UK CCS Spending Debate: Is £22 Billion for Carbon Capture the Right Industrial Strategy?

A new opinion piece argues that Britain's £22 billion commitment to carbon capture and storage (CCS) may be a misallocation of public funds. The author points out that no industrial-scale CCS project is currently operational in the UK, with major projects like Net Zero Teesside and Drax facing delays or cancellations. The core criticism is that CCS adds cost and complexity to existing industries without making them more competitive, and the technology is not easily exportable to other countries. The piece contrasts CCS with other clean technologies where UK expertise could be licensed globally, such as sustainable aviation fuel, green hydrogen, or low-carbon chemicals. It also raises questions about the long-term permanence of geological CO2 storage and whether the subsidy burden on consumers and taxpayers is justified. The article frames this as a fundamental choice about industrial policy and whether public money should support a costly end-of-pipe solution or build industries with broader global demand. For readers tracking carbon policy and climate finance, this piece offers a critical perspective on the UK's CCS strategy. It highlights the tension between supporting existing industries through costly emissions reduction and investing in technologies with export potential. The debate is relevant as governments worldwide decide how to allocate limited climate funding.