Europe’s Industrial Carbon Management: From Policy Frameworks to Infrastructure and Deployment

Editorial — From strategy to implementation: making industrial carbon management work in Europe

Europe has entered a decisive phase of its climate and industrial transition. The debate is no longer about whether decarbonisation is necessary, but about whether it can be deployed at scale without undermining competitiveness, security and industrial sovereignty. Industrial carbon management (ICM) now lies at the heart of this equation.

Carbon capture, utilisation and storage are no longer abstract concepts or distant options. They are becoming structural components of Europe’s industrial future, particularly for hard-to-abate sectors such as cement, chemicals, refining, fertilisers, hydrogen production and waste-to-energy. The challenge is no longer technological, but systemic.

Across Europe, ambition is high. Strategies have been published, targets set and flagship projects announced. The Net Zero Industry Act, the European Industrial Carbon Management strategy and the growing number of projects of common interest all signal clear political recognition: CCS and CCU are indispensable to meeting climate objectives while preserving Europe’s industrial base and enabling the scale-up of low-carbon hydrogen.

Infrastructure, regulation and financing mechanisms must evolve in parallel. Carbon capture cannot advance without predictable access to transport and storage. Hydrogen production from both fossil-based and biogenic sources cannot scale without CCS to manage residual emissions. Transport infrastructure will not be built without clear demand signals. And investments will not materialise without long-term regulatory visibility under the EU ETS, clear liability rules and credible risk-sharing mechanisms. Avoiding fragmentation remains the primary challenge for deployment.

A risk of geographical imbalance is emerging in Europe. While the North Sea region is rapidly establishing itself as a storage hub, large industrial regions in Central, Eastern and Southern Europe risk being left without credible access to storage capacity. This would constrain decarbonisation pathways for industry and hydrogen value chains alike. Without coordinated, cross-border planning, Europe could replace its dependence on imported fossil fuels with a dependence on a handful of CO₂ and hydrogen infrastructure corridors. A genuinely European approach to infrastructure planning is essential.

This dossier does not present CCUS as a silver bullet. Several contributors rightly stress that carbon capture must complement—not replace—electrification, renewable hydrogen, energy efficiency, circularity and material substitution. CCS should target unavoidable process emissions and support transitional pathways where alternatives remain limited. Used indiscriminately, it risks inefficiency and poor allocation of public resources; used strategically, it can prevent deindustrialisation, support hydrogen deployment and limit carbon leakage.

Trust is also central. Public acceptance, transparency on capture rates, rigorous monitoring of storage sites and clear governance frameworks will determine social legitimacy. The same applies to hydrogen infrastructure and associated safety and sustainability standards. Without credibility, even technically robust projects will struggle to move forward.

Finally, time is critical. Europe is operating in a context where industrial policy, energy security and geopolitics are increasingly intertwined. Delays in decision-making, permitting or infrastructure deployment carry real economic and strategic costs. The window for first-mover advantage is closing as global competitors accelerate across CCUS and hydrogen alike.

This special issue reflects the need to align policies, mobilise investment and move from fragmented projects to integrated systems.

Industrial carbon management will not succeed through declarations. It will succeed through implementation.

Editor-in-Chief 

Laurent ULMANN