- The Future Money
- Posts
- The USA's First Commercial Carbon-Sucking Facility
The USA's First Commercial Carbon-Sucking Facility
A company in California, Heirloom Carbon Technologies, has started operating the first US commercial facility for direct air capture.
Five Second Summary:
A company in California, Heirloom Carbon Technologies, has started operating the first US commercial facility for direct air capture (DAC) near San Francisco which is capable of capturing and storing 1,000 tons of carbon dioxide annually.
The companies:
Heirloom Carbon Technologies
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Alphabet Inc. (Google)
Microsoft
Stripe
Shopify
Climeworks
Occidental Petroleum Corp.
What's happening:
Heirloom Carbon Technologies has built the first commercial DAC facility near San Francisco, the first such facility in the US.
Heirloom's facility will deploy innovative technology using an electric-powered kiln and crushed limestone to capture and store CO2, with plans to store it permanently in partnership with green concrete maker CarbonCure.
The Biden administration supports DAC technology, with Heirloom being part of projects to develop DAC hubs across the US, but this facility is not a direct recipient of the US$3.5BN.
Some research suggests DAC is crucial for achieving climate targets, with California relying on the tech to reach carbon neutrality by 2045.
Numbers + facts:
Heirloom raised $53 million in a 2022 Series A round from investors including Microsoft's Climate Innovation Fund and Bill Gates' Breakthrough Energy Ventures.
The facility aims to operate at a cost of $100 per ton of carbon removed by 2030, a target the industry is yet to achieve.
The Biden administration allocated US$3.5BN in funding for DAC hubs, with Heirloom involved in one of the projects in Louisiana expecting to remove 1 million tons of CO2 annually by 2030.
The DAC industry could potentially create a $1 trillion carbon market by 2037, according to BloombergNEF.
Looking ahead:
There will be continued debate about DAC tech, some environmental groups oppose it as they believe it could allow carbon intensive industries to continue as normal.
We expect the technology to continue to attract capital, as part of a broader carbon capture and storage plan which is contentious in nature.