23/06/2026
Say No to releasing Wirral’s Green Belt Land for Development – Brownfield First!
“AN ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL FIASCO” - Norway's "flagship" cement CO2 capture and CCS project
Defend Wirral's Green Spaces
20 Jun 2026
Dear Supporters,
“AN ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL FIASCO” – does Micheal Shanks MP know what investigative journalists are saying about the Norwegian CCS industry and Heidelberg Cement’s emission claims?
During the Parliamentary debate on Peak Cluster and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) on Monday 15 June, the Minister for Energy Security and Net Zero, Michael Shanks MP, attempted to reassure the public by stating:
“On safety, it is really important to make the case to the public that carbon capture is a very tried-and-tested technology that has been deployed across industry and power generation at scale for a long time. Geological carbon dioxide storage has been in operation for decades, and Norway has stored CO₂ since 1996, with more than 20 million tonnes stored so far. Our regulatory regime rightly has to raise the safety levels to ensure that continues.”
However, if the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero has examined the actual performance of Norwegian CCS projects, they will have found the following:
Sleipner CCS, Norway
Sleipner — the world’s first commercial‑scale offshore CCS project — has experienced multiple serious issues over its lifetime. These include unexpected CO₂ migration along geological faults, equipment failures that resulted in overstated storage volumes, and persistent seismic‑monitoring complications. Independent analyses, including those from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), also stress point out that Sleipner's scale is vastly different from newer proposed projects such as Peak Cluster. Scaling up by a factor of ten introduces CO2 storage and pressure‑management risks that Sleipner has never had to confront.
Snøhvit CCS, Norway
The Snøhvit project encountered major subsurface problems almost immediately after operations began in 2008. Geological capacity was far lower than predicted, and unexpected pressure spikes forced emergency well interventions. Although the site was originally expected to accept CO₂ for 18 years, this estimate was downgraded to just six months once injection began. Operators eventually adapted, but the episode raised fundamental questions about the predictability of CO₂ behaviour underground.
Northern Lights CCS, Norway
The Northern Lights CCS Project in Norway is that which is, perhaps, most similar to Peak Cluster, although it does not have long onshore pipelines. Instead, captured CO₂ is liquefied and shipped from capture facilities (such as the Heidelberg Materials cement plant).
Just days before Michael Shanks praised Norway’s CCS record in Parliament, investigative journalists, coordinated by the European Investigative Collaborations (EIC) network, published an exposé on Northern Lights and Heidelberg Cement. The project has required €1.6 billion in investment, including €700 million from the Norwegian government and €131 million from the EU. Oslo will also fund 80% of operating costs for a decade. A further €3 billion has been paid by Norway and three other countries to Northern Lights’ customer plants.
Reports in Der Spiegel, Le Soir, Mediapart and De Standaard highlight deep concerns about the project’s scalability and economic viability, despite its status as a flagship climate initiative for the cement sector.
CCS-Vorzeigeprojekt von Heidelberg Materials in Norwegen: SPIEGEL-Recherche weckt Zweifel - DER SPIEGEL
Climat : le fiasco du mégaprojet de stockage du CO2 de TotalEnergies | Mediapart
Greenwashing of kinderziekten? CO2-opvang maakt belofte niet waar | De Standaard
Mediapart describes Northern Lights as “an economic and technological fiasco.”
Key Findings from the Investigation
Underperformance: The Brevik / Heidelberg cement plant stored only around 77,000 tonnes of CO₂ in its first year — far below the widely promoted 400,000‑tonne annual capacity.
Extreme Costs: The capture facility alone cost roughly €400 million, heavily subsidised by the Norwegian state. Experts warn that without dramatic improvements in capture rates, the project will be economically unsustainable.
Scalability Concerns: Researchers argue that global industrial decarbonisation would require thousands of such plants operating at far higher capture rates. Brevik is viewed as an expensive experimental site, not a proven industrial solution.
Technical Failures: Workers have reported leaks, technical problems and a serious accident that caused prolonged shutdowns. Other projects intended to connect to Northern Lights’ transport network are now delayed.
Poor Market Reception: The small amount of cement produced has sold poorly, despite advertising claims that it is “emissions‑free.”
Greenwashing Allegations: The investigation found that Heidelberg’s “evozero” cement — marketed as “close to zero emissions” — relies on carbon‑credit accounting rather than genuine emissions elimination. Actual emissions reductions are around 33%, rising to a maximum of 50% if the plant ever reaches full capacity. Through what journalists describe as a “legal but misleading” method, Heidelberg markets half its output as “net‑zero” evozero cement (which it then charges a higher price for) and half as conventional cement, even though it’s both the same cement product with identical emissions.
In the same Parliamentary debate, Michael Shanks stated:
“The HyNet cluster, which I visited a few months ago, and Padeswood cement works are examples of projects that are moving forward where carbon capture technology not only reduces our emissions and creates jobs in the process…”
Padeswood is owned by Heidelberg — the same company whose Norwegian emission claims have been exposed as “mis-leading” and “green-washing”.
Heidelberg state they are proposing to produce “evozero” cement at their Padeswood factory by 2028. Again, they will be marketing their “evozero” cement as “near zero”. They claim they will capture 800,000 tonnes, which will then be stored under Liverpool Bay via Hynet. Given the claims and allegations made about “evozero” produced in Norway, we wonder whether the Padeswood emission claims are what they first seem and whether Michael Shanks really has the full picture.
Major shareholders of Heidelberg Cement include a German Billionaire, Ludwig Merckle and asset and investment management companies such as Blackrock inc. Artisan Partners and Capital Group
Peak Cluster also repeatedly cites Norway’s record as evidence of CCS success. Given the documented problems, it is reasonable to ask whether Michael Shanks MP and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero have actually undertaken any detailed examination in to the real‑world economic and technical performance of Norway’s CCS projects and the Heidelberg “evozero” cement plant they serve, or whether they have simply accepted the word of investment managers, the fossil‑fuel lobby and Peak Cluster.
Please write to Michael Shanks Department (email below) and let them know your thoughts about the Norwegian CCS and the Heidelberg cement factory that Peak Cluster, and the Government, are so keen to emulate.
[email protected]
If you haven't already done so, please sign the petition to Stop Peak Cluster and share with all your friends and family. We must stop this massive waste of taxpayers money on an a "greenwashing con".
https://www.change.org/p/stop-the-peak-cluster-co2-pipeline
Thank you for your support
Take the next step!
https://c.org/Zzx58QhZXL
Stop the Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline
