A pilot plant, Carbon Engineering, may be operational by next summer

David Keith’s pilot plant, Carbon Engineering, may be operational by next summer.

A rendering of David Keith’s proposed modular carbon-capture plant; he says such plants will not solve the carbon emissions problem.

A rendering of David Keith’s proposed modular carbon-capture plant; he says such plants will not solve the carbon emissions problem. | Rendering courtesy of Carbon Engineering Ltd.

David Keith founded a company, Carbon Engineering, in 2009, while he held the Canada Research Chair in energy and the environment at the University of Calgary, to capture carbon and use it to develop low-carbon fuels, among other projects. (He launched it with $3.5 million from a group of angel investors that included Bill Gates.) The pilot plant, which he expects to be operational by next summer, should capture a modest 1,000 tons of carbon per year, roughly the amount generated by the activities of 50 average Americans in 12 months. Eventually the company expects to sell the CO2 it captures for applications such as enhanced oil recovery (oil companies would use the gas to force oil out of the ground) and the production of algae-based biofuels. A commercial-scale plant built with this technology might capture up to 100,000 tons of CO2 a year, but Keith stresses that his is a small company with a new technology. “Anyone who knows anything about carbon and energy knows that there isn’t any one magic bullet,” he says. “We’re not trying to solve the world’s climate problems.”

He is careful to separate his efforts on behalf of his company from his academic work. Not only does he see carbon capture and solar geoengineering as technologies with very different risks and costs, he’s also conscious of critics who have suggested that he aims to profit from his aerosol-reflector research. In fact, he has lobbied in Washington to outlaw patents on sun-blocking technologies. Because such global-scale climate solutions can have a dramatic effect on the planet, Keith says, “I think this is a bit like nuclear weapons, and there should be no for-profit work.”

Related topics

You might also like

On Open to Debate, the Harvard economist defended free market competition—with meaningful government involvement. 

The play Spare Parts is a contemporary fable about the quest to live forever.

From competing in youth gymnastics to studying tetrapods, the Harvard curator has always chased her curiosity.

Most popular

Harvard Weathers a Year of Turmoil

The federal government has launched unprecedented actions against the University. Here’s a guide.

The 1884 Cannibalism-at-Sea Case That Still Has Harvard Talking

The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens changed the course of legal history. Here’s why it’s been fodder for countless classroom debates.

Lafayette’s Unexpected Gift to George Washington: Pheasants

The two birds will be on display at Harvard this summer.

Explore More From Current Issue

A vase of yellow flowers on a table next to an orange and a glass.

Harvard Art Museums restores a rare glimpse of an American master.

A flooded office scene with computers, a woman working, and a pink sunset backdrop.

A College student’s attempt to recapture the romanticism of the workplace.

A glowing bulb shape surrounded by colorful, swirling energy lines against a blue background.

Harvard researchers achieve medical breakthroughs in cancer therapy and infection control.