REVIEWS

Carbon dioxide storage through

mineral carbonation
Sandra Ó. Snæbjörnsdóttir 1*, Bergur Sigfússon1, Chiara Marieni2, David Goldberg 3
,
Sigurður R. Gislason4 and Eric H. Oelkers2,4,5
Abstract | Carbon capture and storage (CCS) has a fundamental role in achieving the goals
of the Paris Agreement to limit anthropogenic warming to 1.5–2 °C. Most ongoing CCS projects
inject CO2 into sedimentary basins and require an impermeable cap rock to prevent the CO2
from migrating to the surface. Alternatively, captured carbon can be stored through injection
into reactive rocks (such as mafic or ultramafic lithologies), provoking CO2 mineralization and,
thereby, permanently fixing carbon with negligible risk of return to the atmosphere. Although
in situ mineralization offers a large potential volume for carbon storage in formations such as
basalts and peridotites (both onshore and offshore), its large-​scale implementation remains
little explored beyond laboratory-​based and field-​based experiments. In this Review, we discuss
the potential of mineral carbonation to address the global CCS challenge and contribute
to long-​term reductions in atmospheric CO2. Emphasis is placed on the advances in making
this technology more cost-​effective and in exploring the limits and global applicability
of CO2 mineralization.

1
Orkuveita Reykjavíkur,
Reykjavík, Iceland.
2
GET, CNRS UMR 5563,
Université Paul Sabatier,
Toulouse, France.
3
Lamont-​Doherty Earth
Observatory, Columbia
University, Palisades,
NY, USA.
4
Institute of Earth Sciences,
University of Iceland,
Reykjavík, Iceland.
5
Department of Earth
Sciences, University College
London, London, UK.
*e-​mail:
sandra.osk.snaebjornsdottir@
or.is
https://doi.org/10.1038/
s43017-019-0011-8
Global concentrations of atmospheric CO2 are higher
than at any other time in human history. From a pre-​
industrial baseline of 280 ppm, CO2 concentrations
reached 407 ppm in 2018. Growth rates of 2.3 ppm per
year have been observed over the past decade, approxi-
mately 100 times faster than natural changes1. Increasing
CO2 concentrations can largely be attributed to the use
of fossil fuels, which, through an enhanced greenhouse
effect, raise global average temperatures and, in turn,
affect climatic, ecological and social systems2. To limit
these effects, the 2015 Paris Agreement aims to constrain
anthropogenic warming to 1.5–2 °C (ref.3). Solutions are,
therefore, needed to promote a substantial and sustained
reduction in the net flow of CO2 into the atmosphere,
while, at the same time, ensuring energy needs are still
met. According to the International Energy Agency4, the
goals of the Paris Agreement can be achieved by apply-
ing and pushing already available climate-​mitigation
technologies to their maximum practical limits.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is one such climate-​
mitigation strategy2,4, describing a range of processes for
CO2 capture, separation, transport, storage and moni-
toring, usually from large point sources. For example,
CCS is considered the key technology for reducing emis-
sions from fossil-​fuel power plants while these are still
operational; limiting emissions from many industrial
processes, such as steel, aluminium and cement produc-
tion; and to deliver ‘negative emissions’ by removing and
sequestering CO2 directly from air by the second half
of the century. Indeed, all proposed pathways to limit
global warming to 1.5 °C require some degree of CO2
removal5, with an estimated total of 190 GtCO2 needing
to be stored3. However, large-​scale deployment of CCS
has yet to be achieved; present facilities capture and store
only ~40 MtCO2 annually6. Thus, a considerable scale-​up
in technology is required to meet the aims of the Paris
Agreement, specifically through the operation of >2,500
large-​scale CCS facilities by 2040 (ref.6).
Currently, 14 out of the 18 operational large-​scale
CCS projects worldwide (each capturing >400,000 tonnes
of CO2 annually) are based on enhanced oil recovery6,
whereby CO2 is used to obtain the last remains of an
oil field. These projects deploy one of the most com-
mon approaches of carbon storage, that is, injection
of gaseous, liquid or supercritical CO2 into subsurface
reservoirs, such as sedimentary basins. In such sys-
tems, CO2 can be physically trapped in porous rocks
below an impermeable cap rock (structural trapping),
some of which becomes trapped in small pores (resid-
ual trapping) and, over time, dissolves in groundwater
(solubility trapping) and reacts with the subsurface rocks
to form stable carbonate minerals (mineral trapping).
As the storage progresses from structural to mineral
trapping, the CO2 becomes more immobile, increasing
the security of storage (Fig. 1a) and decreasing the reliance
on the efficacy of the cap rock.

90 | February 2020 | volume 1 www.nature.com/natrevearthenviron

 Reviews

Key points mineral carbonation aims to accelerate a natural process

• Carbon capture and storage has a key role in achieving the goals of the Paris
Agreement.
• CO2 storage through mineral carbonation extends the applicability of carbon capture
and storage by enabling storage in areas previously not considered feasible.
• The rapid mineralization of CO2 through injection into reactive rock formations
increases storage security.
• Carbon mineralization in basaltic rocks offers a global storage potential that exceeds
anthropogenic emissions.
• The method can be used for the subsurface storage of CO2, and potentially other
environmentally important gases, through water capture, although this approach
is water-​intensive.
• Considerable efforts are needed to accelerate the deployment of CO2 storage through
mineral carbonation, including more widespread operation in diverse conditions.
Several key challenges face the storage of CO2 in
sedimentary basins. First, mineral trapping may be limi­
ted by the absence of the silicate-​bound divalent metals
needed for carbonate formation and can take thousands
of years, owing to low rock reactivity7 (Fig. 1a). Second,
the large volume of carbon that needs to be stored to
achieve the climate goals requires the identification and
characterization of many new storage reservoirs. Third,
as most of the injected CO2 will likely remain in the gas-
eous, liquid or supercritical phase long term, it will tend
to migrate back to the surface if not adequately stored.
Even though the likelihood of such leakage from a well-​
regulated site is predicted to be negligible8, the lack of
long-​term storage feasibility has inhibited the broader
application of sedimentary storage of CO2.
Alternative CCS methods have, therefore, been pro-
posed to overcome the limitations of sedimentary injec-
tion, including in situ mineral carbonation9,10. In situ
— the vast storage of carbon in rocks over millions of
years — at a rate fast enough to contribute to climate-​
change mitigation. With this approach, the captured
carbon is stored through its injection into reactive rocks,
such as mafic or ultramafic lithologies, which contain
high concentrations of divalent cations, such as Ca2+, Mg2+
and Fe2+, for rapid mineralization to calcite (CaCO3),
dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2) or magnesite (MgCO3). Mineral
carbonation can be further promoted by the dissolution
of CO2 into water before or during its injection, achieving
solubility trapping immediately11 and mineral trapping
within 2 years (Fig. 1b) at 20–50 °C (ref.12). In situ miner-
alization results in a negli­gible risk of the CO2 migrating
back to the atmosphere both over the short term (due
to the dissolution of CO2 and the density-​related inhibi­
tion of surface migration) and the long term (due to
conversion into carbonate minerals).
Supercritical, liquid or gaseous CO2 can also be
injected into reactive rock formations under favourable
geological conditions, including offshore locations, where
the risks of potential leaks are mitigated by the overlying
seawater and the presence of a low-​permeability sedi-
ment layer near the seafloor–seawater interface13,14. In
such cases, mineralization may be slowed by the need
for the injected CO2 to dissolve into the formation waters
before it is mineralized. Mineral carbonation therefore
provides an attractive alternative or addition to the more
common sedimentary injection CCS techniques: it offers
an expanded geographic range of onshore and offshore
storage reservoirs (including large flood basalt provinces,
large massifs of mantle peridotite and oceanic ridges)
and, in turn, increases the opportunities for pairing car-
bon sources and sinks, and, thus, possibly reduces costs.

a 100 b 100

Structural and
stratigraphic
trapping
% Trapping contribution

% Trapping contribution

Solubility Mineral
Residual CO2 trapping trapping
trapping

Increasing storage security Increasing storage security

Solubility
trapping

Mineral
trapping
0 0
1 10 100 1,000 10,000 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Time since injection stopped (years) Time since injection stopped (years)

Fig. 1 | Comparison of CO2-trapping mechanisms for supercritical and dissolved CO2 injections. Change in the
contribution of the carbon-​trapping mechanism of CO2 storage over time when injecting pure supercritical CO2 into
sedimentary basins (part a) and when injecting water-​dissolved CO2 for mineralization (part b), based on data from field
injection experiments11,12,77,78. Part a is adapted with permission from the IPCC, 2005: IPCC Special Report on Carbon
Dioxide Capture and Storage, prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(Metz, B., Davidson, O., de Coninck, H., Loos, M. and Meyer, L. (eds.)), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and
New York, NY, USA (ref.7). Part b is adapted with permission from ref.77, Elsevier.

NaTure RevIeWS | EArth & EnvirOnment volume 1 | February 2020 | 91

Reviews
Box 1 | Ex situ carbon mineralization
Ex situ mineralization has been extensively considered as an option for carbon
capture and storage for CO2-intensive processes located far from potential geologic
storage sites. This method is operated above ground and involves the reaction of
feedstock (fly ash, waste from the steel and iron industries, ground reactive rock and
mine tailings) with CO2 in a gas stream to produce carbonate minerals, which are
subsequently disposed47.
Owing to the costs associated with grinding and transporting the feedstock
material, as well as storing the carbonated products, the success of the ex situ
approach is dependent on the rapid and close-​to-complete carbonation of the
feedstock109. Thus, there have been substantial efforts to develop industrial methods
to rapidly and efficiently carbonate various mafic and/or ultramafic rocks and
minerals, as reviewed elsewhere109. Such efforts have included increasing the
reaction temperature, the use of additives, ultrafine grinding and thermal activation
of the feedstock material. Under certain conditions, efficient carbonation can be
achieved, but the costs of such processes may prove to be prohibitive for large-​scale
implementation. Indeed, the cost of ex situ mineral carbonation is much higher than
that of subsurface storage84. However, it can provide a local solution for certain
activities, such as the offsetting of CO2 emissions from mining industries, particularly
if the economic viability can be increased by producing saleable resources, such as
building materials109.
Ex situ mineralization is being explored in many global locations. For example,
ongoing research is being conducted on the carbonation of mafic or ultramafic mine
waste tailings, including those from the kimberlite mines in South Africa110 and the
brucite tailings from the Mount Keith Mine, an open-​pit nickel mine in Western
Australia45,111. The carbonation of mine waste has the advantage that it is commonly
already finely ground, increasing its reactivity. It is estimated that there are ~400 Mt of
mine tailings generated per year that could be used to mineralize CO2 (ref.112) and that
these often have the benefit of being located near CO2 point sources, reducing costs.
Furthermore, ultramafic mine tailings can react with and mineralize atmospheric CO2,
and this passive mineralization occurs at several ultramafic mines20,45,46,110. Increasing
the rates of these mineralization processes offers the potential to offset 100% or more
of the emissions produced by their associated mining activities, potentially allowing
for carbon-​neutral mining practices45,112.
In this Review, we discuss the past and present state
of in situ subsurface mineral CO2 storage in address-
ing the global CCS challenge. Emphasis is placed on
assessing the recent advances that could make mineral
carbonation a viable alternative for future CCS activi-
ties and exploring the limits of this technology in terms
of potential sites and gas compositions. We recognise
that ex situ mineralization — whereby CO2 interacts
with a reactive mineral feedstock at the surface near
emission sources — is an alternative CCS strategy
(Box 1). However, given its limitations in regards to cost
and scale, we constrain discussion to subsurface in situ
mineralization.
The mineral-​carbonation process
The geochemistry of mineral carbonation
Mineral carbonation proceeds through the reaction
of water containing dissolved CO2 with rocks, notably
mafic or ultramafic rocks. Water charged with CO2 is
acidic, with a typical pH of 3–5, depending on the partial
pressure of CO2, water composition and temperature of
the system. This acidic solution promotes the dissolu-
tion of silicate minerals, such as pyroxene, a common
mineral in basalt and peridotite:
2H + + H 2O + (Ca, Mg, Fe)SiO3
(1)
⇋ Ca2+, Mg 2+, Fe 2+ + H 4SiO4
92 | February 2020 | volume 1 www.nature.com/natrevearthenviron
Such reactions promote CO2 mineralization in two
ways: first, protons are consumed, neutralizing the acidic
gas-​charged water and facilitating the precipitation of
carbonate minerals as the pH of the water increases;
and, second, they provide cations (Eq. 1) that can react
with the dissolved CO2 to form stable carbonate min-
erals. The degree to which the released cations form
minerals depends on the element, pH and temperature.
Dissolved calcium readily reacts with CO2 in aque-
ous solution at temperatures below ~300 °C, forming
calcite (CaCO3) and/or aragonite once the solutions
are supersaturated15,16. Dissolved magnesium precipi-
tates as the carbonates magnesite (MgCO3) and dolo-
mite (CaMg(CO 3) 2) at temperatures above ~65 °C
(refs17–19); at lower temperatures, the precipitation of
these minerals is kinetically inhibited. Under such
conditions, less stable hydrous Mg-​carbonate miner-
als, such as hydromagnesite (Mg5(CO3)4(OH)2·4H2O),
dypingite (Mg5(CO3)4(OH)2·5H2O) and nesquehonite
(MgCO3·3H2O), can form20. Dissolved Mg2+ is also
readily incorporated into clay minerals such as smec-
tite, limiting its availability to promote carbonation. The
degree to which dissolved iron (Fe2+) combines with dis-
solved injected CO2 to form carbonates in the subsurface
remains unclear. Under oxic conditions, Fe2+ oxidizes
before it can react to form a divalent metal carbonate,
and, thus, the mineral siderite (FeCO3) is only rarely
observed in modern sedimentary and basaltic rocks21.
The formation of the mineral ankerite (CaFe(CO3)2),
however, may be favoured under certain conditions at
ambient to moderate temperatures when the pH of the
solution is low enough to prevent Fe2+ from oxidizing to
Fe3+ (refs22,23).
Other important factors for efficient subsurface
carbon mineralization are the permeability and/or
active porosity of the host rock formation24. The pores
and fractures provide pathways for migrating fluids,
access to mineral surfaces that contribute cations to the
mineralization and space for the carbonate precipitates.
The overall mass of carbon-​bearing precipitates is also
affected by the formation of other secondary minerals,
most importantly clay minerals, but also minerals such
as zeolites25 and anhydrites in seawater systems26. These
minerals compete with carbonates for the divalent
cations liberated from dissolving primary minerals and
for the available pore space.
Carbonate and associated secondary mineral pre-
cipitates typically have a larger volume than their pri-
mary source minerals27 and, therefore, can clog flow
pathways, where they precipitate and/or seal reactive
surfaces28. However, the volume expansion during pre-
cipitation reactions can lead to cracking and the open-
ing of fractures, which increase permeability and expose
new surfaces to the fluid phase and, hence, may promote
subsurface carbonation29,30. It should also be noted that,
owing to the acidity of water–CO2 solutions, they tend
to dissolve minerals during injection, opening up pore
space and flow paths near the injection well. The pre-
cipitation of pore-​filling secondary minerals is expected
to occur only at a distance from the injection well after
sufficient dissolution of the host rock has neutralized the
acidic CO2-rich injection fluids27,31.

Natural mineral carbonation
Natural mineral carbonation is most efficient in mafic
and ultramafic rocks, owing to their high reactivity and
the abundance of divalent metal cations contained in
silicates32. Of these, basaltic rocks are the most abun-
dant: most of the ocean floor, ~70% of the Earth’s surface
and >5% of the continents is basaltic (Fig. 2). Abundant
flood basalt fields are found in central India, Siberia, the
United States, Canada and Yemen. Although the occur-
rence of basalts onshore is limited, the weathering of
basaltic rocks on the continents and volcanic islands is
responsible for ~30% of the natural drawdown of CO2
from the atmosphere attributable to continental silicate
weathering, demonstrating the relative advantage of
these rocks compared with other terrestrial rocks for
mineral carbonation33.
Natural analogues for large-​scale CO2 mineraliza-
tion are found in various environments. In terms of
scale, one of the most substantial natural analogues for
CO2 mineralization is the carbon uptake of the oceanic
crust; basalts in volcanic submarine geothermal systems
receive substantial amounts of CO2 from the degassing
of magma intrusions located in their roots. The oceanic
crust is typi­cally 6–7 km thick and has a remarkably con-
sistent stratigraphy on a global scale34,35. Hydrothermal
circulation through ridge flanks is focused in the upper-
most 1 km of the ocean crust, resulting in extensive CO2–
water–basalt interaction. This hydrothermally active
crust mineralized ~40 MtCO2 annually36,37.
The storage potential of hydrothermally active geo-
thermal systems located onshore in Iceland, the largest
land mass above sea level along the mid-​oceanic ridges,
has been estimated by direct measurements of CO2
bound in carbonates in drill cuttings from three basalt-​
hosted geothermal fields. Although these carbonates are
precipitated over long timescales (10,000–300,000 years),
the results provide insight into the permeability and
Oceanic igneous plateaus or continental flood basalts
Fig. 2 | Locations of feasible geological formations for in situ mineral carbonation. Map showing the potential
onshore and offshore targets for in situ mineral storage of CO2. Oceanic ridges younger than 10 Ma are shown in orange,
and oceanic igneous plateaus and continental flood basalts are shown in purple. Data from refs113–116.
NaTure RevIeWS | EArth & EnvirOnment
Reviews
active porosity of natural systems and indicate that young
and fresh basalts can naturally store >100 kg of CO2
per m3 (ref.38). On the basis of this estimate, the theoret-
ical storage capacity of the ocean ridges is on the order
of 100,000–250,000 GtCO2 — orders of magnitude larger
than the amount of CO2 that would be derived from the
burning of all fossil fuel24. This value agrees with other
estimates that verify the enormous storage capacity of
both sub-​ocean13,14,39 and onshore40,41 basalts.
Evidence for natural carbonation is apparent at var-
ious other onshore locations. For example, in Oman,
tectonically exposed mantle peridotites remove CO2
directly from the atmosphere, with this CO2–water–
rock interaction resulting in the formation of travertines.
Owing to the reactivity of the Omani peridotites, they
are estimated to consume in the range of 10–100 ktCO2
per year through in situ carbonation42. The complete
natural carbonation of the peridotites leads to the forma-
tion of listwanites, with the ultramafic rocks transform-
ing through a series of reactions: serpentine + olivine + 
brucite → serpentine + magnesite → magnesite + talc → 
magnesite + quartz. This mineralogical transformation
serves as a geological analogue for in situ CO2 min-
eralization43. Similarly, in West Greenland, extensive
carbonate mineralization in basalts associated with
petroleum migration was documented21, suggesting
that CO2-bearing fluids may be readily mineralized,
even in extensively altered rocks. The natural carbona-
tion of mafic and ultramafic mine-​waste tailings is also
commonly observed44–46.
Laboratory-​based experimental studies
Experimental studies of mineral dissolution and precip-
itation rates provide insight into the fundamental pro-
cesses behind mineral carbonation and are vital for the
design of field-​scale operations. Numerous experimental
studies have verified the capacity of silicate minerals to
Oceanic ridges <10 Ma
volume 1 | February 2020 | 93
Reviews
a –11
Basaltic glass
Crystalline basalt
log[Ca2+ release rate (mol cm–2 s–1)]
–12 Diopside
Labradorite
Actinolite
–13
–14
–15
–16
–17
2 4 6 8
pH
b –11
Basaltic glass
Crystalline basalt
log[Mg2+ release rate (mol cm–2 s–1)]
–12 Diopside
Forsterite
Chrysotile
–13 Actinolite
–14
–15
–16
–17
2 4 6 8
pH
Fig. 3 | Calcium and magnesium release rates from
mafic rocks and minerals. Variation of Ca2+ (part a)
and Mg2+ (part b) release rates from common minerals,
basaltic glass and crystalline basalt as a function of the
fluid pH at 25 °C. The rates are normalized to the Brunauer,
Emmett and Teller surface area and calculated assuming
stoichio­metric dissolution. Adapted with permission
from ref.117 (chrysotile), ref.65 (basaltic glass), ref.53
(diopside), ref.118 (crystalline basalt), ref.67 (forsterite)
and ref.119 (actinolite), Elsevier.
release cations and, thereby, promote the formation of
carbonate minerals in the presence of CO2-rich fluids.
Many of these studies have focused on the dissolution
rates of the primary silicates that contain the divalent
metals necessary for carbonate precipitation. Emphasis
on mineral dissolution stems from the commonly
accepted view that mineral dissolution is the rate-​limiting
step in the mineral-​carbonation process47,48.
An extensive number of dissolution studies of
divalent-​metal-bearing silicates have been reported
on minerals such as olivine49–54, pyroxene55 and plagio­
clase56–63, as well as volcanic glasses64–66. The rates of Ca2+
and Mg2+ release from mafic minerals and rocks are often
highly dependent on the fluid pH (Fig. 3). The mineral
dissolution rates increase dramatically with a decrease
in pH at the acidic conditions likely encountered near
the CO2 injection point (Fig. 3). The dissolution rates for
Al-​bearing minerals, such as plagioclase (labradorite),
and volcanic glasses are slowest at neutral pH and then
94 | February 2020 | volume 1 www.nature.com/natrevearthenviron
increase at higher pH. By contrast, the rates of Al-​free
minerals, such as olivine (forsterite) and pyroxene
(diopside), typically decrease continuously with increas-
ing pH, such that the dissolution of these minerals is
sluggish at the conditions at which carbonates tend to
precipitate (Fig. 3). The large decrease in the reaction rates
of most of these minerals with increasing pH suggests
that the dissolution of reactive host rocks near the injec-
tion well of CO2-charged water will be rapid but the sub-
sequent precipitation of secondary phases will be slower,
more diffuse and at some distance from the injection site.
The minimum in the dissolution rates of many min-
erals at near-​to-neutral pH has led to the proposal of a
two-​step ex situ carbonation process, in which divalent-​
10 metal-bearing silicates are first dissolved in strong acid,
followed by the formation of carbonate minerals at more
basic conditions. Olivine dissolution exhibits the fastest
Mg2+ release rates at acidic conditions67. This observa-
tion justifies the interest in this mineral, or rocks rich
in this mineral (such as peridotites), as a feedstock for
ex situ mineral carbonation (Box 1) because smaller vol-
umes of materials will be required to supply the required
cations for the mineralization process. Note that the
dissolution of the common sedimentary rock minerals
quartz, kaolinite and the alkali feldspars does not liberate
the divalent cations needed to promote the formation of
common carbonate minerals.
Direct carbonation to form divalent-​metal carbonates
has also been demonstrated. Many of these studies
focused on the carbonation of olivine and serpentines,
owing to their widespread availability and abundance in
10
Mg. Investigations of forsterite carbonation at 30 °C and
95 °C at varying partial pressures of CO2 revealed that
magnesite formed only at 95 °C and 100 bar of CO2 pres-
sure68. At temperatures below 65 °C, less stable hydrous
Mg-​carbonate minerals, such as nesquehonite, have
been commonly observed to form through the carbon-
ation of ultramafic rocks69,70. The precipitation of magne-
site at lower temperatures, however, has been observed
in experiments with water-​saturated supercritical CO2
and in which the mineralization was enhanced by the
addition of ligands to bind and dehydrate the Mg2+ ions,
thereby accelerating magnesite precipitation71.
Most experimental studies on serpentine have explored
mechanical or thermal treatment methods to accelerate
the carbonation of this mineral72. The carbonation of
Ca-​bearing phases, such as glassy and crystalline basaltic
rocks, has also been verified experimentally22,73,74.
One of the main limitations of laboratory-​based
experimental studies is their timescales; experiments
are usually run for days, weeks or months, rather than
years. The spatial scale is also limited, complicating the
transfer of experimental results to field-​scale operations.
To extend the results over longer timescales and spatial
scales, geochemical modelling is commonly used25,48,75,76.
This approach is based on the construction of conceptual
models of the processes of interest, linking observations
from natural systems with results from experimental
studies. Such calculations have been widely applied for
simulating the dominant processes of mineral carbon-
ation, with results suggesting that the carbonation of
mafic and ultramafic rocks through water–CO2–rock
 Reviews

interactions should lead to substantial mineralization (Fig. 1b). The injection also led to an increase in the mass
of the injected carbon over decade-​long timespans75,76. of the subsurface biota79, but carbon isotope measure-
These results are a good indicator of the general pro- ments demonstrate that this biota increase contributed
cesses involved in mineral carbonation but are limi­ negligibly to the subsurface carbon fixation.
ted owing to the natural variability and complexity of Following the success of the initial CarbFix project in
field-​scale operations. Hellisheiði, the project was upscaled starting in 2014
in a hotter, deeper reservoir, with a stepwise increase in
Field mineral-​carbonation studies the amount of gases injected80,81. The acidic gases (CO2
Subsurface mineral carbonation and H2S) were captured directly from the power plant
The results of experiments, geochemical modelling and exhaust stream by their dissolution into pure water
natural analogues have motivated two larger-​scale field (condensed steam from the power plant turbines) in a
projects. These projects have demonstrated the potential scrubbing tower. The resulting gas-​charged water was
of in situ carbon mineralization by injecting CO2 into injected to a depth of ~800 m into the basaltic reservoir
underground basaltic reservoirs for its rapid conversion at temperatures of ~250 °C. Owing to the acidity of the
into carbonate minerals, providing a safe, permanent injected solution, it is strongly undersaturated with
storage solution for the captured carbon (Fig. 4). respect to the primary and secondary minerals of the
basaltic reservoir near the injection well31. Mineral dis-
The CarbFix project. The pilot phase of the CarbFix proj­ solution gradually increases the pH of the gas-​charged
ect, funded by the European Union, was undertaken fluid to a range suitable for carbon mineralization, which
in 2012 near the Hellisheiði geothermal power plant in occurs at a distance from the injection well. As a conse-
southwest Iceland. A total of 230 tonnes of pure CO2 and quence, there is no sign, to date, of a decrease in the sys-
a CO2–H2S gas mixture from the geothermal plant were tem injectivity since the initiation of the carbon injection
fully dissolved in locally sourced groundwater during in 2014. At present, >50% of the injected carbon is fixed
their injection to a depth of ~500 m into basaltic rocks as carbonate minerals within months of its injection in
(Fig. 4a). The temperature of the target basaltic reservoir this upscaled system80.
was 20–50 °C. The method requires large amounts of The CarbFix project currently captures and stores
water: ~25 tonnes of water for each tonne of gas injected ~33% of the CO2 emissions from the Hellisheiði power
to fully dissolve the CO2 at depth. However, as the gas-​ plant81, or ~12,000 tonnes annually, with the aim to
charged water is denser than fresh water, solubility increase injection to ~90% of the CO2 from the plant
trapping occurs immediately11. Injection of the acidic gas-​ before 2030. Moreover, injection of CO2 from a second
charged water accelerates metal release from the bedrock geothermal plant operated in the area will begin in 2021.
and, hence, the formation of carbonate minerals12,77. The
carbonation process was quantified using reactive and The Wallula basalt pilot demonstration project. In 2013,
non-​reactive tracers and isotopes, which revealed the nearly 1,000 tonnes of pure liquid CO2 were injected
rapid mineralization of the injected CO2 (refs12,78), with into the Columbia River flood basalts near Wallula,
>95% of the injected gas mineralized within 2 years Washington, USA82. The CO2 was provided in tanks, and
the gas stream heated and pressurized before injection.
The resultant liquid CO2 stream was injected into two
a b brecciated basalt zones at a depth of 800–900 m and the
Water
reactions between the CO2, formation waters and basaltic
subsurface were monitored (Fig. 4b).
Dissolved CO2 CO2
Geophysical surveys indicated that a portion of the
Supercritical
or liquid CO2 injected CO2 was trapped as free-​phase CO2 in the inter-
flow zones below the massive basalt cap rock. However,
side-​wall cores retrieved from the storage formation
Cap rock flood basalt 2 years post-​injection revealed the presence of carbonate
nodules, composed primarily of ankerite, located in pores
and fractures of the basalts23,83, confirming that some of
Carbonate minerals the CO2 was mineralized within 2 years of injection.
Mass-​balance calculations to determine the quan-
tity of the injected CO2 that had been carbonated could
not be performed and no quantitative data have been
reported to date to evaluate what fraction of the injected
Carbonate CO2 was mineralized or remained as free-​phase CO2
minerals
(ref.82). Nevertheless, carbon and oxygen isotope analy­
sis of the ankerite nodules collected after the injection
Basaltic rock Basaltic rock
confirmed that the carbon in these minerals origin­
ated from the injected CO2 (refs23,83). Energy-​dispersive
Fig. 4 | Comparison of carbon-​injection methods. a | The CarbFix method involves X-​ray spectroscopy of the side-​wall cores also showed
|
the dissolution of CO2 in water during injection into a basaltic reservoir. b During the a progressive enrichment in Fe from the centre of the
Wallula basalt pilot project, pressurized liquid CO2 was injected into basalts. The figure ankerite nodules, indicating that the mineralization
is not to scale. derives material from the dissolution of the host basalt

