You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Here are six things to know about it.

If one company has set the pace for direct air capture, it’s Climeworks. The Switzerland-based business opened its — and the world’s — first commercial DAC plant in 2017, capable of capturing “several hundred tons” of carbon dioxide each year. Today, the company unveiled its newest plant, the aptly named Mammoth. Located in Iceland, Mammoth is designed to take advantage of the country’s unique geology to capture and store up to 36,000 metric tons of carbon per year — eventually. Here’s what you need to know about the new project.
Mammoth is not yet operating at full capacity, with only 12 of its planned 72 capturing and filtering units installed. When the plant is fully operational — which Climeworks says should be sometime next year — it will pull up to 36,000 metric tons of CO2 out of the atmosphere annually. For scale, that’s about 1/28,000th of a gigaton. To get to net zero emissions, we’ll have to remove multiple gigatons of carbon from the atmosphere every year.
“The engineered solutions will have to play a major — and I would say even the major part of this task,” said Climeworks CEO Jan Wurzbacher at the virtual press conference for Mammoth’s unveiling. In his opinion, nature-based solutions “will not be able to scale to the level where we need them to be.”
So in the context of where we need to go, Mammoth is almost nothing. But in the context of our current reality, it’s nine times the size of the next largest DAC facility: another Iceland-based Climeworks plant called Orca. And it’s a major stepping stone towards the company’s ultimate goal of capturing a million metric tons of CO2 yearly by 2030 and a billion by 2050.
Climeworks first broke ground on Mammoth in June 2022, and 18 months later the company announced that the “core pieces of the plant are built.” Now that the plant has started capturing CO2, Climeworks says the rest of 2024 will be devoted to installing the remaining CO2capture units and ramping toward full capacity.
Thus far in its history, Climeworks has largely avoided the construction delays that often plague first-of-its-kind projects. “They’re coming out with new projects every three to four years, which is a pretty wild timeline,” said Erin Burns, Executive Director of the nonprofit Carbon180.
Through Climework’s partnership with Icelandic geothermal company ON Power, Mammoth is powered in full by geothermal energy — although the company has long been reticent about how much energy, exactly, it needs.
At any rate, Climeworks has committed to powering the direct air capture process as well as its storage process with 100% renewables in the long run. The company cited Kenya, New Zealand, and Indonesia as other areas that would be geologically advantageous for future Climeworks facilities, as all have substantial geothermal resources.
Climeworks said it would be able to disclose an exact cost per metric ton of carbon removal figure after Mammoth has been operational for a year or two. But in the meantime, Wurzbacher said the company is “closer to the $1,000 per ton mark than we are to the $100 per ton mark.” He expects prices to drop as the company further scales, and is aiming for $300 to $350 per metric ton by 2030, and ultimately $100 per metric ton by 2050. That’s in line with the Department of Energy’s Earthshots initiative, which aims to reduce the cost of a variety of carbon dioxide removal pathways to below $100 per metric ton by 2050.
While Climeworks hasn’t divulged Mammoth’s lifetime carbon removal capacity, it said the plant is designed to operate for 25 years, and that a third of its lifetime capacity has already been sold. The remainder will be sold in the next year or two, representatives told reporters
The company has offtake agreements with more than 160 organizations including some major corporate buyers such as JPMorgan Chase, Boston Consulting Group and Microsoft. Many of these agreements span a decade or more and involve tens of thousands of tons of CO2 removal from current and future Climeworks projects. (The company also recently opened a marketplace, Climeworks Solutions, to package and sell “high quality” carbon credits from other carbon removal companies.)
The Mammoth plant was primarily financed by Climework’s own equity, said Wurzbacher. “But going forward, project financing will be vital to accelerate the scale up. And for that, such long-term offtake agreements are important.”
Now that the plant is operational, it should help drive more investment, Dana Jacobs, chief of staff at the Carbon Removal Alliance, told me. “Having carbon removal projects that you can see and reach out and touch and understand is so critical,” she said.
Climeworks said the lessons from Mammoth will help the company scale further as it enters the U.S. market through its participation in the Department of Energy-funded direct air capture hub, Project Cypress in Louisiana.
Climeworks is working on Project Cypress alongside developer Battelle and another direct air capture company, Heirloom. The project is designed to capture a million metric tons of CO2annually by 2030, and recently received an initial $50 million grant from the DOE to kickstart the project’s planning, design and community engagement processes.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated with quotes and additional information from Climeworks’ team.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
A federal court has once again allowed Orsted to resume construction on its offshore wind project.
A federal court struck down the Trump administration’s three-month stop work order on Orsted’s Revolution offshore wind farm, once again allowing construction to resume (for the second time).
Explaining his ruling from the bench Monday, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth said that project developer Orsted — and the states of Rhode Island and Connecticut, which filed their own suit in support of the company — were “likely” to win on the merits of their lawsuit that the stop work order violated the Administrative Procedures Act. Lamberth said that the Trump administration’s stop work order, issued just before Christmas, amounted to a change in administration position without adequate justification. The justice said he was not sure the emergency being described by the government exists, and that the “stated national security reason may have been pretextual.”
This case was life or death for Revolution Wind. If the stop work order had not been enjoined, Orsted told the court it may not have been able to secure proper vessels for at-sea construction for long enough to complete the project on schedule. This would have a domino effect, threatening Orsted’s ability to meet deadlines in signed power agreements with Rhode Island and Connecticut and therefore threatening wholesale cancellation of the project.
Undergirding this ruling was a quandary Orsted pointed out to the justice: The government issued the stop work order claiming it was intended to mitigate national security concerns but refused to share specifics of the basis for the stop work order with the developer. At the Monday hearing on the injunction in Washington, D.C., Revolution Wind’s legal team pointed to a key quote in a filing submitted by the Justice Department from Interior Deputy Assistant Secretary Jacob Tyner, saying that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the federal offshore energy regulator, was “not aware” of whether the national security risks could ever be mitigated, “and, if they can, whether the developers would find the proposed mitigation measures acceptable.”
This was the first positive outcome in what are multiple legal battles against the Christmas stop work orders against offshore wind projects. As I reported last week, two other developers filed individual suits alongside Orsted against their respective pauses: Dominion Energy in support of the Coastal Virginia offshore project, and Equinor over Empire Wind.
I expect what happened in the Revolution Wind case to be the beginning of a trend, as a cursory examination of the filings in those cases indicate similar contradictions to those that led to Revolution winning out. We’ll find out soon: The hearing on Empire’s stop work order is scheduled for Wednesday and Coastal Virginia on Friday.
The move would mark a significant escalation in Trump’s hostility toward climate diplomacy.
The United States is departing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the overarching treaty that has organized global climate diplomacy for more than 30 years, according to the Associated Press.
The withdrawal, if confirmed, marks a significant escalation of President Trump’s war on environmental diplomacy beyond what he waged in his first term.
Trump has twice removed the U.S. from the Paris Agreement, a largely nonbinding pact that commits the world’s countries to report their carbon emissions reduction goals on a multi-year basis. He most recently did so in 2025, after President Biden rejoined the treaty.
But Trump has never previously touched the UNFCCC. That older pact was ratified by the Senate, and it has served as the institutional skeleton for all subsequent international climate diplomacy, including the Paris Agreement.
The United States was a founding member of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. It first joined the treaty in 1992, when President George H.W. Bush signed the pact and lawmakers unanimously ratified it.
Every other country in the world belongs to the UNFCCC. By withdrawing from the treaty, the U.S. would likely be locked out of the Conference of the Parties, the annual UN summit on climate change. It could also lose any influence over UN spending to drive climate adaptation in developing countries.
It remains unclear whether another president could rejoin the framework convention without a Senate vote.
As of 6 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday, the AP report cited a U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the news had not yet been announced.
The Trump administration has yet to confirm the departure. On Wednesday afternoon, the White House posted a notice to its website saying that the U.S. would leave dozens of UN groups, including those that “promote radical climate policies,” without providing specifics. The announcement was taken down from the White House website after a few minutes.
The White House later confirmed the departure from 31 UN entities in a post on the social network X, but did not list the groups in question.
The administration has already lost once in court wielding the same argument against Revolution Wind.
The Trump administration says it has halted all construction on offshore wind projects, citing “national security concerns.”
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum announced the move Monday morning on X: “Due to national security concerns identified by @DeptofWar, @Interior is PAUSING leases for 5 expensive, unreliable, heavily subsidized offshore wind farms!”
There are only five offshore wind projects currently under construction in U.S. waters: Vineyard Wind, Revolution Wind, Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind, Sunrise Wind, and Empire Wind. Burgum confirmed to Fox Business that these were the five projects whose leases have been targeted for termination, and that notices were being sent to the project developers today to halt work.
“The Department of War has come back conclusively that the issues related to these large offshore wind programs create radar interference, create genuine risk for the U.S., particularly related to where they are in proximity to our East Coast population centers,” Burgum told the network’s Maria Bartiromo.
David Schoetz, a spokesperson for Empire Wind's developer Equinor, told me the company is “aware of the stop work order announced by the Department of Interior,” and that the company is “evaluating the order and seeking further information from the federal government.” Schoetz added that we should ”expect more to come” from the company.
This action takes a kernel of truth — that offshore wind can cause interference with radar communication — and blows it up well beyond its apparent implications. Interior has cited reports from the military they claim are classified, so we can’t say what fresh findings forced defense officials to undermine many years of work to ensure that offshore wind development does not impede security or the readiness of U.S. armed forces.
The Trump administration has already lost once in court with a national security argument, when it tried to halt work on Revolution Wind citing these same concerns. The government’s case fell apart after project developer Orsted presented clear evidence that the government had already considered radar issues and found no reason to oppose the project. The timing here is also eyebrow-raising, as the Army Corps of Engineers — a subagency within the military — approved continued construction on Vineyard Wind just three days ago.
It’s also important to remember where this anti-offshore wind strategy came from. In January, I broke news that a coalition of activists fighting against offshore wind had submitted a blueprint to Trump officials laying out potential ways to stop projects, including those already under construction. Among these was a plan to cancel leases by citing national security concerns.
In a press release, the American Clean Power Association took the Trump administration to task for “taking more electricity off the grid while telling thousands of American workers to leave the job site.”
“The Trump Administration’s decision to stop construction of five major energy projects demonstrates that they either don’t understand the affordability crises facing millions of Americans or simply don't care,” the group said. “On the first day of this Administration, the President announced an energy emergency. Over the last year, they worked to create one with electricity prices rising faster under President Trump than any President in recent history."
What comes next will be legal, political and highly dramatic. In the immediate term, it’s likely that after the previous Revolution victory, companies will take the Trump administration to court seeking preliminary injunctions as soon as complaints can be drawn up. Democrats in Congress are almost certainly going to take this action into permitting reform talks, too, after squabbling over offshore wind nearly derailed a House bill revising the National Environmental Policy Act last week.
Heatmap has reached out to all of the offshore wind developers affected, and we’ll update this story if and when we hear back from them.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect comment from Equinor and ACP.