Over the last few years, the United States has positioned itself as a fertile growing environment for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) projects, driven by an ambitious and innovative private sector and powered by supportive government mechanisms introduced most prominently during President Biden’s administration.
While in office, Democratic President Biden signed into law frameworks that earmarked billions of dollars in support for climate solutions like CDR technology and carbon capture and storage (CCS) initiatives.
Laws like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the Inflation Reduction Act brought on incentives like the 45Q tax credit and caused traction that prompted governmental carbon removal procurement programs.
Around the same time, the Office of Fossil Energy was renamed to the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, signaling a hopeful and prolific future for the CDR sector in the U.S., one supported by both private investors and the government.
New Administration Turns The Page On CDR
In January 2025, the country’s political tides shifted when Republican presidential elect Donald Trump was sworn into office to serve a second presidential term.
While many wondered how this new political landscape, spearheaded by a conventionally conservative Republican leader, would reflect on the sprouting and progressive U.S. climate industry, that guessing game was short-lived as the new administration swiftly got down to business, making stern decisions that changed the fate or prospects of many Biden-era-approved projects.
The “skinny budget” presented this year by Trump’s administration proposed revoking $14 billion in unspent funds from the IIJA, a move that would have impacted planned DAC initiatives in the country, which were eventually spared, as the White House clarified the revoking of funds wouldn’t apply to projects that have already been approved.
The new budget proposal also pinpointed carbon removal as one of the targets for cuts, drawing what seems like a distancing line between this U.S. decarbonization sector and the current federal government.
Trump’s administration also pulled away support from clean energy initiatives, directing federal attention more towards domestic production of fossil fuels, a vision underscored by reported plans for reinstating the name Office of Fossil Energy and dropping the carbon management suffix.
At this point federal carbon removal procurement has been paused, but many industry stakeholders are left to navigate the scaling of CDR, unclear on further governmental support.
This politically dynamic backdrop has inevitably posed uncertainties about the future of carbon removal development in the United States.
Are United States Policy Advocates Alarmed By This New CDR Attitude?
Looking to gain a clearer picture of this situation, our team got in touch with leading CDR players active in the United States, engaging in conversations where they shared their first-hand experiences and reactions to this new reality.
Erin Burns, executive director at Washington-based carbon removal research and policy nonprofit Carbon180, shared interesting insights from her team’s on-the-ground work advocating for US CDR development and governmental support.
Burns, who became the organization’s policy director back in 2018 during Trump’s first mandate, has since had a front-row seat witnessing the climate development in the U.S. under both Republican and Democratic leadership.
Currently focused on making a case for CDR during this year’s federal appropriations process, in which Congress makes funding decisions considering the propositions made in the “skinny budget,” Burns shared observations on working during the previous and current U.S. political administration.
“It is different this year. One thing that’s changed is the makeup of Congress. We obviously have a Republican-controlled Congress, but we also have political elements that are more focused on scaling back the role of the federal government in things like energy research and development, and it’s felt more strongly under this administration. Last time around, less so.”
She adds that while serving in the Senate for Senator Joe Manchin in the period between 2011 and 2015, domains like the Department of Energy (DOE) R&D budget weren’t as politicized.
The recent “skinny budget” targeting CDR cuts marks the first time this sector has received such focal attention in a presidential budget, Burns says.
She points out that the industry hasn’t really been tested in this way before. Following a period of advanced growth under the Biden administration, where they hired many CDR experts to staff the Department of Energy now its has to weather some serious political changes.
Still, there are tools that remain available to use in support of CDR. Burns says that federal appropriations, a mechanism that can be leveraged to bring carbon management topics to the budget discussion table are something she and her team have been actively working on. It was their effort that back in 2019 contributed to the approval of the first dedicated federal CDR R&D funding totaling just shy of $60 million.
She also highlights that the Carbon180 team remains optimistic about the future of CDR in the U.S., pointing out that the focus now should be on protecting DAC hubs and not only preserving federal support but also looking for ways to expand it.
Relevant: DOE Considering Funding Cuts For The Two Largest DAC Projects In The US
The lack of clarity on one of the flagship initiatives — the DAC Hubs program — has left market players wondering about its future. To get some clarity on this we reached out to Rory Jacobson, Head of Policy at Carbon Direct, a carbon management consultancy which keeps a close eye on the space through its platform, which tracks current and proposed policies, scientific data and real-world market experiences.
“To my knowledge, the DAC hubs haven’t been terminated—they’re still online. But future progress depends on meeting milestones, navigating foreign entity restrictions, and preserving tax credit transferability, which remains a major challenge”, Jacobson states.
He also shared that in his perspective, the CDR community has been extremely vocal so far—engaging lawmakers, highlighting project risks, and emphasizing the broader value they bring. “At this point, the situation in the United States is largely a waiting game for clarity from the administration on DAC funding,” he adds.
What Positive CDR Signals Are There In The United States Currently?
Another company that is remaining optimistic despite the current shift in federal funding priorities is bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) provider Elimini.
The company is on a mission of vetting 20 potential plants for BECCS in the US, planning to announce the first 1-2 selected spots within the next 12-18 months.
