Why climate technology is not stuck on engineering but on demand. In carbon removal, one company accounted for 78.5% of all disclosed contracted tonnes, and in hydrogen the firm offtake contracts cover roughly 5% of what the announcements promised for 2030.
Frequently asked questions
Why does climate technology stall on demand rather than technology?+
Two branches with nothing in common — carbon removal and hydrogen — show exactly the same shape: investment rises while the pipeline shrinks. That means capital is not the constraint, and neither is technology. What is missing sits on the other side of the transaction: there is no buyer.
What do carbon removal and hydrogen have in common as markets?+
Both run on announcements without offtakers. In carbon removal, a single company, Microsoft, accounted for 78.5% of all disclosed contracted tonnes as of 13 April 2026. In hydrogen, announced 2030 production shrank from 49 to 27 million tonnes in two years, while firm offtake contracts together cover under 2 million tonnes — about 5% of what was promised.
Why did the pipeline shrink while investment kept rising?+
Because money and technology are not the binding constraint. As long as no paying offtaker commits, projects stay stuck at the announcement stage. Pumping more capital into the supply side changes little if the demand side stays empty.
What does the policy shift from production support to demand mandates mean?+
Since 2026 policy has been shifting from supporting producers to mandating demand — for instance through purchase obligations. That moves the lever from "make it cheaper" to "create a buyer". The first concrete bill for it, however, only lands in September 2027.
What must a climate-tech company show today to be fundable?+
Not only that the technology works, but that a buyer exists. A credible offtake path — who pays, how much, and on what obligation — weighs more in this climate than a further fall in the cost curve.