Europe’s geological storage bottleneck – an overlooked barrier to scaling carbon removal?
Geological storage is a critical bottleneck for developing carbon removal in Europe. Our Carbon Removal Readiness Assessments look at how different countries could deploy carbon removal, revealing a glaring snag in getting these technologies off the ground.
As Europe races to meet its climate goals, carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies are gaining momentum. The continent is exploring every tool to draw down emissions. But one critical bottleneck threatens to stall progress: geological storage capacity.
In theory, Europe has strong CO₂ storage potential, but deployment is slow and uneven. In many countries, capacity is limited, and fossil carbon capture and storage (CCS) often takes precedence over removals, leaving little room for CDR in current national plans.
The EU’s Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA) sets a bold target: 50 MtCO₂ per year injection capacity by 2030. Yet, progress remains slow. Projects are limited, permitting is sluggish, and most development is concentrated offshore.
Modelling by the Clean Air Task Force suggests that Europe will need to permanently store up to 600 MtCO₂ annually by 2050 to meet its climate objectives (combining CCS and CDR). But preliminary findings from the Carbon Removal Readiness Assessment (CRRA) project led by Carbon Gap and local partners reveal a stark reality: geological storage appears to be the most significant constraint for CDR deployment across Finland, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain.
Finland: No Room Underground
Finland’s geological storage potential is essentially zero, making CO₂ exports inevitable to store all the carbon dioxide captured through Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage(BECCS) and Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) that the country could deploy. Norway and Denmark are likely destinations.
Ambitious plans for electricity generation and an already decarbonised grid would position Finland as a credible destination to deploy DAC. However, the lack of storage jeopardises the opportunity to leverage that potential for now. Finland is projected to forgo at least 7 MtCO₂ removal annually from BECCS by 2035, decreasing to 3 MtCO₂ per year by 2050 as export capacity improves.
Germany: A Cautionary Case
Germany’s situation is equally concerning. Preliminary findings from our CRRA suggest that BECCS alone could saturate domestic geological storage. No operational storage sites exist yet, and development is estimated to take at least 7 to 10 years from exploration to commercial operation.
This slow rollout poses a serious risk. Without rapid expansion, Germany could hit a hard ceiling on how much CO2 it can remove and store domestically.
With storing fossil CO₂ emissions through CCS prioritised until 2045, only a small slice of storage is left for carbon removals. By 2035, domestic geological storage capacity for removals may reach just 0.1–0.45 MtCO₂ per year, rising to 10 MtCO₂ by 2045. International export options are also constrained, capped at 0.72 MtCO₂ by 2035 and 5 MtCO₂ by 2045.
Equally, if DACCS becomes a significant CDR method in Germany, geological storage build-out will also be the key bottleneck.
Italy: Ambitious Plans, Little Room for CDR
Italy’s cumulative geological storage potential ranges from 4 to 20 GtCO₂, with conservative estimates suggesting that up to 8.2 GtCO₂ is realistically usable.
The Ravenna CCS project is one of the few large-scale operational sites in the EU. It currently injects 25 ktCO₂ per year, with plans to scale to 4 MtCO₂ by 2030, 12 MtCO₂ by 2035, and up to 20 MtCO₂ per year by 2040, with a total capacity of over 515 MtCO₂.
However, demand is surging. The PNIEC-2024 reports over 30 MtCO₂ per year of demand for CCS by 2030, rising to 34 MtCO₂ per year by 2040. If realised, this increase would exceed Ravenna’s annual capacity, with cumulative storage needs of >350 MtCO₂ by 2040 and >700 MtCO₂ by 2050, leaving no room for CDR storage.
Poland: High Potential, Low Realism
Poland’s geology could theoretically store up to 15.6 GtCO₂, mostly in saline aquifers. But the IEA estimates that only 2-3 GtCO₂ are realistically usable considering infrastructure, cost, and technical feasibility.
Today, Poland operates two CCS installations and eight more planned, but current capture capacity is just 1,800 tonnes per year.
Unlocking its full potential will require major investment. If developed, Poland could become a low-cost CCS hub for industrial emitters, but that future is far from certain.
Spain: Strong Foundations, No Operational Sites Yet
Spain has an estimated 11 GtCO₂ of geological storage potential, but no operational storage sites. The Geological and Mining Institute has identified 85 suitable areas, though most remain at a low level of maturity.
The TarraCO₂ project in Tarragona, supported by the European Union, plans to store 2 MtCO₂ per year from 2030 onwards, with a maximum cumulative capacity of 54 MtCO₂, most of which will likely be used for CCS.
The Bigger Picture: Storage is the Bottleneck for Several Countries
Scaling CDR in Europe is not just about capturing carbon, it’s about where to store it. Without major investment in geological storage, even the most advanced capture technologies will hit a wall.
Countries with limited geological capacity must either develop alternative storage methods or forge cross-border agreements to export CO₂ to regions with surplus capacity.
Despite promising geology, Europe faces a critical bottleneck to meet its climate goals. Unlocking geological CO₂ storage potential will require:
Faster development timelines
Simpler permitting and regulation
Open access to geological data
Major infrastructure investment
Without these enablers, a significant portion of Europe’s carbon removal potential could be lost. As Carbon Gap’s CDR Strategy puts it:
“The EU should ensure that the physical infrastructure required to transport and store atmospheric and biogenic CO₂ is in place by the time CDR methods need it”.
Beyond Geological Storage: Complementary Pathways
Beyond accelerating reservoir development, the scarcity of geological storage strengthens the case for CDR methods that don’t rely on underground injection, such as nature-based approaches, ocean alkalinity enhancement, enhanced rock weathering, but also alternative storage methods such as in situ and ex-situ mineralisation, using mine tailings, concrete waste, and durable carbon-bound material.
Geological storage, despite its challenges, remains the gold standard for permanent CO₂ removal – offering unmatched durability, minimal leakage risk, and long-term stability. Alternatives storage methods are valuable but can’t meet Europe’s climate goals alone. They must be accelerated as complements, not replacements. To realise its full potential, Europe must invest now. The race to net-zero depends on it.