Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Technology

Surprise! Climeworks Unveils Newer, Faster, Cheaper Tech

Twice the carbon capture with half the energy.

A Climeworks rendering.
Heatmap Illustration/Climeworks

Direct air capture is leveling up. In a surprise move on Tuesday, Climeworks unveiled new “generation 3” technology that it said can suck up twice as much carbon from the atmosphere using half the amount of energy as its previous designs.

The Swiss carbon removal company will premiere the new design in the U.S. at its Department of Energy-funded direct air capture “hub” in Louisiana, with construction to start in 2026.

Climeworks already operates the two largest direct air capture plants in the world, both in Iceland. Its first commercial-scale plant, Orca, was designed to capture 4,000 tons of CO2 per year. Just last month, the company turned on its second plant, Mammoth, which at full capacity is supposed to capture 36,000 tons per year. Now, Climeworks’ third generation breakthrough paves the way for it to build a plant capable of capturing one million tons per year, the company said — a nearly 28x increase.

Over the past five years, while Climeworks was building Orca and Mammoth, it had also been stealthily developing the next generation tech at its labs in Zurich and Basel with a 50-person team. Like the earlier designs, the new system uses a specially engineered material called a solid sorbent that attracts carbon dioxide molecules when air passes through it. But the company has overhauled both the chemistry of the sorbent and its structure. The new design has more surface area, enabling it to grab twice as much CO2 from the air. The company also said it expects the new sorbents to last three times as long as the previous material.

In addition to a new sorbent, the gen 3 tech will also feature an updated architecture described as “sleek modular cubes” that “increase capture efficiency, reduce costs, and boost robustness.” The new cubes will make the plants more compact, taking up half the footprint of an older plant with similar capacity. Renderings feature seemingly taller, boxier facilities compared to the earlier, more horizontally-oriented design.

A rendering of Climeworks\u2019 Gen 3 plant.Courtesy of Climeworks

Climeworks has already tested a full-scale model of its new cubes and says it has “confirmed the anticipated breakthrough in efficiency and performance.” It’s hard to know what that means, since the company has never shared its previous tech’s efficiency or performance. But halving its energy use would be a big deal, as that’s one of the most expensive parts of the process. Carbon is extremely dilute in the air, and these machines consume massive amounts of electricity and heat to extract it.

The company said the breakthrough puts it on track to achieve the cost reductions it has previously promised, with a goal of removing CO2 for $400 to $600 per ton by 2030. (The price range accounts for potential variations in the cost of electricity and CO2 storage in different locations.) That’s about half the amount Climeworks charges today, but it’s still expensive. Some carbon removal companies, like Lithos Carbon, which does enhanced rock weathering, and Vaulted Deep, which buries carbon-rich waste, have already sold credits for less than $400, so Climeworks already faces steep competition to bring its costs down.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect clarification from Climeworks on its 2030 price estimate per ton of carbon.

Green

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
AM Briefing

Exxon Counterattacks

On China’s rare earths, Bill Gates’ nuclear dream, and Texas renewables

An Exxon sign.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: Hurricane Melissa exploded in intensity over the warm Caribbean waters and has now strengthened into a major storm, potentially slamming into Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Jamaica as a Category 5 in the coming days • The Northeast is bracing for a potential nor’easter, which will be followed by a plunge in temperatures of as much as 15 degrees Fahrenheit lower than average • The northern Australian town of Julia Creek saw temperatures soar as high as 106 degrees.

THE TOP FIVE

1. Exxon sued California

Exxon Mobil filed a lawsuit against California late Friday on the grounds that two landmark new climate laws violate the oil giant’s free speech rights, The New York Times reported. The two laws would require thousands of large companies doing business in the state to calculate and report the greenhouse gas pollution created by the use of their products, so-called Scope 3 emissions. “The statutes compel Exxon Mobil to trumpet California’s preferred message even though Exxon Mobil believes the speech is misleading and misguided,” Exxon complained through its lawyers. California Governor Gavin Newsom’s office said the statutes “have already been upheld in court and we continue to have confidence in them.” He condemned the lawsuit, calling it “truly shocking that one of the biggest polluters on the planet would be opposed to transparency.”

Keep reading...Show less
Red
The Aftermath

How to Live in a Fire-Scarred World

The question isn’t whether the flames will come — it’s when, and what it will take to recover.

Wildfire aftermath.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

In the two decades following the turn of the millennium, wildfires came within three miles of an estimated 21.8 million Americans’ homes. That number — which has no doubt grown substantially in the five years since — represents about 6% of the nation’s population, including the survivors of some of the deadliest and most destructive fires in the country’s history. But it also includes millions of stories that never made headlines.

For every Paradise, California, and Lahaina, Hawaii, there were also dozens of uneventful evacuations, in which regular people attempted to navigate the confusing jargon of government notices and warnings. Others lost their homes in fires that were too insignificant to meet the thresholds for federal aid. And there are countless others who have decided, after too many close calls, to move somewhere else.

By any metric, costly, catastrophic, and increasingly urban wildfires are on the rise. Nearly a third of the U.S. population, however, lives in a county with a high or very high risk of wildfire, including over 60% of the counties in the West. But the shape of the recovery from those disasters in the weeks and months that follow is often that of a maze, featuring heart-rending decisions and forced hands. Understanding wildfire recovery is critical, though, for when the next disaster follows — which is why we’ve set out to explore the topic in depth.

Keep reading...Show less
The Aftermath

The Surprisingly Tricky Problem of Ordering People to Leave

Wildfire evacuation notices are notoriously confusing, and the stakes are life or death. But how to make them better is far from obvious.

Wildfire evacuation.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

How many different ways are there to say “go”? In the emergency management world, it can seem at times like there are dozens.

Does a “level 2” alert during a wildfire, for example, mean it’s time to get out? How about a “level II” alert? Most people understand that an “evacuation order” means “you better leave now,” but how is an “evacuation warning” any different? And does a text warning that “these zones should EVACUATE NOW: SIS-5111, SIS-5108, SIS-5117…” even apply to you?

Keep reading...Show less