Carbon capture is a key technological option for mitigating climate change, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors. As fossil-based CO 2 sources are expected to decline in future energy systems, large biogenic emission sources are gaining increasing importance. Kraft pulp mills represent some of the largest point sources of biogenic CO 2 , offering the potential for large-scale carbon capture without additional biomass input. This study provides a comprehensive review of CO 2 capture technologies applicable to pulp mills, combined with a meta-analysis of literature data and a comparative techno-economic case study based on representative Nordic (integrated) and South American (standalone) pulp mill configurations. Capture options from the major emission sources – recovery boiler, multi-fuel boiler and lime kiln – are evaluated alongside emerging concepts such as black liquor gasification and alternative capture technologies. Capture potential is assessed using a harmonized metric expressed as tonnes of captured CO 2 per air-dry tonne of pulp produced (t CO 2 /ADt), enabling comparison across technologies and process configurations. The results show that the recovery boiler represents the largest single capture source, with a capture potential of 1.5–2.2 t CO 2 /ADt, followed by black liquor gasification (∼1.45 t CO₂/ADt). Capture costs reported in the literature vary widely (8–263 €/t CO 2 ), with most values below 150 €/t CO 2 . The case study highlights that capture costs are highly site-specific, driven primarily by electricity price and mill-level energy integration. Successful implementation will depend on site-specific energy balances, integration strategies, and the availability of viable carbon capture and storage (CCS) or carbon capture and utilization (CCU) value chains.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Klüh et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: