unproven" green technology for reducing planet-warming gases without considering the impact on consumers' bills, MPs have warned.
Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) facilities prevent carbon dioxide, produced by industry, being released into the atmosphere by capturing and storing it underground.
In October, the government pledged nearly £22bn for CCUS facilities and three quarters of the money will be raised from consumer bills.
But on Friday, the House of Commons' Public Accounts Committee raised serious concerns that the government had not properly assessed the financial impact on households and businesses.
What is carbon capture and can it fight climate change?
Nearly £22bn pledged for carbon capture projects
What does net zero mean?
"It is an unproven technology, certainly in this country. And we are concerned this policy is going to have a very significant effect on consumers' and industry's electricity bills," said Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, a cross-party group of MPs which scrutinises public spending.
The government said that it would formally respond to the committee, but that CCUS was a "necessity not an option" for reaching its climate goals.
It said in a statement that this type of technology would make Britain's energy system secure, something that would lower electricity costs and bills.
The UK has a target to reach "net zero" - meaning no longer adding to the total amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, by 2050. As the country switches to renewable energy and away from fossil fuels for heating homes and running cars, greenhouse gas emissions like carbon dioxide, also known as CO2, will fall.
But a small amount of gas will still need to be used to maintain electricity supply and there are some industries such as cement where there are few green alternatives. Carbon capture could prevent the CO2 produced by these processes from entering the atmosphere - and the government has bet achieving its climate goals on it.
Both the UK's independent climate watchdog and the UN's climate science body, the IPCC, agree that CCUS will be needed if countries want to reach net zero and avoid the worst impacts of climate change.
By 2050, the government wants carbon capture and storage to prevent the emitting of 50 million tonnes of CO2 - more than 10% of what the country currently releases - and has committed £21.7bn to achieving this goal.
The funding, announced in October, will go towards clusters of carbon capture projects in Merseyside and Teesside, which it said would create thousands of jobs and attract private investment.
Dr Stuart Jenkins, research fellow at the University of Oxford, pushed back on the committee's assessment of the technology.
"I really don't like the phrase "unproven" technology, it is not representative of the status of the technology as an engineering problem," he said.
Although there are no commercial CCUS sites in the UK, there are 45 commercial facilities already operating globally capturing around 50 million tonnes of CO2, and there are more than 700 being proposed or developed, according to the International Energy Agency.
But Dr Jenkins did agree with the Public Accounts Committee that there were questions about whether the government's current funding model was sustainable.
The committee have recommended that the full financial impact of the programme on consumers be properly assessed, taking account of cost-of-living pressures.
The committee did recognise the importance of early government support for novel technologies like CCUS to give confidence to the industry.
But it added it "was surprised" to discover that the government had signed two contracts with CCUS developers last year and not guaranteed that if the projects were successful that the government - and the public - would receive profits or benefits such as lower energy bills.
"If you were a venture capitalist investing this sort of sum of money, which is effectively what the taxpayers are doing here, you would expect to have a big equity stake in this whole thing," said Sir Clifton-Brown.
His committee recommended that any future contracts be changed to include profit-sharing mechanisms.
The government said that it expected the £21.7bn funding for CCUS to unlock £8bn in private sector investment over the next 25 years.
Mirte Boot, co-founder of Carbon Balance Initiative and research associate at University of Oxford, said her team's research suggests a better long-term model for financing could be introducing a carbon storage mandate - placing a legal obligation on fossil fuel producers to store a share of the CO2 they produce, or face a financial penalty.
"We argue that carbon storage mandates on fossil fuel producers are fair whilst also providing the kind of investment certainty that companies need," she said.
