Key Players
Competitive Landscape
The companies discussed in this report are Occidental Petroleum / 1PointFive, Equinor, Shell, TotalEnergies, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Baker Hughes, Heidelberg Materials and Eni. [3][4][5][6][7]
The selected companies compete at different points in the value chain. Occidental and 1PointFive's STRATOS example concerns capture development and permitted injection activity. [4] The Northern Lights partners supply shared transport and permanent storage, with Phase 1 operating and Phase 2 under development. [3][13] MHI's cited record concerns capture-process deliveries and engineering awards, while Baker Hughes supplies compression equipment for the Liverpool Bay network. [5][6] Heidelberg Materials is an industrial capture-project customer, and Eni participates in the receiving infrastructure. [6][7] FMI compares those documented roles and contracts, while keeping an equipment award separate from ownership of the receiving storage asset.
Support mechanisms affect these roles differently. The December 2025 US safe harbour concerns specified 2025 capture and storage under stated conditions, [1] while the UK's HyNet process retains Priority and Standby project classifications and a right to revise them. [2] FMI therefore treats policy eligibility, contract scope and physical delivery as separate competitive conditions. A supplier still needs evidence that its particular package has reached procurement; support for a cluster does not certify the readiness of every proposed connection.
Table 7: Company Developments and Commercial Implications
| Evidence | Commercial effect | Buyer action |
|---|---|---|
| The EPA approved the first-ever Class VI permits for a direct air capture project, Occidental/1PointFive's STRATOS facility, in April 2025, after a joint venture first announced in 2023. [4] | Authorises the specified injection wells subject to permit conditions; does not establish that the associated DAC plant is operating. | Review injection permit conditions alongside separate capture construction, transport and commissioning evidence. |
| Northern Lights partners committed NOK 7.5 billion in March 2025 to expand Phase 2 capacity to at least 5 million tonnes a year, months before the project's first CO2 injection in August 2025. [3] | Signals confidence in third-party CO2 supply from other industries ahead of the expanded capacity coming online. | Evaluate whether a shared transport-and-storage project's expansion timeline, not just its current capacity, matches a buyer's own capture project schedule. |
| Baker Hughes announced on 30 June 2025 a contract booked in Q1 2025 to supply three CO2 compressor trains for Saipem's Liverpool Bay project. [6] | Documents an equipment order for shared transport infrastructure; does not establish the commissioning status of every connected capture plant. | Match the contracted equipment package and delivery schedule with capture connections and storage availability. |
Source: Future Market Insights, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Market, secondary evidence review, 2026.
How are the companies positioned?
Occidental's STRATOS example concerns an integrated direct-air-capture and storage project, while Northern Lights offers shared transport and storage for industrial customers. [3][4] MHI supplies capture-process technology and engineering, and Baker Hughes' cited role is compression equipment for Liverpool Bay. [5][6] These positions expose companies to different contracts: storage operators take responsibility for receiving and injecting contracted CO2, whereas equipment suppliers deliver defined packages into the value chain. FMI compares these documented roles without using storage-company ownership as a substitute for the end-use classification of the emitting customer.
What matters when a customer qualifies a supplier?
Qualification depends on the service being bought. For a US Class VI injection well, 40 CFR 146.86 requires material compatibility and API, ASTM or regulator-accepted standards, supported by information on stream composition, corrosiveness, pressure and material grades. [17] A storage provider must also show the applicable permit conditions and operating readiness. [10] For capture-process supply, MHI's delivered-plant record and the scope of its Tomato-Atsuma design award provide different kinds of delivery evidence. [5] FMI expects buyers to match these records to the contracted duty, rather than treating a design award or well permit as a substitute for a commissioned capture-to-storage chain.
Which capabilities distinguish the product offers?
The Northern Lights expansion covers onshore tanks, pumps, a jetty, injection wells, pipelines and vessels, showing the infrastructure scope behind a transport-and-storage service. Its March 2026 update identifies a long-term Stockholm Exergi agreement as a catalyst for Phase 2. [13] That is evidence of contracted demand supporting expansion, rather than an investment made without customers. Baker Hughes' Liverpool Bay contract concerns CO2 compression equipment, while MHI's cited design award concerns a capture plant. [5][6] Buyers therefore compare capabilities against the package required: capture-process performance, compression duty or the receipt and permanent storage of CO2.
How does geographic reach affect competition?
The activities documented here have different geographic scopes. MHI's July 2025 disclosure records 18 delivered capture plants worldwide and the Tomato-Atsuma design award in Japan; Baker Hughes' cited contract concerns Liverpool Bay in the United Kingdom. [5][6] STRATOS in Texas and Northern Lights in Norway are the selected operator examples in this report. [3][4] Their inclusion does not imply that Occidental or the Northern Lights shareholders operate only in those jurisdictions. FMI compares the location of the documented asset with an equipment supplier's delivery record, rather than treating one featured project as the company's entire geographic footprint.
Representative Company Overview
Table 8: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Market Representative Company Overview
| Company | Positioning | Verified activity |
|---|---|---|
| Occidental Petroleum / 1PointFive | Integrated direct air capture and CO2 storage operator drawing on oil-and-gas subsurface expertise. [4] | Secured the first-ever EPA Class VI permits issued for a DAC project in April 2025, for the STRATOS facility in Ector County, Texas, targeting up to 500,000 tonnes of annual CO2 capture. |
| Equinor / Shell / TotalEnergies (Northern Lights) | State-coordinated transport-and-storage infrastructure consortium. [3] | Injected and stored first CO2 volumes in Norway's North Sea reservoir in August 2025; committed NOK 7.5 billion in March 2025 to expand Phase 2 capacity to at least 5 million tonnes a year. |
| Mitsubishi Heavy Industries | Post-combustion capture-process technology licensor and plant designer. [5] | KM CDR Process delivered to 18 plants worldwide as of July 2025; awarded a basic design contract that month for Japan's largest planned CO2 capture plant at Tomato-Atsuma. |
| Baker Hughes | CO2 compression and equipment supplier to CCS clusters. [6] | Booked a Q1 2025 contract, announced June 2025, to supply three CO2 compressor trains to Saipem for Eni's Liverpool Bay CCS project within the UK's HyNet cluster. |
The competitive assessment describes the companies and activities covered in this report using the public records identified in the bibliography and alongside the relevant claims. Company announcements are considered within their stated scope and dates, providing context for supplier roles, product developments and investment plans.
Research Methodology
The market outlook was reviewed for consistency between the 2026 value, 2036 forecast, ten-year CAGR, currency and units. Segment findings were checked against their classification, base year, comparison-table complements and repeated figures in the opening and FAQs. The product assessment combines secondary evidence on capital allocation with assumptions about external procurement and deployment timing; project cost, capture capacity and supplier revenue are treated as different measures. Competitive positioning was reviewed against the cited permits, delivered-plant records, design contracts and infrastructure updates. This secondary-source approach supports comparisons within the evidence available without assigning numerical company shares or claiming new interviews or surveys.
