The discussion about technologies for carbon capture and storage (CCS) is becoming increasingly heated. A recent expert discussion in the environment committee of the Bundestag has revealed the deep rifts that exist between the various interest groups. Representatives from the industry, invited by the CDU/CSU faction, advocate for a comprehensive use of CCS. They argue that this technology is essential to achieving climate goals and making the industry climate-neutral. Matthias Belitz from the Association of the Chemical Industry (VCI) stated: "We believe that CCS can also serve as a bridge." He pointed out that certain emissions in the chemical industry are unavoidable, which underscores the necessity of CCS.
On the other side are scientists from the SPD, Greens, and Left Party, who take a restrictive stance. They argue that CCS should only be used for unavoidable CO2 residual emissions, that is, emissions that cannot be avoided through the use of renewable energies or more efficient production methods. This viewpoint is supported by Dr. Felix Schenuit from the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), who emphasizes the urgency of offsetting remaining emissions through CO2 removal to stabilize global temperatures.
The controversies are further fueled by critical voices such as Marcus Resch (AfD), who questions the use of CCS as a central climate policy solution. He argues that the high costs and technical complexity of CCS infrastructure are not justified and that a large portion of emissions cannot be addressed.
Another aspect of the debate concerns the costs and public acceptance of CCS projects. Prof. Dr. Volker Quaschning from the University of Applied Sciences in Berlin highlighted the "exorbitantly high costs" of building a CO2 pipeline network and instead called for all avoidable residual emissions to be reduced to zero by 2045. He sees the solution in an increased use of renewable energies and more efficient technologies.
The question remains: How can Germany achieve its climate goals without relying on controversial technologies like CCS? Opinions are divided, and time is running out to find viable solutions that are both ecologically and economically sensible. The debate will certainly need to continue in order to reach a consensus that aligns both climate protection and economic interests.
