LCA4CCU, A Methodology for Carbon Capture and Utilisation

The Problem with LCA for Carbon Capture and Utilisation

Carbon Capture and Utilisation covers an enormous range of technologies, from industrial flue gas conversion to direct air capture to mineralisation, and each raises different methodological questions when assessed by LCA. Who bears the emissions burden of the captured CO2? How do you treat a carbon dioxide removal product that releases its carbon back to the atmosphere in ten years versus five hundred? Which system boundary is appropriate when the CCU plant and the CO2 source are built together?

The ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 standards leave enough room for individual methodological choices that two practitioners assessing the same CCU system could reach incomparable results. The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Energy identified this as a problem worth solving, and in 2019 assembled a small group of seven international LCA experts to write a shared set of guidelines for LCA of carbon capture and utilisation systems. Below280’s lead practitioner was one of them.

The Work

The group spent two years producing the LCA4CCU guidelines, working through contested LCA methodology for CCU that had no consensus in the field. Two workshops in Brussels gathered academic and industrial stakeholders to test draft recommendations against real-world practice before the group finalised the guidance.

Below280’s primary technical contribution was the climate change methodology section, including the framework for handling GWP timescales. GWP100 has no scientific basis for its 100-year horizon; it is a policy convention, not a physical threshold. Given that CCU systems sit at the intersection of short-lived products like synthetic fuels and long-lived ones like mineralisation, using only GWP100 masks genuinely different climate outcomes. The guidelines therefore require practitioners to use both GWP20 and GWP100 together, giving a clearer picture of near-term and long-term impacts. For more on how GWP timescales affect carbon capture LCA results, see our LCA knowledge base.

The delayed emissions framework required the same rigour. The group reviewed several approaches for treating carbon stored in products over varying timescales, from dynamic GWP methods to probabilistic decay models. Workshop feedback from practitioners was consistent: complexity creates inconsistency across studies and makes results harder for businesses to use. The guidelines therefore settled on a single, transparent rule.The rule treats emissions released within 500 years as emitted at year zero; practitioners can ignore those stored beyond 500 years to a reasonable level of certainty. Simple enough to apply consistently, but set at a horizon where the distinction between temporary and permanent storage actually matters.

Beyond the technical authorship, Below280 contributed to both stakeholder workshops and helped finalise the documentation for publication, a process complicated by the Covid period.

What the LCA4CCU Guidelines Cover

The LCA4CCU document sets out LCA methodology for CCU across each phase of an ISO-compliant assessment. The core technical positions include a cradle-to-grave default system boundary, system expansion over allocation where possible, and strict rules on CO2 burden allocation between primary emitters and CCU plants. The electricity modelling section carries particular weight, given how much CCU energy demand determines whether a carbon dioxide removal system delivers any climate benefit at all. It sets out requirements for additionality, marginal grid mix and time-resolved data that go well beyond standard LCA practice.

The European Commission publishes the guidelines freely at https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2833/161308, and the CCU research and policy community cites them widely.

Why It Matters for Carbon Capture Due Diligence

For investors and developers working in CCU, the LCA4CCU guidelines are the standard for any credible environmental assessment. A CCU LCA that ignores GWP20, treats delayed emissions generously, or uses a gate-to-gate system boundary will produce conclusions that no credible reviewer can defend. The guidelines exist to prevent that.

The climate change and GWP methodology Below280 helped establish in this document is the same framework we apply when conducting LCA for carbon capture and utilisation projects. If you are developing or investing in a CCU technology and need independent due diligence built on the EU guidelines, contact us for a quote.

About Below280

Below280 is a specialist LCA, EPD and carbon due diligence consultancy. We conduct ISO 14040/44-compliant life cycle assessments for carbon dioxide removal technologies, carbon capture and utilisation systems, sustainable materials and low-carbon energy systems, including independent verification of carbon capture claims for investors, developers and regulators.