NaTure RevIeWS | EArth & EnvirOnment volume 1 | February 2020 | 95

Reviews

a 800 the contamination of water resources and induced

Fresh water seismicity. The main risks are discussed next.
700 Seawater

CO2 buoyancy versus water penalty. The two in situ

600
mineral-​carbonation projects adopted different meth-

Water demand (tonnes)

500
ods for carbon injection: the injection of water charged
with CO2 (Fig. 4a) or the injection of liquid or supercritical
400 CO2 (Fig. 4b).
Liquid and supercritical CO2 are routinely stored
300 and transported commercially, and their compositional
integrity can be assured. Efficient transportation of
200 CO2 is possible given its low viscosity, high density and
low critical temperature (31 °C) and pressure (74 bar).
100 However, owing to its buoyancy, it is essential to ensure
that the storage reservoir is securely sealed during
0
and after the injection of a pure CO2 fluid phase. This
0 20 40 60 80 100
Pressure (bar) requirement is especially challenging during onshore
injection into volcanic rocks because these formations
b 120 are often highly fractured85.
CO2 alone
The injection of an aqueous solution of CO2 into
CO2-charged water
100 Water alone
the subsurface offers both advantages and challenges.
The method is both simple and cost-​effective80, and the
risks of leaks are mitigated as CO2-charged water is
Energy demand (kWh)

80 denser than the corresponding CO2-free water. The

60
40
20
0 co-​injected with the CO2 and, hence, no net change in
0 20 40 60 80
Pressure (bar)
Fig. 5 | Water and energy demands for dissolving
and pressurizing CO2. a | The amount of fresh water and
seawater needed at 25 °C to dissolve 1 tonne of CO2 as a
function of the CO2 partial pressure. Values calculated
using the real gas equation of state for solubility (Henry’s
law). b | The energy demand at 25 °C as a function of the
CO2 partial pressure for the pressurization of 1 tonne
of CO2, the mass of pure water needed to fully dissolve
this CO2 and 1 tonne of CO2-charged pure water by
pressurizing the two phases individually and then mixing
to form a single, equilibrated phase. The black dashed
line indicates the energy demand to form liquid CO2 by
pressurizing the gas from 1 bar to its liquefaction pressure.
In each case, the required energy is calculated based on
the equilibrium isothermal pressurization of CO2 and the
adiabatic pressurization of water.
as the nodules form, rather than from reprecipitated
carbonates. Extensive surface and well-​bore monitor-
ing several years after injection confirmed that no sub-
stantial leakage of CO2 has occurred from the storage
formation since its injection84.
Risks and challenges
Many of the main risks associated with the conventional
injection of supercritical CO2 into sedimentary basins
also apply to carbon-​mineralization projects, including
major drawback of this approach is that a large quan-
tity of water is needed to dissolve the CO2 gas. However,
this water could be sourced from the target reservoir,
therefore providing access for monitoring the chemistry
of the injected gas-​charged fluid and preventing pres-
sure build-​up in the reservoir owing to injection. As an
example, during the CarbFix pilot injections, the amount
of water pumped continuously from the two nearest
monitoring wells was equal to the amount of water
100
water pressure was observed in the storage formation.
The mass of water needed to dissolve 1 tonne of CO2 is
a function of the capture pressure, as shown in Fig. 5a;
the mass required decreases from >100 tonnes of water
per tonne of CO2 at a pressure of 3 bar to <35 tonnes of
water at a CO2 pressure of 25 bar. Abundant fresh water
is not readily available for this process in many parts of
the world, but in such cases, seawater may provide an
adequate alternative.
One additional advantage of CO2 injection as a water-​
dissolved gas is that it might considerably lower the cost
of CCS. Carbon dioxide and other acidic gases can be
captured directly from CO2-rich exhaust streams in fresh
water or seawater by mixing with the exhaust gas in a
scrubbing tower80. The energy to pressurize CO2-charged
water to pressures of up to 25 bar at 25 °C (the injection
conditions used in the pilot CarbFix project) is less than
that required to pressurize pure CO2 to the liquid state
at this temperature (Fig. 5b). However, the injection of
liquid CO2 is less energy-​intensive than the injection
of CO2 dissolved in water at pressures greater than
25 bar (Fig. 5b).
Although dissolving CO2 in water prior to its injec-
tion limits the risk of leakage, injecting supercritical
CO2 may offer advantages in sub-​ocean and/or other
environments, because fewer wells may be needed to
inject an equivalent volume of CO2 for storage. The low-​
permeability sediment cover of sub-​ocean reservoirs also

96 | February 2020 | volume 1 www.nature.com/natrevearthenviron


provide primary seals to trap CO2 injected in a buoyant,
supercritical state14. However, this environment also
offers vast seawater resources for the dissolution of CO2
prior to injection and could, thus, increase the efficiency
of this alternative approach and minimize energy needs
for CO2 capture. The optimal approach at potential
sites likely depends on factors such as the location and
depth of the target reservoir, as well as the economics
and efficiency of an ocean-​based storage system; thus,
site-​specific feasibility studies are required. Safety is also
a consideration, and as offshore sites are far from inhabi­
ted areas, the risk posed to humans from potential CO2
leaks and other related liabilities is reduced13.
Induced seismicity. One of the main risks of CO2 injection
of any kind is induced seismicity. The potential for damage
to infrastructure and public concern over seismic events
can result in CCS projects being shut down. Therefore,
utmost care should be taken to minimize these risks.
There are >180,000 active or formerly active injection
wells in the United States for both waste-​water disposal
and enhanced oil recovery. Induced seismic events have
been associated with ~10% of these wells, with high injec-
tion rates being the dominant trigger for induced seis-
micity86. High injection rates also seem to have triggered
the induced seismicity observed during commissioning
at the Hellisheiði power plant in Iceland87.
Three years prior to the scaled-​up gas injection, the
CarbFix target reservoir was taken into service as a
reinjection zone for waste water from the power plant.
Reinjection started on 1 September 2011 with a high
flow rate of ~500 kg s−1, resulting in an excess injection
pressure of ~28 bar. Microseismicity increased imme-
diately in the area north of the injection sites, with the
largest seismic events being a sequence that included
two magnitude 4 earthquakes on 15 October 2011
(ref.88). This problem was addressed by introducing a
workflow through which preventive steps, including the
adjustment of the injection rates, are taken to minimize
the risk of induced seismicity87,89. The CarbFix project
applies this framework and, following its implementa-
tion, the annual number of seismic events greater than
magnitude 2 in the area has decreased from 96 in 2011 to
one in 2018 (ref.90), which is considered satisfactory and
demonstrates that the project is being operated within its
regulatory boundaries.
The CarbFix example suggests that, prior to injec-
tion, a site-​specific study of the regional seismicity must
be performed to determine the seismic risk and should
include a thorough characterization of depths, times,
locations and magnitudes of seismic events. The risk
of induced seismicity might be greater when injecting
dissolved CO2, owing to the large volume of fluid that
would need to be injected into the subsurface. For exam-
ple, the injection of 1 MtCO2 per year (which is approxi­
mately the injection rate of CO2 into a single well at the
Sleipner CCS project)91 as a dissolved water form would
require ~20 injection wells with depths of ~500 m and
injection rates of ~50 l s−1, which is a common injection
rate for such shallow wells. Such a project could be fed
with water from the target injection reservoir to pre-
vent excessive pressure build-​up in the system and to
NaTure RevIeWS | EArth & EnvirOnment
Reviews
minimize the need for an additional water source. The
risk of induced seismicity affecting infrastructure and
the general public can also be mitigated by injecting CO2
into offshore reservoirs, away from populated areas and
infrastructure that could be affected92.
Groundwater contamination. Another potential risk of
injecting CO2 is groundwater contamination. During
the initial phase of CO2 injection — prior to substan-
tial carbon mineralization — a metal-​rich plume can
form, causing the concentrations of certain elements to
exceed proposed drinking-​water limits. The main metals
of concern are Ni, Al and Cr, but other metals, such as
Fe and Mn, can become toxic to biota at high concen-
trations93. This risk is highest before the precipitation of
carbonate and other secondary minerals, such as clays,
Al-​oxide and Fe-​oxide, and hydroxides, which can scav-
enge potentially toxic metals. The potential of carbonates
to scavenge a metal plume has been described in detail
in studies of natural carbonation during volcanic erup-
tions94,95. Ground contamination is not a major concern
at offshore locations, given the lack of underground
drinking-​water sources.
Advancing carbon mineralization
Deployment of CCS technologies is not yet at the rate
and scale needed to address the current global-​warming
challenge on a global scale. To date, the CarbFix and
Wallula projects are the only examples of field-​scale
demonstrations of mineral carbonation. The results of
these projects have demonstrated the rapid mineraliza-
tion of CO2 when it is injected at rates of ktCO2 per year.
Further upscaling is essential to obtain a more compre-
hensive understanding of the mineralization process
under diverse conditions. There are, however, planned
advances that might help accelerate mineral carbonation
to the global scale necessary to limit atmospheric carbon
concentrations (Fig. 6).
Combining with direct air capture
Favourable conditions for subsurface carbon minerali-
zation (for example, the availability of subsurface reac-
tive rocks) are not equally distributed across the globe.
Therefore, the pairing of large emission sources and suit-
able rock formations may be held back by the long dis-
tances involved and high costs of pipeline infrastructure.
As CO2 mixes rapidly, resulting in approximately equal
atmospheric concentrations everywhere, direct air cap-
ture (DAC) installations could be effective when installed
near suitable reactive rock formations for carbon storage
(Fig. 2) and appropriate energy sources92,96.
DAC technologies capture CO2 directly from the
atmosphere, in contrast to point-​source CCS technol­
ogies, which capture CO2 from more concentrated
industrial streams. In a DAC system, large volumes
of air flow through a filtering unit containing either a
solid or liquid that can selectively remove CO2 from the
atmosphere by processes such as absorption or adsorp-
tion. The resulting concentrated CO2 stream can either
be stored underground or used as a feedstock for indus-
trial applications. DAC may be an important approach
in managing emissions that are challenging or costly to
volume 1 | February 2020 | 97
Reviews

Emission source

CO2
Offshore
Injection injection rigs Cargo ship for
well CO2 transport
Monitoring
well
DAC

H2O Seawater

Dissolved CO2 CO2

H2O
CO2
CO2

Carbonate minerals
Dissolved CO2

Fig. 6 | Advanced carbon-​mineralization operations. Schematic illustrating the design of an industrial CarbFix operation,
offshore injections and the integration of direct air capture (DAC) installations with carbon-​mineralization technology
(on land and offshore). For onshore operations, the CO2 is dissolved in water prior to injection. For offshore injection, the
CO2 is either dissolved in seawater or injected as a separate supercritical phase.

eliminate at the source (such as aeroplane emissions), Moving offshore

and by combining DAC and CCS, it may be possible to
create negative emission pathways during the latter part
of the century5.
DAC technologies are, however, still immature and,
to date, have only been demonstrated on the scale of
ktCO2 per year. The primary limitation in the imple-
mentation of DAC is the high cost, currently estimated
in the range of approximately US$90–900 per tonne of
CO2 (refs84,97). The high cost is mostly due to the energy
requirements, especially the thermal energy required
for CO2 desorption: at present, ~3.4–10.7 GJ of energy
is required for every tonne of CO2 captured84. Strategies
that minimize the thermal requirements of DAC pro-
cesses will be crucial for reducing the operating costs
of these systems, enabling their scale-​up to MtCO2 or
GtCO2 per year. The efficiency of the DAC process is
inevitably directly linked with the CO2 emissions gen-
erated by its energy source; for maximum efficiency,
the energy demand of the DAC process should be sup-
plied by available low-​grade industrial-​waste heat or
low-​CO2-emitting geothermal heat98.
The coupling of DAC and mineral carbonation is
being explored in the CarbFix2 project (which started
in August 2017), and a DAC unit has been installed at
Hellisheiði. The air-​derived CO2 gas stream is then dis-
solved into water, injected and mineralized, achieving a
negative emission pathway98. Scale-​up of this DAC tech-
nology in combination with the CarbFix injection
technology is being explored at various sites in Iceland.
Looking towards the future, the Solid Carbon project in
British Columbia is assessing DAC technologies with
a similar in situ mineralization approach at an offshore
site in the Cascadia Basin on the Juan de Fuca plate99.
The increased storage security of subsurface mineral
storage and, hence, diminished need for monitoring
could enable the coupling of CCS with DAC for carbon
storage in remote locations. For example, it has been pro-
posed that CO2 could be extracted from the atmosphere
using renewable wind energy and coupled to sub-​ocean
basalt storage in a remote offshore environment near
the Kerguelen Islands in the southern Indian Ocean92.
Although increased operational experience under differ-
ent conditions is needed to enable remote operation at a
reasonable cost, upscaling could provide high-​capacity
CO2 storage through in situ mineralization in basalt
reservoirs with low risk of leakage, few environmental
effects and minimal human inconvenience.
Two projects are currently exploring offshore injec-
tion for carbon mineralization. In the north-​eastern
Pacific Ocean, the potential of injecting CO2 into oce-
anic basalts below marine sediments is being assessed
offshore from Washington state and British Columbia.
A pre-​feasibility study was conducted under the US
Department of Energy’s CarbonSAFE programme to
evaluate technical and non-​technical aspects of storing
~50 million tonnes of CO2 at an offshore storage complex
located in the Cascadia Basin99. The study concluded that
there are sufficient reservoir storage capacity, transport
options and CO2 sources to meet such targets. A total of
~40 MtCO2 is generated per year onshore from nearby
stationary sources; this could provide a steady stream
of CO2 to the offshore reservoir, and DAC technology
could be added to these carbon sources. Conditions at
the Cascadia Basin site might favour CO2 injection as a
supercritical fluid, owing to the low risk of degassing at
ocean depths of >800 m.

98 | February 2020 | volume 1 www.nature.com/natrevearthenviron

 Reviews

The CarbFix2 project is preparing for the injection of
CO2 dissolved in seawater into submarine basalts. Initial
results indicate that seawater, despite its high concen-
tration of dissolved elements, is a suitable medium for
carbon mineralization. Its applicability is, however, more
limited than that of fresh water in terms of its temper-
ature and pH range, owing to the formation of various
secondary minerals that could affect the efficiency of
the injection100,101.
Mineral carbonation in other rock types
The chemistry and reactivity of different rock types,
the porosity and permeability of the potential reservoir,
and the pressure and temperature of the reservoir during
CO2 injection all strongly influence the rate of mineral
carbonation reactions32,66,102,103. The most feasible forma-
tions for carbon mineralization are ultramafic and mafic
rocks, owing to their reactivity, and, in the case of basalts,
abundant pore space available for carbon storage.
Other rock formations have the potential for mineral
carbonation, including less reactive rock types, but it is yet
to be established which formations contain high enough
concentrations of the required cations for efficient CCS
through carbon mineralization. The identification of
suitable formations could extend the applicability of the
method already established in basalts and peridotites.
Water capture of impure CO2 gas streams
The most widely applied and mature capture technology
for CCS to date is amine capture, whereby an amine sol-
vent is used to absorb CO2 from flue gas104. The CO2 is
then recovered by heating the solvent and subsequently
compressed and injected. A potential advantage of min-
eral carbonation is the possibility of using water capture
instead of amine capture.
The energy demand for pressurizing pure CO2 gas
is far greater than that for water pressurization (Fig. 5b).
However, the energy demand of any capture process
and, thus, the energy cost depends on the purity of the
CO2 stream. This issue is less significant for the amine-​
capture process, because most of the energy demand
is for supplying heat for CO2 recovery, rather than the
compression of the gas stream104.
The estimated energy required to capture CO2 from
air and from a gas stream containing ≤20% CO2 by water
capture is compared with that required using an amine
solvent in Fig. 7a. In this example, the efficiency of the
water-​capture process, assuming inefficient compression
(80% efficiency) and that some CO2 (20 vol%) remains
in the gas phase after passing through the capture plant,
was set at 64%. This is approximately the efficiency of the
ongoing injection operations at Hellisheiði, Iceland.
The energy cost is based on an average global electricity
price of US$0.13 kWh−1.
These cost estimates depend on the specific infra-
structure requirements and energy prices at potential
storage sites and, thus, could vary considerably from site
to site. However, the energy cost of the capture process is
by far the largest share of the operational cost of any CCS
activity. Therefore, these comparisons serve to illustrate
the applicability of the different capture processes for
dilute CO2 streams (<20 vol%).
The energy cost of the amine-​capture method is
highly dependent on the energy supply for the heat used
to recover the CO2. For gas streams containing <20 vol%
CO2, the energy costs of amine capture are, to date, less
than those for water capture when the energy can be
supplied for free (waste heat) or by using natural gas.
However, when electricity is the only source of energy
for the amine-​capture process, the cost of energy for
water capture is less than that for amine capture for gas
streams containing ≥15 vol% CO2 (Fig. 7a).
The water demand for the water-​capture process
at 30 bar is presented in Fig. 7b. At low CO2 concen-
trations, the water demand is high but decreases with
increasing CO2 concentration. Owing to the low par-
tial pressure of CO2 in air, ~55,000 tonnes of water
would be needed to capture 1 tonne of CO2 from the

a 100,000 13,000 b 100,000

(tonne H2O per tonne CO2)
Cost (US$ per tonne CO2)

Water capture
(kWh per tonne CO2)

Amine capture
Energy demand

Water demand

10,000 1,300 10,000

1,000 130 1,000

100 13 100
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
CO2 concentration (vol%) CO2 concentration (vol%)

Fig. 7 | Water and energy demands of capturing impure CO2 gas streams. a | The estimated energy and cost (in US$)
of CO2 capture from a flue gas stream for two capture methods as a function of the CO2 content of the flue gas. Capture is
either through dissolution into water at a capture pressure of 30 bar or by amine capture104,120 and subsequent compression
to supercritical conditions121. b | The water demand for the water-​capture method as a function of CO2 content. For water
capture, the calculation is based on first pressurizing both the flue gas and sufficient water for dissolution of the CO2
to 30 bar and then mixing to form an equilibrated water–CO2 phase. The calculation was performed assuming ideal
gas behaviour, 80% capture efficiency and 80% compressor efficiency. Ideal gas behaviour was assumed to obtain a
general approximation for any gas mixture. The energy-​demand values used for capturing CO2 from air are for a direct
air capture unit120. The energy demand values used for other CO2 concentrations are based on those for a conventional
amine capture unit104. The amine-​capture calculation was performed assuming 90% capture efficiency, 90% compressor
efficiency and the use of electric boilers as the heat supply for CO2 desorption. An average global energy price of
US$0.13 kWh−1 was used in both calculations. Part a is adapted with permission from ref.104, Elsevier.

NaTure RevIeWS | EArth & EnvirOnment volume 1 | February 2020 | 99

Reviews

atmosphere (which contains ~400 ppm CO2) at 30 bar,
whereas only 22 tonnes are needed to capture 1 tonne
of pure (100%) CO2.
These analyses demonstrate the feasibility of the water-​
capture method: for CO2 streams containing <15 vol%
CO2, amine capture might be a more suitable method,
owing to the lower energy cost and the high water demand
of the alternative capture method. However, the water-​
capture method could be a better option for more concen-
trated (≥15 vol%) CO2 gas streams. The high demand for
water and how it is sourced should be considered; in some
cases, waste water from other processes at a site could be
used. A great advantage of this method is the direct injec-
tion of the CO2-charged water into the subsurface with-
out requiring additional separation or purification steps.
Moreover, this approach enables the co-​injection of other
environmentally important gases, such as H2S (ref.80).
The future of mineral carbonation
Recent advances have positioned in situ mineral carbona-
tion as a viable technology for limiting at least some of the
global anthropogenic CO2 emissions. In cases in which
injection into sedimentary basins is not feasible, in situ
mineral carbonation could offer a safe and economic
alternative. Laboratory and field experiments, specifi-
cally the CarbFix and Wallula projects, have demonstrated
the potential of the method. However, the only ongoing
industrial-​scale injection is at Hellisheiði, Iceland.
Considerable effort is therefore needed to accelerate
the deployment of CO2 storage through mineral carbon-
ation to gain experience of operating such projects under
diverse conditions. Demonstrated successes will further
increase public confidence in the carbon-​mineralization
process and motivate more widespread application of
the method, including the construction of large-​scale
CCS systems.
For example, the long-​term storage security of in situ
mineral carbonation offers the possibility of injection
into offshore locations, where the largest masses of
mafic rocks exist. Storage at such sites could be facili-
tated by pairing DAC with mineral carbon storage and
an appropriate energy source to enable extensive carbon
storage beneath the basaltic ocean floor (Fig. 2). However,
the regulatory framework for offshore storage projects
will depend strongly on the nature and location of the
specific CO2 sources and reservoirs, their corresponding
jurisdictions and the governing laws99,105.
The biggest hurdle in applying in situ carbon miner-
alization on a greater scale is not technological, but the
financial incentive for CCS. The current cost of capturing,
injecting and storing CO2 still exceeds the cost of emit-
ting, leading to the shutdown of many projects before
they were in operation. For example, since the launch
of the European Union’s carbon trading scheme in 2005,
the cost of the rights to emit CO2 in Europe has been
too low to motivate the development and application of
CCS106. This lack of incentive rather than scientific and
technical barriers has resulted in the slow deployment of
CCS technologies.
The rising prices of CO2 emission quotas over the past
2 years (from ~€4.5 in May 2017 to ~€27 per tonne of
CO2 as of 31 June 2019)106 are likely to change the CCS
environment in the near future; the quota price of €27 in
June 2019, for example, is higher than the current on-​site
costs of the CarbFix injection. In the United States, recent
tax legislation provides financial incentives for CO2 stor-
age of up to US$50 per tonne for saline aquifer injection
and up to US$35 per tonne for enhanced oil-​recovery
injection107. Nevertheless, this financial incentive may still
be too low to motivate many new carbon-​storage projects.
The competitive cost of in situ mineral carbonation,
when operated under favourable conditions, compared
with other CCS methods may, however, lead to increased
implementation in the future. In cases in which CO2 is
captured from emission gases by dissolution into water
at the source and the resulting gas-​charged water directly
injected into reactive subsurface rocks, the energy costs
may be substantially reduced compared with alternative
technologies (Fig. 7a). This approach could also provide
additional value by co-​capturing and storing other
acidic gases, such as H2S and SO2, through subsurface
mineralization, as demonstrated at Hellisheiði.
Human CO2 emissions already exceed global silicate
weathering uptake by at least an order of magnitude108.
Although anthropogenic emissions may decrease as
fossil fuels are replaced by renewables, numerous indus-
tries, including the cement and metal industries, cannot
readily avoid carbon emissions. Thus, there is a need
for some form of CCS. The technology and advances
discussed in this Review suggest that carbon minerali-
zation can help to address this issue. To maximize the
potential of mineral carbonation, it will be key to define
the practical constraints on the application of existing
technology (such as rock and gas compositions), to fill
the knowledge gaps in our understanding of the funda-
mental processes underlying efficient mineral carbona-
tion and to streamline the processes to limit their cost.
These advances require road maps for the most proba-
ble reaction paths in natural systems, including studies
of reaction rates of different rock types in the subsurface.
Determining the effect of the composition of the injected
fluid and the potential use of chemicals or catalysts to
alter reaction rates would help to quantify the extent and
consequences of host-​rock carbonation at various sites.
The most prominent options for carbon mineralization
can already be identified, but only through increased
understanding of the limitations and potential of the
method will its wider applicability be realized.
Published online 20 January 2020

1. Blunden, J. & Arndt, D. S. State of the climate
in 2018. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 100, Si–S305
(2019).
2. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Global warming of 1.5°C (IPCC, 2018).
3. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change. Report of the conference of the Parties
on its twenty-​first session, held in Paris from
30 November to 13 December 2015 (UNFCCC,
2016).
4. International Energy Agency. World energy outlook
2017 (IEA, 2017).
5. Rogelj, J. et al. in Global warming of 1.5°C. Ch. 2
(IPCC, 2018).
6. Global CCS Institute. The global status of CCS 2018
(Global CCS Institute, 2018).
7. Benson, S. et al. in IPCC Special Report on Carbon
Dioxide Capture and Storage (eds Metz, B. et al.)
Ch. 5 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).
8. Alcalde, J. et al. Estimating geological CO2 storage
security to deliver on climate mitigation. Nat. Commun.
9, 2201 (2018).
9. Seifritz, W. CO2 disposal by means of silicates. Nature
345, 486–490 (1990).

100 | February 2020 | volume 1 www.nature.com/natrevearthenviron


10. Lackner, K., Wendt, C. H., Butt, D. P., Joyce, E. L. &
Sharp, D. H. Carbon dioxide disposal in carbonate
minerals. Energy 20, 1153–1170 (1995).
11. Sigfusson, B. et al. Solving the carbon-​dioxide
buoyancy challenge: the design and field testing
of a dissolved CO2 injection system. Int. J. Greenh.
Gas Control 37, 213–219 (2015).
12. Matter, J. M. et al. Rapid carbon mineralization for
permanent disposal of anthropogenic carbon dioxide
emissions. Science 352, 1312–1314 (2016).
Reports on the results from the rapid
mineralization of the CarbFix pilot injection.
13. Goldberg, D. S., Kent, D. V. & Olsen, P. E. Potential
on-​shore and off-​shore reservoirs for CO2 sequestration
in Central Atlantic magmatic province basalts.
Proc. Natl Acad. Sci.USA 107, 1327–1332 (2010).
14. Goldberg, D. S., Takahashi, T. & Slagle, A. L. Carbon
dioxide sequestration in deep-​sea basalt. Proc. Natl
Acad. Sci. USA 105, 9920–9925 (2008).
15. Ellis, A. J. The solubility of calcite in carbon dioxide
solutions. Am. J. Sci. 257, 354–365 (1959).
16. Ellis, A. J. The solubility of calcite in sodium chloride
solutions at high temperatures. Am. J. Sci. 261,
259–267 (1963).
17. Saldi, G. D., Jordan, G., Schott, J. & Oelkers, E. H.
Magnesite growth rates as a function of temperature
and saturation state. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 73,
5646–5657 (2009).
18. Johnson, N. C. et al. Olivine dissolution and
carbonation under conditions relevant for in situ
carbon storage. Chem. Geol. 373, 93–105 (2014).
19. Gadikota, G., Matter, J., Kelemen, P. & Park, A. H.
Chemical and morphological changes during olivine
carbonation for CO2 storage in the presence of
NaCl and NaHCO3. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 16,
4679–4693 (2014).
20. Turvey, C. C. et al. Hydrotalcites and hydrated
Mg-​carbonates as carbon sinks in serpentinite
mineral wastes from the Woodsreef chrysotile mine,
New South Wales, Australia: controls on carbonate
mineralogy and efficiency of CO2 air capture in mine
tailings. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 79, 38–60
(2018).
21. Rogers, K. L., Neuhoff, P. S., Pedersen, A. K. &
Bird, D. K. CO2 metasomatism in a basalt-​hosted
petroleum reservoir, Nuussuaq, West Greenland.
Lithos 92, 55–82 (2006).
22. Gysi, A. P. & Stefánsson, A. CO2-water–basalt
interaction. Low temperature experiments and
implications for CO2 sequestration into basalts.
Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 81, 129–152 (2012).
23. McGrail, B. P. et al. Field validation of supercritical
CO2 reactivity with basalts. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett.
4, 6–10 (2017).
Reports the results from the rapid carbonation
during the Wallula pilot injection.
24. Snæbjörnsdóttir, S. Ó. et al. CO2 storage potential
of basaltic rocks in Iceland and the oceanic ridges.
Energy Procedia 63, 4585–4600 (2014).
25. Gysi, A. P. & Stefánsson, A. CO2–water–basalt
interaction. Numerical simulation of low temperature
CO2 sequestration into basalts. Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 75, 4728–4751 (2011).
26. Voigt, M., Pearce, C. R., Baldermann, A. &
Oelkers, E. H. Stable and radiogenic strontium
isotope fractionation during hydrothermal seawater-​
basalt interaction. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 240,
131–151 (2018).
27. Snæbjörnsdóttir, S. Ó., Gislason, S. R., Galeczka, I. M.
& Oelkers, E. H. Reaction path modelling of in-​situ
mineralisation of CO2 at the CarbFix site at Hellisheidi,
SW-​Iceland. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 220,
348–366 (2018).
28. Godard, M., Luquot, L., Andreani, M. & Gouze, P.
Incipient hydration of mantle lithosphere at ridges:
a reactive-​percolation experiment. Earth Planet.
Sci. Lett. 371, 92–102 (2013).
29. Kelemen, P. B. & Hirth, G. Reaction-​driven cracking
during retrograde metamorphism: Olivine hydration
and carbonation. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 345, 81–89
(2012).
30. Zhu, W. L. et al. Experimental evidence of reaction-​
induced fracturing during olivine carbonation.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 9535–9543 (2016).
31. Clark, D. E. et al. The chemistry and potential
reactivity of the CO2-H2S charged injected waters at
the basaltic CarbFix2 site, Iceland. Energy Procedia
146, 121–128 (2018).
32. Wolff-​Boenisch, D., Gislason, S. R. & Oelkers, E. H.
The effect of crystallinity on dissolution rates and
CO2 consumption capacity of silicates. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta 70, 858–870 (2006).
NaTure RevIeWS | EArth & EnvirOnment
33. Dessert, C., Dupre, B., Gaillardet, J., Francois, L. M.
& Allegre, C. J. Basalt weathering laws and the impact
of basalt weathering on the global carbon cycle.
Chem. Geol. 202, 257–273 (2003).
Assesses the natural weathering potential of
basalts worldwide and their contribution to the
carbon cycle.
34. Kappel, E. S. & Ryan, W. B. F. Volcanic episodicity
and a non-​steady state rift valley along northeast
Pacific spreading centers: evidence from Sea MARC I.
J. Geophys. Res. 91, 13925–13940 (1986).
35. Karson, J. A. Geologic structure of the uppermost
oceanic crust created at fast-​to intermediate-​rate
spreading centers. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 30,
347–384 (2002).
36. Alt, J. C. & Teagle, D. A. H. The uptake of carbon
during alteration of ocean crust. Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 63, 1527–1535 (1999).
37. Coogan, L. A., Parrish, R. & Roberts, N. M. W. Early
hydrothermal carbon uptake by the upper oceanic
crust: insight from in-​situ U-​Pb dating. Geology 44,
147–150 (2016).
38. Wiese, F., Fridriksson, T. & Ármannsson, H. CO2
Fixation by calcite in high-​temperature geothermal
systems in Iceland (ÍSOR, 2008).
39. Marieni, C., Henstock, T. J. & Teagle, D. A. H.
Geological storage of CO2 within the oceanic crust
by gravitational trapping. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40,
6219–6224 (2013).
40. Callow, B., Falcon-​Suarez, I., Ahmed, S. & Matter, J. M.
Assessing the carbon sequestration potential of basalt
using X-​ray micro-​CT and rock mechanics. Int. J. Greenh.
Gas Control 70, 146–156 (2018).
41. McGrail, B. P. et al. Potential for carbon dioxide
sequestration in flood basalts. J. Geophys. Res. 111,
B12201 (2006).
42. Kelemen, P. B. & Matter, J. M. In situ carbonation of
peridotite for CO2 storage. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA
105, 17295–17300 (2008).
Reviews the carbonation of peridotites and their
potential for CO2 storage.
43. Hansen, L. D., Dipple, G. M., Gordon, T. M. &
Kellett, D. A. Carbonated serpentinite (listwanite)
at Atlin, British Columbia: a geological analogue to
carbon dioxide sequestration. Can. Mineral. 43,
225–239 (2005).
44. Wilson, S. A. et al. Carbon dioxide fixation within
mine wastes of ultramafic-​hosted ore deposits:
examples from the Clinton Creek and Cassiar
chrysotile deposits, Canada. Economic Geol. 104,
95–112 (2009).
45. Wilson, S. A. et al. Offsetting of CO2 emissions by air
capture in mine tailings at the Mount Keith Nickel Mine,
Western Australia: Rates, controls and prospects for
carbon neutral mining. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 25,
121–140 (2014).
46. Oskierski, H. C., Dlugogorski, B. Z. & Jacobsen, G.
Sequestration of atmospheric CO2 in chrysotile mine
tailings of the Woodsreef Asbestos Mine, Australia:
quantitative mineralogy, isotopic fingerprinting and
carbonation rates. Chem. Geol. 358, 156–169
(2013).
47. Power, I. M. et al. in Geochemistry of Geologic CO2
Sequestration Vol. 77 Ch. 9 (eds DePaolo, D. J.,
Cole, D. R., Navrotsky, A. & Bourg, I. C.) 305–360
(Mineralogical Society of America, 2013).
Reviews all aspects of carbon mineralization.
48. Marini, L. Geological Sequestration of Carbon
Dioxide: Thermodynamics, Kinetics, and Reaction
Path Modeling (Elsevier, 2007).
A compilation of the theoretical background
of CO2 storage.
49. Blum, A. E. & Lasaga, A. C. Role or surface speciation
in the low-​temperature dissolution of minerals. Nature
331, 431–433 (1988).
50. Oelkers, E. H. An experimental study of forsterite
dissolution rates as a function of temperature and
aqueous Mg and Si concentrations. Chem. Geol. 175,
485–494 (2001).
51. Pokrovsky, O. S. & Schott, J. Kinetics and mechanism
of forsterite dissolution at 25°C and pH from 1 to 12.
Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 64, 3313–3325 (2000).
52. Rosso, J. J. & Rimstidt, J. D. A high resolution study
of forsterite dissolution rates. Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 64, 797–811 (2000).
53. Golubev, S. V., Pokovsky, O. S. & Schott, J. Experimental