Public Accounts Committee
A simple guide to climate change
Four ways climate change worsens extreme weather
What you can do to reduce carbon emissions
Sign up for our Future Earth newsletter to get exclusive insight on the latest climate and environment news from the BBC's Climate Editor Justin Rowlatt, delivered to your inbox every week. Outside the UK? Sign up to our international newsletter here.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
World leaders call on oil companies to help solve urgent global crisis: 'We can make substantial progress'
The European Commission asked Big Oil to help clean up the carbon mess they helped create by literally putting it back underground. As reported by Reuters, 44 oil and gas companies will be directly contributing to the EU's carbon storage goals. The Commission asked these companies to help meet a collective target of storing at least 55 million tons of carbon dioxide annually by 2030. The companies were selected based on their share of oil and natural gas production in the EU between 2020 and 2023. They are now expected to scale up their participation in carbon capture and storage. CCS is a technology that traps carbon dioxide, which is the main gas driving the changing climate, before it can enter the atmosphere. It works by capturing pollution from sources like factories or power plants, compressing it, and then storing it deep underground in rock formations where it can't escape. Think of it like putting a lid on pollution before it leaves the smokestack, helping reduce the amount of heat-trapping gases in our air. While the sector has long been linked to large amounts of pollution, this new directive positions dirty fuel producers as key contributors to solutions rather than just polluters. "By combining their industrial know-how with faster permitting processes and robust financial support - including from the ETS-resourced Innovation Fund - we can make substantial progress in advancing industrial decarbonisation and modernisation in Europe," said Kurt Vandenberghe, head of the Commission's directorate general for climate action, per Reuters. This shift makes financial sense, too. By leveraging industrial expertise and combining it with access to fast-tracked permits and EU funding, such as from the Innovation Fund tied to the Emissions Trading System, traditional energy giants can transform themselves into long-term assets in a green economy. As the clean energy sector continues its upward trajectory, it's clear that investing in a decarbonized future is no longer just a moral decision; it's a market one, too. Do you think gas stoves should be banned nationwide? No way Let each state decide I'm not sure Definitely Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.


USA Today
2 days ago
- USA Today
Don't expect the Boston Celtics to trade Brown or White
On Monday, June 23, the Boston Celtics traded Jrue Holiday to the Portland Trail Blazers. Brad Stevens then followed that up with the June 24 trade of Kristaps Porzingis, with the veteran big man being sent to the Atlanta Hawks as part of a 3-team deal. However, those trades haven't stopped the rumor mill from churning out ideas of a potential Jaylen Brown or Derrick White trade. Both Brown and White are expected to shoulder significant roles next season, as the Celtics attempt to navigate life without Jayson Tatum, who is recovering from a torn Achilles. During a recent news conference, Celtics Vice President of Basketball Operations, Mike Zarren, quickly shut down the idea that Boston has been considering trade offers for either star. Zarren noted that "there haven't been anything close to serious discussions" regarding a potential trade for either player. 'Those two guys are really, really great NBA players,' Zarren said. 'There hasn't been anything close to serious about trading them. And so I'm not sure where all this reporting came from. But those guys are key parts of our team, and we're lucky to have them here.' The only logical reason to consider trading Brown or White is to create further flexibility below the luxury tax line. However, the Celtics would be unlikely to get fair or comparable value in any potential trade. Therefore, the most logical outcome will be for White and Brown to remain part of the roster heading into next season. You can watch Zarren's full news conference by clicking on the embedded video above. Watch the "Taylor Talks Celtics" podcast on: YouTube: Website:

Wall Street Journal
2 days ago
- Wall Street Journal
The Oil Tycoon and the Philosopher Threatening Big Oil's Carbon Capture Plans
Exxon Mobil, Occidental Petroleum OXY -1.30%decrease; red down pointing triangle and other oil giants are expected to receive billions of dollars of incentives to collect and bury carbon emissions. Texas oil billionaire Ben 'Bud' Brigham and pro-fossil-fuels activist Alex Epstein want to turn off the tap. Brigham, a serial entrepreneur and libertarian from Austin, is urging President Trump and the Republicans who are considering slashing a host of energy incentives to go further and nix tax credits for carbon capture. He says there is no climate disaster on the horizon, and that funneling public money into a nascent technology is a gift to oil behemoths.