Key considerations for engineered pathway cost reductions TABLE 6 DAC cost-reduction considerations While projections suggest DAC costs could fall to $200–$400 per tonne by 2030, achieving this depends on: –Energy efficiency improvements: Current DAC processes are highly energy-intensive. Without access to cheap renewable power, costs may remain elevated. –Process intensification and modularity: Some companies are developing higher-efficiency sorbents and heat- integration techniques that could drive cost reductions, but there remains uncertainty whether DAC technology improvements can actually be replicated and expanded at industrial scale because of the very high costs involved. –Capex reduction: DAC requires large-scale infrastructure, and while learning curves suggest potential cost declines, historical trends in similar capital-intensive industries (e.g. carbon capture in fossil fuel sectors) indicate that capex reductions may not be as rapid as anticipated. –Policy and subsidies: The US 45Q tax credit and public procurement commitments (e.g. Frontier’s advance market commitment) play a crucial role in price reductions. Without long-term policy certainty, DAC cost curves could flatten. BECCS cost-reduction considerations Expected cost declines for BECCS ($200–$300/ tonne by 2030) are more plausible due to: –Existing infrastructure: Many BECCS projects employ established biomass and ethanol production facilities, lowering capital intensity. –CO2 transport and storage scaling: If geological storage costs decline due to expanded infrastructure, BECCS may see cost reductions in line with expectations. –Feedstock constraints: Scaling BECCS is limited by sustainable biomass availability, however, which could exert upwards pressure on costs in some regions. Price structures and market dynamics The pricing of CDR pathways depends on contractual terms, buyer preferences and market maturity. Established pathways such as biochar exhibit stable pricing, whereas emerging technologies like DAC have wider price ranges due to high capital costs and early-stage deployment.Additionally, pricing varies by payment model: –Prepaid contracts (common for DAC and BECCS) allow suppliers to secure upfront capital for scaling; while this can sometimes result in lower per-tonne prices, variability remains –Payment on delivery models (typical for biochar) reflect delayed revenue realization and operational risks, leading to slightly higher but more predictable pricing FIGURE 11 $/tonne pricing by technology, prepayment vs. payment on delivery 6008001,0001,2001,400 400 200 0 2024 prepayment 2024 payment on delivery 2030 prepayment 2030 payment on deliveryDAC BECCS Biochar ERW Note: Each bar shows the range of prices observed for a given technology and payment type. The shaded band captures the middle half of all contracts in the dataset, where most deals are priced. The lower line marks the point below which only the cheapest 25% of contracts fall, and the upper line marks where the most expensive 25% begin. A narrow band signals more consistent pricing; a wide band reflects greater variability. Pricing within each pathway is beginning to converge as more suppliers reach operational stage, achieve third-party verification and build a delivery track record – biochar, the most mature pathway, shows the tightest price range. For other pathways, prices remain more dispersed, reflecting ongoing development in MRV methodologies, quality standards and regulatory frameworks, all of which shape how individual suppliers set and negotiate prices. Source: World Economic Forum Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies: Market Overview and Offtake 19

Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies 2026