MANDATORY CO₂ STORAGE CAPACITY TARGET

Government can require specified companies to provide enough CO₂ storage facilities to handle a set annual volume by a deadline. These facilities must have the permits and equipment needed to receive CO₂ and inject it safely underground. The requirement concerns making storage available, rather than ensuring that customers immediately use all of it. Companies may develop sites themselves, invest jointly or contract specialist storage providers, with government checking and enforcing their responsibilities. The aim is to overcome a common investment problem: storage developers wait for customers, while capture projects wait for somewhere to send their CO₂. Requiring storage to be ready by a deadline can encourage earlier investment and give prospective customers greater confidence to proceed. Targets must nevertheless reflect suitable geology, realistic costs, construction times, transport connections and likely demand. Both industrial carbon capture and carbon removal projects that need geological storage can benefit from the resulting services.

The target’s volume and deadline should reflect suitable geology, investment requirements and realistic development times. A credible business case needs customers able to pay for storage, expected revenues that support investment and clarity over any public funding required. Capture facilities, transport connections and storage sites must become available on compatible schedules. Where financing or demand is insufficient, complementary measures may include investment grants, loan guarantees, support for shared transport or public CDR purchasing. The rules should identify which companies carry the obligation, allow joint investment or specialist providers, and specify what counts as delivered capacity.

A clear, enforceable deadline can bring site assessment and storage investment forward, giving capture developers greater confidence that services will become available. Where oil and gas companies are covered, their geological expertise, engineering capabilities and existing assets may support delivery. Joint investment can spread costs and make shared facilities viable for several customers. With credible transport connections and affordable access, additional storage can help industrial capture and removal projects secure contracts and finance their own construction. Predictable expansion can also accommodate new customers as demand grows.

An unrealistic target can require substantial investment in facilities that attract too few customers to recover their costs. Delayed capture projects or missing transport may leave completed storage unused, while unsuitable geology and lengthy permitting can prevent delivery. Companies may challenge disproportionate obligations or defer investment if penalties are ineffective. Poorly defined joint responsibilities can leave nobody clearly accountable for a shortfall. Optimistic estimates or duplicate claims may also exaggerate available capacity. Pressure to meet the deadline must not weaken safety assessments, and public support can expose taxpayers to losses if commercial demand fails to materialise.

Authorities should compare the target with site assessments, financing commitments, permits, construction progress and independently verified readiness to operate. They should also examine customer contracts, expected delivery dates, transport availability and storage charges to assess whether the facilities are likely to be used. Annual capacity ready for use, total underground storage space and CO₂ actually injected should be reported separately. Joint projects need records preventing the same capacity from satisfying several obligations twice. Reviews should identify the causes of delays and inform corrective plans, enforcement or adjustments permitted under published rules.

Government should involve affected companies early to test whether the proposed target is achievable and identify the conditions needed for investment. Storage developers and independent geologists should explain site prospects, costs and technical constraints; financiers should assess whether expected revenues support lending. Capture customers and transport operators should provide realistic volumes, connection plans and delivery schedules. Regulators should clarify permitting and safety requirements, while communities should help shape decisions on siting, local impacts and monitoring. These discussions should inform a workable target and supporting measures, with government retaining responsibility for the final obligation.

Supranational and national lawmakers can impose the storage obligation and empower regulators to monitor and enforce delivery. Regional or state legislatures can do so where their powers cover the affected industry and storage development, subject to higher-level law. Companies fulfil the duty through investments and contracts. Government must identify who remains legally responsible when companies deliver jointly or use specialist providers.