Verdox captured CO₂ from an aluminum smelter. Commercial scale is a much larger system.

Support CleanTechnica’s work through a Substack subscription, on Patreon, or on Stripe. Help us produce all the original, high-quality content we publish week after week despite the challenges of AI deleting content, anti-social media, inflation and other obstacles.

Verdox has completed a useful industrial demonstration at Hydro’s Sunndal aluminum smelter in Norway. During a two-month test, its electrochemical process captured carbon dioxide from exhaust gases containing only about 1% CO₂ and operated in the presence of contaminants found in actual smelter gas. Hydro’s investment and ongoing work with Verdox gives the test more weight than a lab demonstration or a technology company test performed on a prepared gas stream.

The demonstration establishes that the capture chemistry can operate in a relevant industrial environment. It does not establish how much a commercial installation would cost, how much electricity the entire plant would use, how long the finished capture modules would last, or what equipment would be needed to move and condition the enormous volume of diluted exhaust gases. These are the questions that determine whether technology becomes an industrial business and not an interesting capture process.

I resolved those questions in a TFIE Strategy Briefing assessment of Verdox at Hydro’s Sunndal smelter, separating the published technological evidence from the additional engineering required to capture the CO₂ to permanent storage.

Concentration generates much of the problem. When carbon dioxide represents only about 1% of the incoming stream, almost all of the gas handled is nitrogen, oxygen, water vapor and other components rather than the molecule that is captured. Commercial equipment has to move that gas through cleaning systems and capture modules while controlling pressure losses, contaminants and flow distribution. The size and energy demand of fans, ducts, and pretreatment equipment pertain to economics even when the electrochemical separation itself works well.

Verdox publishes an energy figure of approximately 1.5 GJ, or 417 kWh, per ton of CO₂ for its process. The figure is relevant, but an investor needs a precise limit of equipment around him. A complete installation may also require gas cleaning, additional switching and cleaning steps, pumps or fans, cooling, drying and compression of products, and public material does not yet provide enough information to determine which of those loads are included in the company’s figure.

Continuous industrial operation introduces another layer. Verdox’s quinone-containing material captures CO₂ in one electrical state and releases it in another, so a capture surface cannot perform both functions simultaneously. A consistent smelter exhaust requires multiple banks operating at different stages of the cycle, or an equivalent arrangement that allows fresh combustion gases to continue arriving while other modules remove waste gas and release concentrated CO₂.

The commercial scale of that equipment depends largely on how much CO₂ each square meter of finished module can process over time and how long the material survives in service. Published laboratory cycle results are useful evidence about the underlying chemistry, but they are not a maintenance record for a commercial module exposed to foundry gas for years. Replacement frequency affects capital requirements, operating costs, downtime, material supply, and waste management, so it deserves as much diligence as the electrical consumption of the capture reaction.

The captured gas also has to be converted into a product that a pipeline or storage operator will accept. The CO₂ released from the capture medium must be separated from the residual feed gas, collected, dried and compressed to the required specifications. From there you still need transportation and access to suitable geological storage, with corresponding contracts, monitoring requirements and infrastructure. A technically successful capture unit next to a smelter represents only one part of the carbon management chain.

Aluminum complicates the investment decision because the industry is also working to eliminate the source of much of the direct CO₂. The conventional Hall-Héroult smelter consumes carbon anodes, and Hydro and Rio Tinto say that anode consumption accounts for approximately three-quarters of a smelter’s direct carbon emissions. Capture is being investigated in part because such emissions are difficult to address in existing plants, while alternative smelting processes are being developed in parallel.

Rio Tinto and Alcoa’s ELYSIS company commissioned a commercial-size 450 kA inert anode cell at the Alma smelter in 2025. Hydro’s HalZero program follows a different route using aluminum chloride and remains at an earlier stage of industrial development. Neither of these technologies provides an easy replacement for every existing fishing line, but both belong to the life economics of a trapping project that is expected to operate for decades.

An existing smelter with substantial remaining useful life may still have a sensible capture case if process conversion is difficult, clean electricity is available, and storage is accessible at a tolerable cost. A plant approaching a major production line replacement faces a different decision because the investment in capture has to compete with the investment that could change the smelting process itself. The relevant comparison is specific to the asset, its remaining life, and the alternatives available when the next big capital decision arrives.

The same assessment logic applies to carbon capture in a broader sense. Some CO₂ streams start much more easily than exhaust gases from aluminum smelters. Fermentation, biogas upgrading, and some other processes can produce relatively concentrated biogenic CO₂ that requires less separation work before compression and storage. When biomass is truly sustainable and geological storage is durable, storing such a stream can provide net carbon removal rather than avoiding new process emission.

That does not eliminate the potential role of diluted industrial capture. Existing plants will remain in service for years, some process emissions will be difficult to eliminate, and not all sites will have a commercially viable process conversion option. It does suggest that investment in carbon capture should start with the source, available alternatives and the complete chain to storage rather than ranking technologies primarily based on separation material performance.

Verdox has presented sufficient evidence in Sunndal to justify the continuation of industrial diligence. The next useful evidence will be more operational: a complete gas and CO₂ mass balance, electricity measured throughout the plant, pressure losses, product purity, module area productivity, availability, replacement rates and a storage route that exists on commercial terms. Such measurements would turn a promising industrial demonstration into the basis for a much firmer evaluation of the project.

The paid TFIE strategy report includes the full system detection model, gas flow calculations, capture and storage scenarios, module life sensitivities, and the evidence I would like before using economics in an investment decision.