Carbon capture has become one of the most frequently discussed sustainability topics in the global chemical industry. Suppliers increasingly reference carbon capture and storage (CCS) or carbon capture and utilisation (CCU) when describing their decarbonisation strategies, yet these technologies are not equally mature across every manufacturing process. Some applications have operated commercially for years, while others remain in demonstration or pilot phases.
For procurement professionals, understanding this distinction is essential. A supplier's carbon capture claim may be technically accurate, but the credibility of the associated emission reductions depends heavily on where and how the technology is being applied.
Understanding CCS and CCU
Although they are often mentioned together, CCS and CCU have different objectives.
Carbon capture and storage focuses on capturing carbon dioxide and storing it permanently in suitable geological formations to prevent atmospheric emissions.
Carbon capture and utilisation captures carbon dioxide for use as a feedstock in another industrial process. Instead of permanent storage, the captured carbon becomes part of a commercially valuable product.
Both approaches can contribute to lower emissions, but their commercial readiness varies significantly across different sectors of chemical manufacturing.
Commercial Success in Ammonia Production
One of the most established examples of carbon capture exists within ammonia production.
During ammonia manufacturing, carbon dioxide generated through the production process is already available in a relatively concentrated stream. Capturing this CO₂ requires less energy than separating highly diluted emissions from combustion gases.
The captured carbon dioxide is commonly reacted with ammonia to manufacture urea fertilizer, creating one of the longest-standing examples of industrial carbon utilisation.
Because this integration has operated commercially for many years, procurement teams can generally view carbon capture claims related to conventional ammonia and urea production as representing an established industrial practice rather than an emerging technology.
Hydrogen Production Has Mature Carbon Capture Technology
Hydrogen produced through steam methane reforming generates concentrated carbon dioxide streams that are technically well suited for capture.
Carbon capture systems integrated with SMR facilities have reached commercial operation at several industrial sites. The technology itself is considered technically mature, and operational experience continues to expand across different regions.
While economics and project-specific conditions still influence investment decisions, carbon capture from hydrogen production is no longer considered purely experimental.
Steam Crackers Present Greater Technical Challenges
Steam crackers occupy a very different position on the commercial maturity scale.
Unlike ammonia or hydrogen production, carbon dioxide from steam cracker operations is largely contained within combustion flue gas, where concentrations are much lower. Capturing carbon from these dilute streams requires more complex separation technologies and higher energy consumption.
As a result, carbon capture for steam crackers remains at an early commercial demonstration stage. Companies continue to test different technologies, but widespread commercial deployment has not yet occurred across the industry.
Procurement professionals should therefore distinguish between demonstration projects and fully established commercial operations when reviewing supplier sustainability claims.
Cement and Steel Projects Continue to Expand
Carbon capture also attracts significant investment within the cement and steel industries because both sectors generate substantial carbon dioxide emissions.
Many chemical manufacturing complexes operate alongside these industries, making future integration opportunities attractive. However, carbon capture in cement and steel generally remains at the large pilot scale rather than routine commercial deployment.
These projects continue to generate valuable operational knowledge, but buyers should recognize that large pilot facilities differ significantly from technologies adopted across entire industries.
Evaluating Supplier Carbon Capture Claims
Sustainability reporting often references carbon capture without explaining the maturity of the underlying technology. Procurement professionals can strengthen supplier evaluations by asking practical questions that clarify whether emission reductions come from established operations or developing projects.
Useful questions include:
Which manufacturing process uses carbon capture?
Is the system operating commercially or as a pilot project?
Does the captured carbon undergo permanent storage or industrial utilisation?
What proportion of total plant emissions does the system capture?
Are reported emission reductions independently verified?
Answers to these questions provide greater context than broad sustainability statements alone.
What Procurement Teams Should Focus On
Carbon capture will likely remain an important element of chemical industry decarbonisation for many years. However, buyers should avoid treating every carbon capture claim as representing the same level of commercial maturity.
Applications involving ammonia production and hydrogen from steam methane reforming already demonstrate established commercial practice. By comparison, steam cracker applications and many projects associated with cement and steel continue progressing through demonstration and large pilot stages.
Understanding these differences allows procurement professionals to evaluate supplier sustainability claims more accurately, compare competing suppliers on a consistent basis and make sourcing decisions supported by realistic expectations of current technology.
Ready to source sustainable chemical products from verified global suppliers? Explore competitive offers on our platform today.