No products in the cart.
The race to pull carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere has never been more intense. In boardrooms across Silicon Valley and research labs in Europe, engineers are wrestling with a deceptively simple challenge: how do you capture invisible gas from thin air at a price the world can afford?
Direct Air Capture (DAC) technology promises to be humanity’s vacuum cleaner for the sky, but with current costs ranging from $250 to over $600 per ton of CO₂, it’s more like buying a Lamborghini to clean your garage. Yet billions of dollars are flowing into the sector, and three companies are emerging as the frontrunners in this high-stakes climate tech marathon.
The Promise and the Problem
Unlike traditional carbon capture that sucks emissions from industrial smokestacks, DAC technology grabs CO₂ molecules straight from ambient air. It’s the difference between catching water from a fire hose versus collecting morning dew—technically possible, but requiring vastly different approaches and energy inputs.
This distinction matters enormously for achieving net-negative emissions. While smokestack capture can only clean up new emissions, DAC can theoretically reverse centuries of atmospheric buildup. The question keeping investors awake at night: which technology will crack the cost code first?
Three Paths to the Same Summit
In the global race to make DAC economically viable, three distinct strategies have emerged, each backed by different philosophies, funding sources, and technological bets.
Climeworks: The Swiss Precision Play
High in the Icelandic highlands, a field of white shipping containers hums quietly against the volcanic landscape. This is Orca, the world’s first commercial DAC plant, operated by Zurich-based Climeworks. Each container houses fans that draw air through solid amine-based filters, which bind CO₂ molecules like molecular velcro.
When the filters become saturated, the system heats them to 100°C using renewable geothermal energy, releasing pure CO₂ that gets pumped underground and turned to stone. It’s elegant engineering, but it comes at Swiss watch prices—approximately $600 per ton of CO₂ captured.
Climeworks has parlayed its first-mover advantage into a roster of premium clients. Microsoft pays millions annually for Climeworks credits to offset its cloud computing emissions. Stripe, the payments giant, has committed to purchasing $15 million worth of carbon removal over nine years. Swiss precision comes with Swiss pricing, but also Swiss reliability.
The company’s modular approach means they can deploy units anywhere with renewable energy access, from Iceland’s geothermal fields to Kenya’s solar farms. Their current capacity of 10,000 tons per year sounds impressive until you realize that’s equivalent to removing about 2,100 cars from the road annually—a meaningful start, but hardly dent-making in global terms.
Climeworks represents the premium, small-batch approach to DAC, betting that corporate customers will pay top dollar for proven, reliable carbon removal while costs gradually decline through experience and scale.
Carbon Engineering: The Industrial Heavyweight
If Climeworks is the artisanal coffee shop of DAC, Carbon Engineering is the Starbucks—focused on scale, standardization, and making the economics work through sheer volume. Based in British Columbia but increasingly focused on the American market, the company takes a radically different approach.
Instead of solid filters, Carbon Engineering uses liquid potassium hydroxide to scrub CO₂ from the air in massive, industrial-scale facilities. Their pilot plant looks more like an oil refinery than a tech startup’s moonshot, and that’s entirely intentional. The company has secured over $1.1 billion in funding, much of it from Occidental Petroleum, one of America’s largest oil companies.
This partnership raises eyebrows in climate circles but provides crucial advantages. Occidental brings decades of experience building large-scale industrial facilities and managing complex chemical processes. More importantly, they have the capital and risk tolerance to build gigaton-scale infrastructure.
Carbon Engineering’s bet is straightforward: get big fast, drive costs down through industrial economies of scale, and worry about the optics later. Their current cost estimate of $250 per ton is less than half of Climeworks’, with a roadmap to reach $150-200 per ton by 2035. Their first major facility in the Permian Basin aims to capture one million tons of CO₂ annually—100 times larger than Climeworks’ current operation.
Carbon Engineering represents the industrial scaling approach, betting that traditional heavy industry expertise and capital can drive DAC costs down faster than Silicon Valley innovation.
