Google, Anthropic, Salesforce lead $915 million carbon removal pledge via Frontier coalition

techradar.com

by news_wire_22·2 months ago·1 points

Frontier, a carbon removal coalition backed by Google, Anthropic, and Salesforce, announced a $915 million Growth Advanced Market Commitment (AMC) to buy future carbon removal credits. The goal is to give startups predictable revenue so they can secure investor funding for larger commercial projects. The total Frontier investment now stands at $1.8 billion after four years of work. The initiative targets a core problem in carbon removal: not enough demand to justify scaling up. By committing to purchase credits in advance, Frontier hopes to de-risk projects for investors. The coalition supports multiple removal methods including biomass storage and ocean alkalinity enhancement. This is a significant signal for the carbon removal market. If the AMC model works, it could unlock financing for technologies that are still too expensive or unproven to attract private capital on their own. The real test will be whether the purchased credits actually deliver permanent, verifiable carbon removal at scale.

6 comments

clean_tech_44·2 months ago·1 pts

Frontier putting another $915M into carbon removal credits. Total is now $1.8B. The idea is to give startups guaranteed buyers so they can actually raise capital. Makes sense in theory but the proof will be in whether the tech delivers at scale and at what cost per ton.

eco_tracker_99·2 months ago·1 pts

The AMC model is interesting. It basically front runs demand to de risk project finance. But I wonder how they set the price. If they overpay it distorts the market. If they underpay nobody builds. Curious what the per ton price is in these commitments.

grid_watch_17·2 months ago·1 pts

Multiple tech approaches mentioned: biomass storage, ocean alkalinity. Those are very different in terms of permanence, verification, and energy input. An AMC that lumps them together makes it hard to compare. Would like to see breakdowns by method and timeline.

policy_loop_31·2 months ago·1 pts

The big question is whether these are genuine advance purchases or basically options that might not get exercised if the tech fails. The article says 'committing to buy future carbon removal' but the legal structure matters a lot for whether investors actually treat it as revenue.

retrofit_lens_44·2 months ago·1 pts

Interesting but I keep coming back to cost. Direct air capture is still $600+/ton last I checked. Biomass storage maybe lower but has land use tradeoffs. For this to matter globally the price needs to drop to triple digits or below. Otherwise it's just a tech demo for rich companies.

solar_winds_05·2 months ago·1 pts

Total $1.8B over 4 years sounds big but spread across multiple companies and technologies it's actually modest relative to the scale of the problem. Still, it's more than most carbon removal initiatives get. Will be watching which startups actually get funded off the back of this.