A year ago, the Nordic Carbon Removal Association (NCRA) didn't exist. Today, it has 37 members, a seat at the table in Brussels, and a founding story that reads a lot like a startup's. In a recent episode of What Goes Up Must Come Down, Klimate's Simon sat down with Valter Selén, co-founder and Secretary General of the NCRA, and Alexander Mäkelä, Chief Policy Officer at Carbon Gap and NCRA co-founder, to talk through how the association came together, where Nordic carbon dioxide removal (CDR) stands today, and what's needed to turn the region's potential into real, permanent removal capacity.

TL;DR

• The NCRA launched just over a year ago, combining a market report and a trade association launch in one go, a first for the sector
• Around 40% of all globally contracted CDR supply has come from the Nordics, a region of roughly 25 million people
• The past few months have been rockier, with some voluntary market projects paused and less reliance possible on a single anchor buyer
• Three priorities for the year ahead: broaden corporate demand, shift toward government-backed demand, and bring new industries like cement and steel into the CDR conversation
• Long term, the Nordics could supply up to 60% of Europe's total removal needs by 2050, and export the expertise behind it

Origins of the NCRA

The NCRA's story starts with Stripe. The payments company had built a fellowship for policy entrepreneurs working to grow demand for carbon removal across different sectors and regions. Alexander Mäkelä's pitch was the Nordics: what would it take to build as much new demand here as possible? He wrote the application from a cafe in South Korea, sketching out the idea for a trade association and an intergovernmental working group.

Around the same time, Valter Selén, then Policy Director at Carbon Gap, had been thinking about the same gap. The Nordics had plenty of suppliers and interested parties, but no coordinated effort behind them. A conversation with Carbon Gap's CEO connected Valter and Alexander directly, and Carbon Gap took on the role of incubating what would become the NCRA.

What followed was, by their own account, unusually collaborative. The founding team built a pitch deck and held somewhere between 60 and 80 conversations over about five months, updating the deck after every one. Valter recalls meeting someone from Stockholm Exergy early on, then running into her again a month and a half later at the European Parliament, where she reacted to the pitch deck with, "wait, I suggested that." That sense of shared ownership, both founders agree, was central to how quickly the association found its footing.

The NCRA's mission is straightforward: drive demand and supply of high-quality, permanent CDR in the Nordics, by the Nordics, for the Nordics, with an ambition to make the region a global CDR hub by 2050. It launched in Copenhagen just over a year ago, pairing its debut with a full market report rather than waiting, as most trade associations do, until year two. Membership has more than doubled since.

State of Nordic CDR

The numbers back up the ambition. Roughly 40% of all CDR supply contracted globally has come from the Nordics, a striking figure for a region of five countries and around 25 million people. The underlying conditions help: strong geology, biomass resources, existing infrastructure, and stable governments with high GDP per capita.

But there are real gaps. There is currently no unified CDR strategy across the Nordic countries, and while awareness has grown, most national plans still treat removals as an afterthought to decarbonisation rather than a distinct target. Alexander points to a BECCS (bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) facility in northern Sweden, backed by eleven local municipalities, as a sign of what's possible, but notes this kind of government-level capacity building isn't yet happening consistently across the region.

That matters because CDR infrastructure requires long lead times, often 10 to 20 years, to secure financing, storage contracts, and monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) partners. Without clearer targets and financing models, that planning becomes harder.

The past year has also tested the sector's resilience. After a hype-driven run of enthusiasm, spring brought a rockier stretch: paused projects and less certainty on the voluntary carbon market (VCM) side, particularly following Microsoft's pullback as the market's dominant anchor buyer. Valter is careful to separate signal from noise here — underlying policy progress and contracted volumes remain solid, even if sentiment has cooled.

What's next for NCRA and the sector

Looking ahead, Valter outlines three priorities. First, broaden voluntary demand beyond a single anchor buyer by bringing more Nordic corporates on board. Second, shift some of the weight from the voluntary market toward government-backed demand — Norway's proposed reverse fee for carbon removal is one example being watched closely. Third, extend CDR into traditional industries that haven't engaged with it yet: cement, steel, pulp and paper, and mining.

Underpinning all three is a simpler ask: separate targets for emissions and removals. Right now, most Nordic countries fold removals into broader net-zero goals rather than setting them as their own measurable target. Without that separation, it's hard to create a demand signal solid enough to invest against, regardless of whether the bill is footed by public procurement, tax incentives, or the voluntary market.

Alexander adds a longer-term dimension: the Nordics' opportunity isn't only about selling removal credits. It's about exporting the expertise behind them — MRV services, engineering and storage capabilities, project development — much as Denmark's early investment in wind power became one of its largest export industries decades later.

Conclusion

A year in, the NCRA has moved faster than most trade associations manage in several. Both founders are clear that the harder work is still ahead: building the government capacity, financing clarity, and industrial demand needed to turn the Nordics' natural advantages into lasting removal capacity, for the region and potentially for Europe's broader climate ambitions.

In late March 2025, a 149.5-metre vessel called the Carbon Destroyer arrived in the port of Esbjerg, Denmark. This summer, it will carry liquefied CO₂ offshore to the NINI West reservoir — the first time CO₂ will be commercially stored in the EU.

In this episode of What Goes Up Must Come Down, Simon spoke with Kurt Jager Lykke, Head of Business DK at INEOS Energy and head of Project Greensand. Kurt has led the commercial side of Greensand since its inception and took over as project head in 2024. Their conversation covers the project's origins, the organisations that made it possible, and what the carbon dioxide removal (CDR) sector can take from it.

TL;DR

• INEOS entered carbon capture and storage (CCS) by repurposing depleted North Sea fields, matching geological expertise with a new purpose
• CO₂ is sourced from Danish biomethane producers who already separate it as a standard step, lowering capture costs significantly
• The Carbon Destroyer will make 80 voyages per year, storing up to 400,000 tonnes CO₂ annually over eight years
• Project viability relied on a phased approach, an EU Innovation Fund grant, and risk shared across a three-party consortium
• Denmark faces a shortfall of roughly 10 million tonnes CO₂ to net zero — a measure of what still lies ahead
• The voluntary CDR market bridges the economics gap while carbon pricing cannot yet sustain the full CCS value chain

Why did INEOS invest in Project Greensand & how does it align with their overall strategy?

INEOS acquired the Danish oil and gas assets of the former DONG (now Ørsted) in 2017. By 2019, the fields in the SYRI fairway were nearing end of production life, and INEOS began asking whether existing expertise could be repurposed.

Injecting fluids into subsurface reservoirs, interpreting geological formations, moving large volumes — these are core oil and gas competencies, and CCS uses them in reverse. Decades of production data and seismic surveys gave the project a meaningful head start. INEOS also had its own emissions targets, making CCS investment strategically rational — though internal units must still compete on price. Greensand has to be the most competitive storage option available, not the in-house default.

The project story: the web of organisations involved and challenges along the way

Biogas is roughly 60% methane and 40% CO₂. Biomethane producers already separate that CO₂ to reach gas-grid quality as standard practice — the capture was already happening. What Greensand adds is liquefaction, transport, and permanent storage.

From Esbjerg, CO₂ is loaded onto the Carbon Destroyer and sailed to the NINI West reservoir. The ship carries 5,500 tonnes per voyage and is designed for 80 voyages a year — up to 400,000 tonnes CO₂ annually over eight years. The vessel did not exist when the project was conceived — INEOS and Dutch ship owner Wagenborg co-developed it from the design phase, both taking on risk beyond a standard supplier arrangement. The intermediate storage facility at Esbjerg — four 40-metre tanks of 1,000 cubic metres each — begins commissioning in June 2025. A pilot in 2022–23 had already confirmed that reusing existing offshore infrastructure was feasible.

Learnings from getting a project like this off the ground

Project Greensand’s story highlights the importance of public-private partnerships, managing risk, and prioritising feasible, physical results.

The decision to keep scope contained was deliberate. Other CCS projects target millions of tonnes per year; Greensand targets 300,000 to 400,000. That made the risk manageable for the consortium — INEOS, Harbour Energy, and Norse, representing the Danish state.

INEOS got to know the biomethane producers well before formalising any agreements, synchronised timelines across the full value chain, and acted as convener throughout. The EU Innovation Fund grant, awarded in autumn 2024, was material to the project's economics; it was sanctioned in December 2024.

The cost of the full CCS value chain still exceeds what emitters pay through carbon pricing alone — subsidies were necessary, and that is stated plainly. The voluntary CDR market provides an additional revenue route for early-stage storage projects while carbon pricing catches up.

Conclusion

Project Greensand is a learning project as much as a delivery project. Carbon Destroyer 2 is being scoped, and a storage licence application for the larger NINI East field is with the Danish Energy Agency.

Denmark faces a shortfall of roughly 10 million tonnes CO₂ to net zero. At 400,000 tonnes per vessel per year, closing that gap would require around 20 ships. What the infrastructure being commissioned in Esbjerg this summer proves is that these projects can be done. Tonnes will be delivered.

That matters for every organisation weighing whether offshore CO₂ storage is a credible part of the energy transition. It is. And if your organisation is thinking about where carbon removal fits into your climate strategy, Klimate can help you navigate the options.