Heirloom: The Biomimicry Breakthrough
In a nondescript warehouse in San Francisco, Heirloom Carbon is pursuing perhaps the most elegant solution of all. Instead of fans, filters, or chemical solvents, they’re accelerating a process that happens naturally every day: limestone weathering.
When limestone sits in air, it slowly absorbs CO₂—a process that normally takes months or years. Heirloom’s innovation is speeding this up to hours by heating crushed limestone and maximizing its surface area exposure. Once saturated with CO₂, the limestone gets heated in a kiln to release pure CO₂ for storage, while the regenerated limestone returns to capture more carbon.
The approach eliminates energy-intensive fans and reduces the need for exotic materials. It’s like discovering you can achieve the same result by optimizing what nature already does rather than inventing entirely new processes. Their current cost estimate of $475 per ton sits between their competitors, but their energy footprint is potentially much lower.
Backed by Breakthrough Energy (Bill Gates’ climate fund) and Stripe, Heirloom is still in early-stage development with less than 1,000 tons of annual capacity. But their approach has attracted attention for its simplicity and potential scalability using abundant materials.
Heirloom represents the biomimicry approach, betting that accelerating natural processes will prove more efficient and cost-effective than purely engineered solutions.
The Economics of Air
The numbers tell a story of rapidly evolving economics and fierce competition:
Current State (2025):
- Climeworks: $600/ton, 10,000 tons/year capacity, $800M raised
- Carbon Engineering: $250/ton, 1,000,000 tons/year planned, $1,100M raised
- Heirloom: $475/ton, <1,000 tons/year current, $500M raised
Projected Trajectories (2030-2035): By 2030, industry projections suggest costs could fall to $450/ton for Climeworks, $200/ton for Carbon Engineering, and $300/ton for Heirloom. By 2035, the targets become even more aggressive: $300, $150, and $200 per ton respectively.
Comparative Table
| Company | Tech Approach | Cost Estimate ($/ton) | Scale (kt/year) | Funding ($M) | Key Partners |
| Climeworks | Solid sorbent | $600 | 10 | 800 | Microsoft, Stripe |
| Carbon Engineering | Liquid solvent | $250 | 1000 | 1100 | Occidental, BHP |
| Heirloom | Mineralization with lime | $475 | 1 | 500 | Breakthrough Energy, Stripe |
Sources: Climeworks, Carbon Engineering, Heirloom, Breakthrough Energy, IEA, CarbonPlan
These projections depend heavily on continued funding, supportive policies, and growing corporate demand for high-quality carbon credits. They also assume successful scale-up of manufacturing and deployment, which remains unproven for all three approaches.
Sources: Company disclosures, Climeworks, Carbon Engineering, Heirloom, Breakthrough Energy, IEA, CarbonPlan
The Verdict: Different Bets, Same Urgency
Each company represents a fundamentally different thesis about how to make DAC work at scale. Climeworks bets on modularity and premium positioning. Carbon Engineering bets on industrial scale and traditional project finance. Heirloom bets on natural process optimization and material abundance.
In reality, the world probably needs all three approaches to succeed. Different geographies, energy systems, and economic contexts may favor different solutions. Iceland’s geothermal resources suit Climeworks’ energy-intensive process. Texas’s industrial infrastructure and cheap natural gas favor Carbon Engineering’s approach. Regions with abundant limestone and solar power might prove ideal for Heirloom’s method.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. Current global DAC capacity is measured in thousands of tons annually, but climate models suggest we need to remove billions of tons of CO₂ from the atmosphere by 2050. The gap between current reality and required scale is enormous, but the progress trajectory is accelerating.
As corporate sustainability commitments drive demand and government policies provide regulatory support, these three companies aren’t just building carbon capture plants—they’re building the foundation of a new industry that could reshape how humanity relates to the atmosphere itself.
The question isn’t which approach will win, but whether any of them can scale fast enough to make a meaningful difference in the narrow window we have left to address climate change.
Related Articles:
Company Links:
