Last week's announcement from the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC) in the USA, that it is now pilot-scale testing a promising new capture technology developed by KC8 Capture Technologies with the help of funding from the Department of Energy (DoE), will be undoubtedly be welcomed by the US cement industry at a time of growing uncertainty about carbon capture utilisation and storage (CCUS).
KC8’s system, UNO MK3, deploys a catalytically enhanced potassium carbonate solvent and is reckoned to be a cheaper, high-performance alternative to amine-based technology. It is capable of capturing 95 per cent of CO2 emissions from industrial sources like natural gas and cement plants. The UNO MK3 will be tested in a 5-10tpd plant that captures CO2 from the combustion flue gas delivered by the NCCC’s natural gas testing system.
Although it is positive news, and while the DoE continues to fund other cement-related CCUS research, the rhetoric from the Trump administration about CCUS in general has been far less encouraging. Last month the DoE announced it was withdrawing US$3.5bn in funding for 24 CCS projects. The two largest beneficiaries of these were both cement related, with National Cement Co’s Lebec Net Zero project (California) and Heidelberg Materials’ Mitchell plant (Indiana) each losing out on US$500m in promised grants, resulting in the their cancellation. As part of the same cuts green cement start-ups Sublime Systems (US$87m) and Brimstone Energy (US$189m) also had funding withdrawn.
The DoE concluded that “these projects failed to advance the energy needs of the American people, were not economically viable and would not generate a positive return on investment of taxpayer dollars”. Mike Ireland, American Cement Association president and CEO, described the cancellations as “a missed opportunity” and comes despite CCS receiving broad bipartisan support in Congress.
As noted recently by the Global Carbon Capture Institute, the US remains the global leader in overall CCUS deployment, with 33 operational projects, 19 under construction, and over 300 in various stages of development. But concerns about the scalability and the requisite investment are undoubtedly growing in the US and beyond. Recent analysis by OneStone Research suggests that by 2030 approx 41.3Mta of carbon capture capacity will be available to the cement industry, well short of the 170Mta required to realise net zero. It projects by 2050 around 10-12 per cent (245-290Mta) will be captured by CCS, with only 20Mta being captured in North America.
Moreover, to make CCUS systems viable would require carbon taxes of about EUR350 (US$406)/t of CO2. Even then, it would not become the main choice until taxes are closer to EUR600/t CO2.
The Trump administration is providing some incentives for CCS development, but the advantages appear angled towards the oil and gas industry. The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”, signed by the President on 4 July 2025, expanded and increased the federal Section 45Q federal tax credit for point-source capture (US$85/t) and direct air capture (US$180/t) in dedicated geological storage. Notably, it now includes parity for the utilisation of CO2, meaning that CO2 converted into valuable products or stored underground as part of oil and gas recovery projects also qualifies for tax credits.
To what extent this benefits the cement industry remains open to question, although the Lebec and Mitchell plants might have qualified for US$80m and US$170m per year, respectively, if they were operating at their theoretical storage capacity. It should be emphasised both projects were massively ambitious, cement-specific projects and that a billion dollars remains a substantial investment by any standards.
Some experts believe that the sheer scale of such undertakings mean that cement would be better advised to piggyback with other hard-to-abate industries such as the energy sector or steel mills, but this in itself poses infrastructure questions.
