GRANTS

Grants are non-repayable awards for specified work that delivers a public benefit but is too uncertain, early or unprofitable to finance commercially. They commonly support research, technology development, project preparation, demonstrations and deployment. They may cover research costs, development expenditure such as engineering and permits, capital expenditure on equipment and construction, or limited operating expenditure while a project proves performance. For CDR, grants can support scientific studies, field trials, measurement, first plants and shared learning. Unlike procurement, they do not buy removals. Unlike loans, recipients normally repay nothing if conditions are met.

Design starts with the problem and stage. Research grants should generate evidence; development grants can fund engineering and permits; capital grants can build pilots or first plants; operating grants should be temporary and linked to learning or verified performance. Funders must decide eligible costs, award size and whether recipients contribute money. CDR eligibility should require a credible route to net atmospheric removal, appropriate storage, sustainable inputs and safeguards. Payments can follow milestones. Rules should also address open data, intellectual property, recovery of misused funds, legal limits on public subsidies and the route from a grant to permits, finance and buyers.

Grants can bridge the “valley of death” between a promising laboratory result and the field evidence or first plant needed for commercial finance. They can fund knowledge, measurement tools and demonstrations whose benefits spread beyond one recipient, while cost-sharing can bring in private capital. A varied portfolio can widen the supplier base, build skills and reveal which approaches merit further support. Grants help projects reach the market, but they do not provide the recurring demand or revenue needed once public funding ends.

Grants can subsidise work recipients would have funded anyway, while selection may favour familiar technologies or applicants able to provide match funding. Applicants may overstate readiness, cost reductions or access to permits, inputs, storage and customers. Slow decisions can stall smaller recipients, while weak milestone checks allow failing projects to continue. Excessive secrecy hides lessons, but forced disclosure can expose valuable know-how. Capital grants may leave pilots idle if follow-on finance or demand never arrives.

Funders should judge each award against its stage. Research should produce usable evidence; development should reach designs or permits; capital grants should build and test facilities; operating support should demonstrate verified output and declining cost. Results, private funding attracted, delays, failures and safeguards should determine whether payments continue and how later calls change.

Grant makers should map needs with researchers, CDR developers, equipment, input and storage providers, investors and potential buyers. Independent technical, lifecycle and standards experts can test milestones and removal claims. Smaller applicants can expose application barriers, while affected communities and civil society should shape safeguards, benefit sharing and what results must be public.

International funds and supranational institutions can invite applications from several countries; national, regional and municipal governments can award grants under their spending powers. Companies can fund research or demonstration through corporate grant programmes, while foundations can make grants aligned with their mission. Larger levels are suited to expensive demonstrations, and smaller levels to local trials, skills and community participation. They may co-fund one project, but each grant maker remains responsible for selection, agreements, milestone checks and recovery. Grants still need CDR rules where they support removal activity.