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

What Makes a Fact, According to a Harvard Social Scientist

Sheila Jasanoff has spent her career studying how societies produce knowledge, evaluate expertise, and make decisions about technology.

How to Care for Patients in AI-Driven Medicine

Harvard’s Arthur Kleinman reflects on what’s lost when healthcare systems prioritize efficiency.

Cambridge Once Fought Harvard’s DNA Research. Now There’s a Play About It.

A theatrical reenactment explores a 1976 clash between science and democracy.

Most popular

Lafayette’s Unexpected Gift to George Washington: Pheasants

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

Harvard Weathers a Year of Turmoil

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

Harvard Agrees to $53 Million Settlement in Body Parts Theft Case

The University will compensate families of those whose remains were sold and establish a scholarship to honor anatomical donors.

Explore More From Current Issue

Runners compete on a track, with a Harvard athlete in the foreground and others behind.

After a historic 2025-26 season, athletes eye NCAA championships.

A woman with curly blonde hair sits casually against a stone wall, wearing a black top and jeans.

Chloe Chapin trains her Broadway costume designer’s eye on the history of men’s fashion.

Smiling woman stands beside a large skull in a display cabinet.

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