Carbon Capture for Net-Zero India

Can India Leverage Ocean Carbon Capture for Net-Zero by 2070?

India emits 2.6 gigatonnes of CO2 annually, making it the third-largest emitter globally after the US and China. With an 11,098.8 km coastline and a 2 million sq. km Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), the nation is uniquely positioned to explore ocean-based Carbon Capture, Utilisation, and Storage (CCUS). But can this ambitious technological suite bridge India’s climate targets with economic feasibility?

The Policy Push: India’s Commitments and Potential

Under its updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement in 2022, India pledged to reduce emissions intensity by 45% by 2030 relative to 2005 levels and ensure that 50% of its installed electricity capacity comes from non-fossil fuel sources by the same year. Creating a carbon sink of 2.5–3 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent is central to these commitments. While terrestrial carbon sequestration dominates current climate strategies, India has yet to embrace the potential of its vast marine resources for carbon sequestration.

Emerging techniques like Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE) and Biological Carbon Capture could pivot India toward net-zero. For instance, seaweed farming over just 20% of its ocean area could remove 0.6–1 gigatonne of CO2 annually. Additionally, OAE—combined with aquaculture—offers a highly durable carbon storage solution while boosting marine productivity. Not only does this align with climate goals, but captured carbon could also be repurposed for industries like biofuels, green hydrogen, fertilizers, and construction materials, fostering a circular carbon economy.

Why Ocean-Based CCUS Makes Sense

India’s geographical advantage combined with emerging technologies positions ocean-based CCUS as a feasible supplementary approach to terrestrial methods. Consider the durability of OAE, which provides stable carbon storage lasting over 100,000 years—a time scale far exceeding terrestrial sinks like forests. Moreover, biological methods such as seaweed farming not only sequester carbon but also enhance marine biodiversity and local fishing economies. Mangroves, already acknowledged for their role in carbon storage (up to 1,000 tonnes of carbon per hectare), could complement broader sustainability goals.

For India, these approaches address twin concerns: mitigating climate change and boosting coastal economies, an essential political imperative given the high dependence of tens of millions on fisheries and coastal tourism.

Implementation Pitfalls: From Cost to Regulation

Despite its promise, the road ahead for ocean-based CCUS is riddled with scientific, institutional, and financial hurdles. High capital costs associated with early-stage deployment cannot be ignored. For example, large-scale OAE testbeds require specialized minerals like olivine and lime—resources that need extraction, transportation, and processing, all of which carry significant carbon footprints unless handled sustainably.

The ecological risks are equally pressing. Ocean alkalinity enhancement alters seawater chemistry, which could inadvertently unbalance marine ecosystems. Over-fertilisation of phytoplankton regions, while capturing carbon, risks oxygen depletion in deeper waters—a condition known as hypoxia, detrimental to fish stocks and biodiversity.

On the governance front, India lacks a comprehensive framework for marine carbon regulation. Existing instruments like the Environment Protection Act of 1986 do not address ocean-specific carbon capture strategies. Without an integrated Marine Carbon Policy, operationalising such projects risks regulatory fragmentation. The irony here is that India’s Deep Ocean Mission, aimed at exploiting marine resources, does not currently include provisions for CCUS pilot projects, despite its technological emphasis.

Lessons from Norway’s CCUS Model

In comparing India’s nascent ocean-based CCUS efforts to Norway’s mature framework, one finds striking differences. Norway’s Sleipner Project, operational since 1996, has successfully stored over 20 million tonnes of CO2 under the North Sea, pioneering geological storage approaches. Funded through a carbon tax imposed on oil companies (currently $200/tonne), the project highlights the critical role of fiscal tools in incentivising private sector participation.

India, by contrast, has yet to attach price mechanisms like carbon credits to marine-focused CCUS investments. Norway’s proactive legislative framework—backed by its Ministry of Petroleum and Energy—ensures industry alignment, something India could learn from, particularly as it seeks collaboration with global CCUS hubs such as Norway and Japan.

Where India Stands

India’s ocean-based CCUS ambitions hover between potential and pragmatism. While the concept of turning seas into "negative emission engines" resonates with long-term benefits, the timeline for scaling such technologies risks running counter to India’s 2030 and 2070 climate commitments. Moreover, skepticism is warranted on whether state-driven pilot projects alone—without private sector mobilization or international financial aid—can overcome capital limitations.

The real bottleneck, however, is not scientific viability but institutional coherence. What India needs now is clarity: integrate marine CCUS into the Blue Economy Mission with focused targets, fiscal incentives, and pilot-scale ecosystems. Without this, the promise of carbon-neutral oceans may remain just that—a promise.

Practice Questions for UPSC

Prelims Practice Questions

Frequently Asked Questions