The World has Limited Carbon Storage Capabilities

A recent study¹ put forth by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis sheds light on many of the limitations of carbon capture technology in terms of capacity and capabilities. The report looks at a variety of factors beyond the traditional approach.

Specifically, it delves into issues like environmental conservation requirements, repercussions of failure, public perception, and the geopolitics surrounding the use of basins that cross international boundaries. Here’s what you need to know.

CO₂ and Its Role in Global Warming

Carbon dioxide remains one of the largest contributors to global warming. As CO₂ gets trapped in the atmosphere, it causes heat to get stuck closer to the ground, furthering CO2 emissions, creating a vicious cycle. Sadly, CO₂ is a byproduct of burning fossil fuels and other key tasks that are crucial to daily life. As such, CO₂ pollution continues to hit record highs.

Another recent study found that in 2025, CO₂ monthly concentrations hit an all-time high of 430ppm (parts per million). The same study revealed that relaxed industrial standards in the US pushed the global emission rates higher, despite a drop from Chinese manufacturers.

Reaching Net-Zero CO2 Emissions

Recognizing how important it is to control CO₂ emissions to preserve the environment, scientists, governments, and institutions have come together to put forth ways to achieve net-zero carbon emissions. Net-zero carbon emissions is a term that refers to a point where the amount of new carbon produced is equal to the amount of carbon removed from the atmosphere.

Notably, the Paris Agreement is the perfect example of governments coming together to pledge to combat CO₂ emissions. This agreement seeks to have countries institute CO2 reduction and capture methods to ensure that global temperatures rise by no more than 2°C (3.6°F) above pre-industrial levels, while pursuing efforts to limit the increase to 1.5°C (2.7°F).

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is one of the core aspects of the Paris Agreement. Carbon capture methods come in many forms, from direct air capture systems to chemical or water-based strategies that combine CO₂ with other molecules to create safer options. There are even next-gen batteries in the works that use CO₂.

Once the CO₂ gets captured, it’s first compressed and then transported to a storage location. The most common location to store CO₂ is deep underground in specific basins, including basalt formations and unmineable coal seams.

Specifically, these CO₂ storage locations must have a minimum depth of ~800m to 1,500m (0.8–1.5 km). These restrictions are in place to prevent bedrock destabilization, which could lead to added seismic activity in certain areas.

Notably, the Paris Agreement calls for CO₂ emissions to be stored for centuries in these rock formations as a feasible way to reduce emissions. As such, there have already been many studies to locate geologically stable target sites for CO₂ storage.

Problems with Current CCS Methods

There are several problems with this approach to CO₂ pollution. For one, every study to date has been conducted with the assumption that there is are vast amount of storage room for CO₂ waste. Specifically, experts have located potentially 10,000–40,000 GtCO₂of possible storage locations.

However, the true capability is far less. For one, all previous estimates didn’t account for vulnerabilities that could render the location unusable or unwise at the very least. Crucial aspects such as seismic activity, which could lead to major leaks, were never considered.

Companies have poured billions into carbon capture technology, and many tout it as a safe resolution for the CO₂ pollution problem. Despite these massive investments, very little CO₂ has been captured and stored to date.

Critics argue that too much emphasis has been put on this technology and that the same amount of effort put towards prevention makes more sense. They cite costs, past data, and conflict regarding the use of international basins as CO₂ storage options as the main drawbacks.

Limited Carbon Storage Study

Recognizing the need for more transparency, the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis released the A Prudent Planetary Limit for Geologic Carbon Storage study in the scientific journal Nature. This first-of-its-kind study delves deep into the proposed CO₂ storage locations, revealing that the world has much less CO₂ storage capacity than first believed.

For years, CO₂ capture advocates have pushed long-held industry claims of massive capacity to store CO2 safely. This study shatters these myths, demonstrating that there will be a need for a combined effort of prevention and storage to even come close to net-zero emissions.

You Can’t Store CO2 Anywhere

The paper examines each potential CO₂ storage basin to see if it is actually a wise deposit for this harmful byproduct. The study pushed the concept of “prudent potential,” referring to the balance between safety and capabilities.

Source – Nature

The goal of the research is to minimize risks to people and the environment. Additionally, the scientists want to help people realize that CO2 storage isn’t limitless. There needs to be a cap placed on each location that takes into account key factors, including engineering, safety, and other vital aspects of the equation.

Sensitive Environmental Areas

One of the first steps of the study was to exclude sensitive environmental areas. You can’t store pollutants in locations that could suffer catastrophic loss if a leak occurred. A perfect example of this strategy includes excluding the Arctic and Antarctic regions.

Ruling Out Seismic Active Zones

Another crucial aspect that the scientist examined was the seismic activity of each basin. Locations near tectonic plates or active tremors were eliminated.  It doesn’t make any sense to attempt to lock CO₂ in rock formations that will eventually leak due to earthquakes and tremors. Especially considering that any leaks could be catastrophic to the land and water supply.

Volumetric Calculations

The team then set out to calculate the volume of each remaining location. This step required the team to look at crucial data, including depth of target formation, overall pore volume, seal integrity, and basin type.

Guide Policymakers

Lastly, the group discusses how smart policies can help to enhance CO₂ removal and prevention strategies. The paper explains how every nation needs to begin working on a plan for geological carbon storage and the reduction of fossil-fuel emissions asap.

Study Methodology: Testing Global Carbon Storage Capacity

As part of the study, the scientist examined crucial aspects of the current CO₂ storage plans. They conducted several tests, including spatially explicit analysis. This strategy helped them to identify and exclude any storage areas that have potential risks.

Findings: True Global CO₂ Storage Capacity

Swipe to scroll →

The paper’s test results could help to guide future policy making and more. The team managed to determine the planetary limit for geologic carbon storage for both onshore and offshore basins. Specifically, they determined that a prudent planetary limit of around 1,460 Gt CO₂ storage was possible.

This data contradicts previous reports that place CO₂ storage capability at 10x that, or around 11,800 Gt CO₂ of theoretical storage. It also shows that it’s only possible to achieve a global temperature reduction of 0.7 °C relying on CO₂ capture exclusively. Consequently, the primary focus of the paper is to demonstrate that people should begin treating geologic carbon storage as a limited global resource.

Implications and Benefits of the Study

There are many benefits that this paper brings to light. For one, it puts realistic goals on CO₂ capture initiatives that originally failed to take into account limiting factors. By providing the world with a more transparent view of CO₂ capture capabilities, it enables scientists to focus on additional methods and prevention strategies.

Optimal Use

The paper helps to highlight which industries would benefit the most from CO₂ capture initiatives and which need to be ushered into the reduction strategy. Specifically, the paper lists difficult-to-decarbonize industries like cement production, aviation, and agriculture as prime areas to integrate CCS methods.

Insight into Localization

This paper is the first to take a serious look at each location’s geographic and geopolitical factors. It shows that CO₂ storage capacity is uneven, with some nations like the US, Russia, China, Brazil, and Australia having massive storage basins while others lack any.

Legal Framework

Another major benefit of this study is that it could help shape legislation surrounding the use of basins in international waters and other legally dubious areas. This legal framework will need to examine critical details like jurisdictional boundaries, long-term monitoring obligations, and financial responsibilities.

Real-World Applications and Timeline

The main application for this study is to further transparency on CCS methods. The scientist wants to make nations understand that the best approach is prevention combined with cleanup strategies. Only then can global CO₂ emissions begin to taper off.

Limited Carbon Storage Study Timeline

You can expect to see this study have an immediate effect on the CO₂ capture community. The science in this paper will help to guide future CO₂ deposit location approvals and could be seen as a map for countries seeking to do their part.

Key developments resulting from this study could include enhanced CO₂ transport routes, the development of cross-border pipelines, and streamlined shipping corridors to get waste to injection hubs faster.

Limited Carbon Storage Study Researchers

The International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis hosted the Limited Carbon Storage study. The paper lists Matthew J. Gidden, Siddharth Joshi, John J. Armitage, Alina-Berenice Christ, Miranda Boettcher, Elina Brutschin, Alexandre C. Köberle, Keywan Riahi, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, and Joeri Rogelj as main contributors.

Limited Carbon Storage Study Future

The engineers will now seek to get their paper in the hands of lawmakers and environmentalists to inspire a more realistic approach to the CO₂ pollution problem. They hope to combine CO2 storage with prevention and other capture strategies to get results.

Investing in the CO₂ Storage Sector

There are several companies involved in the CO2 capture industry. These firms range from massive gas companies to firms seeking to create new capture methods like reusing captured CO2 in manufacturing strategies. Here’s one company leading the charge in terms of innovation.

Chevron

Chevron entered the market in 1879 as Pacific Coast Oil Company to provide reliable oil products to the US. Notably, the firm underwent several mergers, including with Standard Oil Company of California in 1906, Texaco in 2001, and Unocal Corporation in 2005. The latter resulted in the company changing its name to Chevron Corp.

Chevron has been a pioneering force in the US oil industry for decades. For the longest time, the company operated the largest refinery in California. It currently has operations across the US, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia.

In the early 2000s, the firm started to focus on renewable fuels and lower-carbon initiatives. This pivot made the company diversify its products into marine biofuels, CO₂ capture devices, and advanced lubricants.

Today, Chevron delivers around 3.1 million oil-equivalent barrels per day. It is recognized as a leading oil provider globally and reported annual revenues of +$246 billion. All of these factors make CVX a smart stock for those seeking access to a leader in CO₂ capture innovation and more.

Latest CVX (CVX) Stock News and Performance

Limited Carbon Storage Study | Conclusion

Saving the world from global warming is going to take more than a singular approach. As such, sciences like CO₂ capture and storage are just one of many tools that environmentalists will need to master to make a real difference. This study helps to show that capturing and storing CO₂ isn’t enough. Only when combined with relevant preventative measures will any strategy provide the sizable results.

Learn about other cool Environmental Projects here.

References:

^{1. Gidden, M. J., Joshi, S., Armitage, J. J., Christ, A., Boettcher, M., Brutschin, E., Köberle, A. C., Riahi, K., Schellnhuber, H. J., Schleussner, C., & Rogelj, J. (2025). A prudent planetary limit for geologic carbon storage. Nature, 645(8079), 124-132. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09423-y}