{"id":173,"date":"2025-06-23T12:40:46","date_gmt":"2025-06-23T12:40:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wimploverska.com\/?p=173"},"modified":"2025-07-23T09:25:23","modified_gmt":"2025-07-23T09:25:23","slug":"how-the-end-of-carbon-capture-could-spark-a-new-industrial-revolution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wimploverska.com\/index.php\/2025\/06\/23\/how-the-end-of-carbon-capture-could-spark-a-new-industrial-revolution\/","title":{"rendered":"How the end of carbon capture could spark a new industrial revolution"},"content":{"rendered":"
Steelmaking uses a lot of energy, making it one of the highest greenhouse gas-emitting industries.
\n<\/span> David McNew\/Getty Images<\/a><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The U.S. Department of Energy\u2019s decision to claw back US$3.7 billion in grants<\/a> from industrial demonstration projects may create an unexpected opening for American manufacturing.<\/p>\n

Many of the grant recipients were deploying carbon capture and storage<\/a> \u2013 technologies that are designed to prevent industrial carbon pollution from entering the atmosphere by capturing it and injecting it deep underground. The approach has long been considered critical<\/a> for reducing the contributions chemicals, cement production and other heavy industries make to climate change<\/a>.<\/p>\n

However, the U.S. policy reversal could paradoxically accelerate emissions cuts from the industrial sector. <\/p>\n

An emissions reality check<\/h2>\n

Heavy industry is widely viewed as the toughest part of the economy to clean up.<\/p>\n

The U.S. power sector has made progress, cutting emissions 35% since 2005 as coal-fired power plants were replaced with cheaper natural gas, solar and wind energy<\/a>. More than 93% of new grid capacity<\/a> installed in the U.S. in 2025 was forecast to be solar, wind and batteries. In transportation, electric vehicles are the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. automotive market<\/a> and will lead to meaningful reductions in pollution. <\/p>\n

But U.S. industrial emissions have been mostly unchanged, in part because of the massive amount of coal, gas and oil required to make steel, concrete, aluminum, glass and chemicals. Together these materials account for about 22% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The global industrial landscape is changing, though, and U.S. industries cannot, in isolation, expect that yesterday\u2019s means of production will be able to compete in a global marketplace. <\/p>\n

Even without domestic mandates to reduce their emissions, U.S. industries face powerful economic pressures. The EU\u2019s new Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism<\/a> imposes a tax on the emissions associated with imported steel, chemicals, cement and aluminum entering European markets. Similar policies are being considered by Canada<\/a>, Japan, Singapore, South Korea and the United Kingdom<\/a>, and were even floated in the United States<\/a>. <\/p>\n

The false promise of carbon capture<\/h2>\n

The appeal of carbon capture and storage, in theory, was that it could be bolted on to an existing factory with minimal changes to the core process and the carbon pollution would go away.<\/p>\n

Government incentives for carbon capture allow<\/a> producers to keep using polluting technologies and prop up gas-powered chemical production<\/a> or coal-powered concrete production. <\/p>\n

The Trump administration\u2019s pullback of carbon capture and storage grants now removes some of these artificial supports. <\/p>\n

Without the expectation that carbon capture will help them meet regulations, this may create space to focus on materials breakthroughs that could revolutionize manufacturing while solving industries\u2019 emissions problems. <\/p>\n

The materials innovation opportunity<\/h2>\n

So, what might emissions-lowering innovation look like for industries such as cement, steel and chemicals? As a civil and environmental engineer<\/a> who has worked on federal industrial policy, I study the ways these industries intersect with U.S. economic competitiveness and our built environment. <\/p>\n

There are many examples of U.S. innovation to be excited about. Consider just a few industries: <\/p>\n

Cement<\/strong>: Cement is one of the most widely used materials on Earth, but the technology has changed little over the past 150 years. Today, its production generates roughly 8%<\/a> of total global carbon pollution. If cement production were a country, it would rank third globally after China and the United States.<\/p>\n

Researchers are looking at ways to make concrete that can shed heat or be lighter in weight to significantly reduce the cost of building and cooling a home. Sublime Systems developed a way to produce cement with electricity<\/a> instead of coal or gas. The company lost its IDP grant<\/a> in May 2025, but it has a new agreement with Microsoft<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Making concrete do more could accelerate the transition. Researchers at Stanford and separately at MIT are developing concrete that can act as a capacitor<\/a> and store over 10 kilowatt-hours of energy per cubic meter. Such materials could potentially store electricity<\/a> from your solar roof or allow for roadways that can charge cars in motion.<\/p>\n

\n