As the Global South battles in negotiations and deliberations on agenda items, drafts and tries to achieve the climate finance anticipated prior to the meeting, an underlying agenda has sprung up, Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS).

The Carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) are processes designed to collect or “capture” carbon dioxide generated by high-emitting activities like coal- or gas-fired power production or plastics manufacturing.

Witnessed is a rise in the number of lobbyists advocating for Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) a controversial technology that supports continued fossil fuel use has gained access to the COP29 climate talks in Baku.

According to a new analysis by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), the number of lobbyists championing this agenda is huge exceeding the combined core delegations of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the European Union.

The number of carbon capture lobbyists has increased compared to last year’s at COP28 in Dubai (475), despite the overall number of participants being significantly lower in Baku (52,504 compared to 81,027 in Dubai. Figures exclude media and support staff).  

The most striking aspect is the possibility that half of these lobbyists (209) are embedded within national delegations, giving them direct influence over government negotiations. Their growing presence comes despite rising criticism of CCUS as an expensive, unreliable technology that hinders meaningful climate action.

The Reality Behind CCUS
Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage are often promoted as a way to manage carbon dioxide emissions by capturing and storing them underground or reusing them in industrial processes. However, the technology has repeatedly failed to deliver on its promises hence a heightened fear of its possible repercussions.

It’s important to note that carbon capture, utilization, and storage/sequestration (CCUS) is a combination of carbon capture and storage/sequestration (CCS) and carbon capture and utilization (CCU). Yes, quite complex terms for very very technical processes that are believed to have an impact as climate actions.

They are embedded in a concept of carbon capture encompassing a set of technological processes that trap or “capture” carbon dioxide (CO₂) from an emitting source like a fossil fuel power plant and then compress and transport it for storage, use, or both.

The most commonly described process is carbon capture and storage/sequestration (CCS), where carbon dioxide is captured and then injected underground and stored. In carbon capture and utilization (CCU), carbon dioxide is used but not stored, such as in the production of fuels or fertilizers.

A 2021 study revealed that 78% of attempted large-scale CCS projects have been canceled or paused due to technical problems or overspending. This has sparked controversy as activists, researchers argue that it’s closely related to Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) which entails the process of injecting heat, chemicals, or gases into oil fields to stimulate additional oil production.

Based on the researchers, most captured carbon as much as over 70% is used for enhanced oil recovery, a process that enables further fossil fuel extraction, effectively worsening overall emissions. This thus leads to lifecycle emissions from CCUS often getting ignored, which seems like a masking of the true environmental cost of the technology.

Economic and Social Costs
Critics argue that investing in CCUS is not only economically unsound but also detrimental to communities. In their advocacy, they say that pulling pollution out of the atmosphere might sound like a good idea, among other carbon capture schemes however they are unproven, expensive, and may actually accelerate climate change.

A 2023 report from Oxford University’s Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment estimated that pursuing a CCS-based pathway could cost at least USD 30 trillion more than transitioning to renewable energy, energy efficiency, and electrification. The report labeled CCS as “highly economically damaging” which brings the question of why the persistence in pushing for its acceptance.

In addition to its financial drawbacks, CCS infrastructure exacerbates harm to communities already burdened by fossil fuel operations. These projects can increase air pollution and other health risks in areas hosting fossil fuel facilities, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations.

A Fossil Fuel Lifeline
Fossil fuel companies are leveraging CCUS as a lifeline to extend their business models. Many national climate plans now rely on this technology, despite its failures. Rachel Kennerley, CIEL’s International Carbon Capture Campaigner, warned, “Governments and companies cannot ‘clean’ fossil fuels with this failing technology. Investing in CCUS locks in fossil fuel use and wastes precious time and resources.”

Kennerley also emphasized the broader risks stating that its ironical up to 78% of large-scale projects have failed, yet the industry continues to promote CCUS. Pointing out that this is a move that not only delays the phase-out of fossil fuels but also puts communities at risk through large-scale carbon transport and storage.

Corporate Influence at COP29
The presence of CCUS lobbyists at COP29 highlights the fossil fuel industry’s significant investment in shaping climate policy. Many are also promoting other carbon capture technologies, such as Direct Air Capture, in an attempt to downplay their ongoing emissions.

CIEL Senior Attorney Erika Lennon called for urgent reforms stressing that the overwhelming presence of fossil fuel lobbyists undermines climate negotiations and often sway the focus of deliberations. “The voices of polluters should not outweigh the voices of frontline communities. It’s time to address this conflict of interest,” said Erika.

The analysis comes as the Kick Big Polluters Out Coalition reported that 1,773 fossil fuel lobbyists gained access to this year’s talks. Advocates are urging the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to prioritize climate justice and prevent polluters from derailing global climate efforts.