An Aspiring Industry – Analysis from the MegaDAC Database
Annual Growth of 250% from 2025 to 2030
About two months ago I released The MegaDAC Database and the results are rather astounding. Now containing over 1,600 data points and over 20% filled, light is spreading on the emerging direct air capture landscape. Let’s explore the data we’ve collected and see if we can tease out anything interesting.
Before we dive in, here’s a big shout out to Grant Faber1 and the DAC Coalition2 for their massive contributions.
Deployment Aspirations
The DAC Coalition recently released a cataloged map of DAC projects by status (planning, construction, operating, etc.). It’s a great tool, but the DAC industry is still pretty early. At the time of this analysis, over 80% of 150+ DAC teams have not yet reached Seed-stage fundraising. The nascency indicates DAC is still a forward-looking growth play, and the number of planned projects will soon be an outdated underestimate. We must simultaneously hold two truths in our head:
Not all DAC projects and deployment plans will pan out.
Today’s list of planned deployments is a snapshots of today’s information.
There are 10x more DAC companies than there were a few years ago, so instead of tracking projects like an analyst, the MegaDAC Database tracks DAC companies’ expectations and aspirations.
As the MegaDAC Database fills with companies’ TRL levels and other maturity indicators, we’ll be able to analyze deployments with a metric like ‘realization likelihood’. For instance, if a TRL 9 company like Climeworks states they will build 6 plants each 400,000 tCO2/yr in 2031, we should be able to expect these projects will be realized with something like 85% certainty. If an early-stage, TRL 3 DAC company says they will be operating a megaton facility within 5 years, maybe it is ascribed a 5% chance. Taken together, we’d be able to predict future DAC capacity within likely ranges using everything from aspiration to final investment decision announcements.
These are the types of outcomes The MegaDAC Database is designed to deliver over time. If that sounds cool to you, share this with your favorite DAC team and invite them to provide input on their TRL and aspirations.
Armchair DAC Analysts – What to Watch
By the end of 2024, 18 DAC teams expect to have capacity to capture 0.1–1.0 tons of CO2 per day. Just 12 DAC teams (mostly today’s front-runners) expect to capture 1.0–10 tons of CO2 per day. Only 3 DAC teams (Climeworks, Heimdal, and CarbonCapture) expect to be operating DAC equipment with more capacity by the end of the year.
By the end of 2025, only two world-scale plants are expected to be operating: Carbon Engineering’s (Oxy’s) and Capture6’s. Both of these plants will have a planned capture capacity of 500,000 tCO2 per year. Any delays, and either plant may start in 2026. I’m of the opinion that the DAC industry is still in its infancy as long as a single project installation can 2x global capacity. All other 2025 DAC company aspirations add just 12% capacity. The limited project numbers (and Murphy’s law) imply that 2025’s global DAC capacity could be less than 0.1 MtCO2/yr or over 1.1MtCO2/yr. With both big plants online, the industry will hit a critical milestone. Place your bets.
The DAC industry will start kicking up some dust in 2026. Current team project and aspiration targets indicate that we might see 2025’s capacity grow at least 150% in 2026 – hold on to your hats!
Here’s what the aspirational deployment data provided in The MegaDAC Database currently looks like through 2030.
What we see is a projected CAGR in the 50-250% range over the rest of the decade using 2025 capacity as the base year. Growth 2025 to 2030 looks to be 250% based on current company plans/hopes. Probably time to ask, “is this data good or useful?”. The data could certainly be more complete, but it isn’t a bad start. The data could become more useful/insightful if we could include other attributes like TRL or funding stage. Both require your help, so please share this far and wide. At minimum, this data should be seen as a significant underestimate of the industry’s capacity aspirations (for rationale, see this footnote3).
Before we finish up, I just wanted to throw in some [fun] additional observations I’ve had while managing the MegaDAC Database.
DAC Superlatives
THE DARK HORSE
DACMA GmbH. Already at Series B. Already has 30 employees. Already has ton per day scale DAC. Literal tons of progress and hadn’t crossed my radar in 3 years working in the DAC space. Everyone say “Hello” to DACMA—like welcoming a host to their own dinner party.
THE WALTER WHITE
Holocene is having some fun with organic molecules. Amino acids, Guanidine. Crystallization. Solid-Liquid Separation. They’ve got it all. Their tech page is pretty interesting, and their process is fundamentally different from most other DAC approaches. Might be best described as a combination of a liquid sorbent front end, a mineral looping process, and a temperature-swing solid sorbent back end. Watch out when Holocene comes knocking.
THE MILFORD MAN
Neither seen nor heard, Verdox raised nearly $100m in early 2022 and then seemingly disappeared into a cave outside Boston to work on electrochemical DAC. Even their website’s News page was last updated over 1 year ago. Maybe someone should give their public relations team a hand.
THE REMAKE
NeoCarbon uses industrial waste heat and cooling towers for DAC. Sound familiar? Noya used to do this but, faced with local CO2 offtake challenges, decided to go bigger to [seemingly] court the high-willingness-to-pay CDR buyers. However, NeoCarbon is based in Germany and intends to tap into local CO2 pipelines. Will this infrastructure make this business model more scalable? I’ll be watching, for nostalgia sake.
Before you head off to spin up your DAC fans, you should hit this button. It’ll make your air contactor super efficient!
https://daccoalition.org/global-dac-deployments/
This deployment goal data has only been collected from less than 30% of DAC companies, mostly from public statements. It is likely biased: later-stage companies may be holding plans close to the vest while earlier-stage companies may be overstating their position. Further, young companies may be more likely to overestimate their future capacity additions, but they are also less likely to have their ambitions publicly stated. Finally, behind the scenes, the collected data is also structured to assume constant capacity for any years beyond stated goals. For instance, Carbon Engineering’s and Capture6’s capacity are both flat after 2028. Given these factors, this data significantly underestimates the industry’s aspirational capacity.