Mariano Molina, Elimini’s VP of Government Affairs and Stakeholder Relations, explains that with the 45Q tax still in play, the company is currently not readjusting its strategy.
Оn the road ahead, Elimini intends to strengthen its presence in the U.S. market, engaging with policymakers and the administration to convey the importance of BECCS technology and how it can help position the U.S. as a global climate tech leader while also bringing numerous employment opportunities to rural regions.
“With BECCS, with the carbon capture and storage, we have an amazing opportunity in the U.S., as this technology is incredibly well positioned to support the new administration and its current priorities around bringing more dispatchable base load power to the grid, where the power station doesn’t rely on intermediate sources of energy to operate.”
Molina stresses that these operations generate numerous job openings, mainly in rural America, a benefit that according to him is well received on both ends of the aisle, not only by Republicans but by Democrats as well. This, he points out, is a unique selling point for BECCS technology under the current US administration.
In his words, another factor that ransk high on both opposing ends of the political spectrum is carbon capture and storage (CCS) which is widely recognized as a critical technology by both Republicans and Democrats.
This interest, Molina states, was underlined in an Earth Day statement issued by the White House, in which they expressed strong support for carbon capture as one of their key technologies going forward.
Talking about what’s keeping Elimini optimistic in the current United States market, Molina shares: “The pace of the voluntary carbon market has not slowed down. There’s a growing need for stable, clean, firm power, not only in the US, but around the world. So our main technology is uniquely positioned to serve both needs.“
He also reflects on the current global climate industry, where governments around the world, including the US, the EU, and others, are thinking about how they can bring these technologies online faster, and there is ongoing activity in both the private and public sectors brainstorming their accelerated development, recognizing that these solutions are critical for the next 10, 15, or 20 years.
Looking at the state of affairs under Biden and now under Trump, Molina shares that in April 2025, Elimini had the chance to talk with DOE representatives in D.C., where it received positive signals that the new government is aware of the importance of BECCS and the role it can play in enhancing the nation’s energy security and grid stability, while under the Biden administration, the impression was that knowledge on BECCS was lagging.
Read more: California Advances Bill To Promote Biomass In Climate Strategy
What Coping Mechanisms Can Help Companies In This US CDR Climate?
New York-based CDR technology company Vycarb has been on the receiving end of federal support via two separate DOE initiatives, which, while currently still on the agenda and scheduled to provide funds, are being delayed, in part due to personnel pullback.
One of these initiatives is a DOE voucher program that provides funding for specific scopes of work done by independent groups.
While in January 2025 Vycarb received a vital portion of this funding, the following month the company learned that the support was put on hold, with no clear signs of it being cancelled and most probably still moving forward in the future.
Another DOE funding channel was the CDR Purchase Pilot Prize, where Vycarb was one of the 20 companies selected in Phase 1. When the company respected the Phase 2 application deadline and submitted all required documentation on time in February 2025, it was told to expect feedback by May or June of this year.
However, that plan is currently also stalling, and Vycarb CEO Garrett Boudinot says that there are talks that the program will remain in place, but results for Phase 2 might come as late as August.
Boudinot notes that last year, his business meetings weren’t accompanied with questions around whether the CDR market was still going to be a thing.
In his opinion, no matter what the current market reality is, the fact that it’s being perceived as taking such a serious hit indicates that the market is indeed taking a hit and people who were supporting it are a little bit more cautious now.
In terms of Vycarb’s coping strategy in this market, Boudinot states that his company has been able to address this challenge, successfuly in his judgement, via a number of different ways.
One element of their safety net is the fact that the company was gaining international traction even in 2024, which led Vycarb to build relationships and embark on projects with a lot of international investors and opportunities.
Boudinot points out that other global geographies like Asia Pacific, where Japan and New Zealand are ramping up their ETS, and then Singapore with its carbon tax, were organically attractive to Vycarb and the company set out to pursue opportunities in these regions – a decision that is now providing a buffer against some of the uncertainties in the U.S.
He goes on to highlight that the CDR market has so far been relying on a public-private partnership framework, stating,
“What we’ve seen in the U.S. is that the private support has not really dwindled. The major U.S. corporate voluntary carbon market buyers have not changed course. They still have commitments and are purchasing credits at volume, and that’s also been really helpful.”
Looking ahead, he is confident that even if the public side goes down in the U.S., there’s still the private that will help stakeholders weather the storm.
When asked about what he believes the carbon removal industry might look like in five years from now, Boudinot shares that he is hopeful that growing CDR policy support in other parts of the world will stimulate a bolder carbon removal deployment, attracting a broader base of new buyers that will enable the scale-up of these decarbonization efforts.
What’s Next For CDR In The United States?
The optimism conveyed by CDR market actors active in the U.S. signals a strong industry sector that is likely to continue making carbon removal strides in the United States regardless of the level of government support.
Still, the risk of other countries and regions outrunning the U.S. and taking the global lead on CDR remains on the horizon and 2025 is shaping out to be a crucial year that will set the stage for the future balance of carbon removal power on a worldwide level.