determination of the effect of dissolved CO2 on the
dissolution kinetics of Mg and Ca silicates at 25 °C.
Chem. Geol. 217, 227–238 (2005).
54. Olsen, A. A. & Rimstidt, J. D. Oxalate-​promoted
forsterite dissolution at low pH. Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 72, 1758–1766 (2008).
Reviews
55. Brantley, S. L. & Chen, Y. in Chemical Weathering
Rates of Silicate Minerals Vol. 85 (eds White, A. F.
& Brantley S. L.) 1767–1783 (Mineralogical Society
of America, 1995).
56. Carroll, S. A. & Knauss, K. G. Dependence of labradorite
dissolution kinetics on CO2(aq), Al(aq), and temperature.
Chem. Geol. 217, 213–225 (2005).
57. Metz, V., Amram, K. & Ganor, J. Stoichiometry of
smectite dissolution reaction. Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 69, 1755–1772 (2005).
58. Oelkers, E. H. & Cole, D. R. Carbon dioxide
sequestration: a solution to a global problem. Elements
4, 305–310 (2008).
59. Kampman, N., Bickle, M., Becker, J., Assayag, N.
& Chapman, H. Feldspar dissolution kinetics and
Gibbs free energy dependence in a CO2-enriched
groundwater system, Green River, Utah. Earth Planet.
Sci. Lett. 284, 473–488 (2009).
60. Pham, V. T. H., Lu, P., Aagaard, P., Zhu, C. &
Hellevang, H. On the potential of CO2–water–rock
interactions for CO2 storage using a modified kinetic
model. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 5, 1002–1015
(2010).
61. Munz, I. A. et al. Mechanisms and rates of plagioclase
carbonation reactions. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 77,
27–51 (2012).
62. Hellevang, H., Pham, V. T. H. & Aagaard, P. Kinetic
modelling of CO2–water–rock interactions. Int. J.
Greenh. Gas Control 15, 3–15 (2013).
63. Gudbrandsson, S., Wolff-​Boenisch, D., Gislason, S. R.
& Oelkers, E. H. Experimental determination of
plagioclase dissolution rates as a function of its
composition and pH at 22°C. Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 139, 154–172 (2014).
64. Gislason, S. R. & Oelkers, E. H. Mechanism, rates,
and consequences of basaltic glass dissolution: II. An
experimental study of the dissolution rates of basaltic
glass as a function of pH and temperature. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta 67, 3817–3832 (2003).
65. Oelkers, E. H. & Gislason, S. R. The mechanism,
rates and consequences of basaltic glass dissolution: I.
An experimental study of the dissolution rates of
basaltic glass as a function of aqueous Al, Si and
oxalic acid concentration at 25°C and pH = 3 and 11.
Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 65, 3671–3681 (2001).
66. Wolff-​Boenisch, D., Gislason, S. R., Oelkers, E. H. &
Putnis, C. V. The dissolution rates of natural glasses as
a function of their composition at pH 4 and 10.6, and
temperatures from 25 to 74°C. Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 68, 4843–4858 (2004).
67. Rimstidt, J. D., Brantley, S. L. & Olsen, A. A. Systematic
review of forsterite dissolution rate data. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta 99, 159–178 (2012).
68. Giammar, D. E., Bruant, R. G. & Peters, C. A.
Forsterite dissolution and magnesite precipitation
at conditions relevant for deep saline aquifer storage
and sequestration of carbon dioxide. Chem. Geol.
217, 257–276 (2005).
69. Power, I. M., Kenward, P. A., Dipple, G. M. &
Raudsepp, M. Room temperature magnesite
precipitation. Cryst. Growth Des. 17, 5652–5659
(2017).
70. Hänchen, M., Prigobbe, V., Baciocchi, R. & Mazzotti, M.
Precipitation in the Mg-​carbonate system — effects
of temperature and CO2 pressure. Chem. Eng. Sci. 63,
1012–1028 (2008).
71. Qafoku, O. et al. Formation of submicron magnesite
during reaction of natural forsterite in H2O-​saturated
supercritical CO2. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 134,
197–209 (2014).
72. Maroto-​Valer, M. M., Fauth, D. J., Kuchta, M. E.,
Zhang, Y. & Andrésen, J. M. Activation of magnesium
rich minerals as carbonation feedstock materials
for CO2 sequestration. Fuel Process. Technol. 86,
1627–1645 (2005).
73. Gislason, S. R., Veblen, D. R. & Livi, K. J. T. Experimental
meteoric water-​basalt interactions: characterization
and interpretation of alteration products. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta. 57, 1459–1471 (1993).
74. Xiong, W. et al. CO2 mineral trapping in fractured
basalt. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 66, 204–217
(2017).
75. Harrison, A. L., Tutolo, B. M. & DePaolo, D. J.
The role of reactive transport modelling in geologic
carbon storage. Elements 15, 93–98 (2019).
76. Aradóttir, E. S. P., Sonnenthal, E. L., Björnsson, G.
& Jónsson, H. Multidimensional reactive transport
modeling of CO2 mineral sequestration in basalts at
the Hellisheidi geothermal field, Iceland. Int. J. Greenh.
Gas Control 9, 24–40 (2012).
77. Snæbjörnsdóttir, S. Ó. et al. The chemistry and
saturation states of subsurface fluids during the in situ
volume 1 | February 2020 | 101
Reviews
mineralisation of CO2 and H2S at the CarbFix site in
SW-​Iceland. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 58, 87–102
(2017).
78. Pogge von Strandmann, P. A. E. et al. Rapid CO2
mineralisation into calcite at the CarbFix storage site
quantified using calcium isotopes. Nat. Commun. 10,
1983 (2019).
79. Trias, R. et al. High reactivity of deep biota under
anthropogenic CO2 injection into basalt. Nat. Commun.
8, 1063 (2017).
80. Gunnarsson, I. et al. The rapid and cost-​effective
capture and subsurface mineral storage of carbon and
sulfur at the CarbFix2 site. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control
79, 117–126 (2018).
81. Sigfússon, B. et al. Reducing emissions of carbon
dioxide and hydrogen sulphide at Hellisheidi power
plant in 2014–2017 and the role of CarbFix in
achieving the 2040 Iceland climate goals. Energy
Procedia 146, 135–145 (2018).
82. McGrail, B. P., Spane, F. A., Amonette, J. E.,
Thompson, C. R. & Brown, C. F. Injection and
monitoring at the Wallula basalt pilot project. Energy
Procedia 63, 2939–2948 (2014).
83. McGrail, B. P. et al. Wallula Basalt Pilot demonstration
project: post-​injection results and conclusions. Energy
Procedia 114, 5783–5790 (2017).
84. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
and Medicine. Negative emissions technologies and
reliable sequestration: a research agenda (National
Academies Press, 2018).
A comprehensive review on carbon mineralization
prepared by the US National Academy of Sciences.
85. Zakharova, N. V., Goldberg, D. S., Sullivan, E. C.,
Herron, M. M. & Grau, J. A. Petrophysical and
geochemical properties of Columbia River flood
basalt: implications for carbon sequestration.
Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 13, Q11001 (2012).
86. Weingarten, M., Ge, S., Godt, J. W., Bekins, B. A. &
Rubinstein, J. L. High-​rate injection is associated with
the increase in US mid-​continent seismicity. Science
348, 1336–1340 (2015).
87. Thorsteinsson, H. & Gunnarsson, G. Induced seismicity
– stakeholder engagement in Iceland. GRC Trans. 38,
879–882 (2014).
88. Juncu, D. et al. Injection-​induced surface deformation
and seismicity at the Hellisheidi geothermal field,
Iceland. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2018.03.019 (2018).
89. Zoback, M. D. & Gorelick, S. M. Earthquake triggering
and large-​scale geologic storage of carbon dioxide.
Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 10164–10168
(2012).
90. Aradóttir, E. S. & Hjálmarsson, E. CarbFix – public
engagement and transparency. Energy Procedia 146,
115–120 (2018).
91. Eiken O. in Geophysics and Geosequestration (eds
Davis, T. L., Landrø, M. & Wilson, M.) 209–234
(Cambridge Univ. Press, 2019).
92. Goldberg, D. S., Lackner, K. S., Han, P., Slagle, A. L.
& Wang, T. Co-​location of air capture, subseafloor CO2
sequestration, and energy production on the Kerguelen
plateau. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 7521–7529
(2013).
93. World Health Organization. Guidelines for drinking-​
water quality, 4th edition (WHO, 2011).
94. Flaathen, T. K., Gislason, S. R., Oelkers, E. H. &
Sveinbjörnsdóttir, Á. E. Chemical evolution of the
102 | February 2020 | volume 1 www.nature.com/natrevearthenviron
Mt. Hekla, Iceland, groundwaters: a natural analogue
for CO2 sequestration in basaltic rocks. Appl. Geochem.
24, 463–474 (2009).
95. Olsson, J., Stipp, S. L. S., Makovicky, E. & Gislason, S. R.
Metal scavenging by calcium carbonate at the
Eyjafjallajökull volcano: a carbon capture and storage
analogue. Chem. Geol. 384, 135–148 (2014).
96. Goldberg, D. & Lackner, K. Creating negative emissions
at remote CO2 sequestration sites. Greenh. Gas Sci.
Technol. 5, 238–240 (2015).
97. Keith, D. W., Holmes, G., St. Angelo, D. & Heidel, K.
A process for capturing CO2 from the atmosphere.
Joule 2, 1573–1594 (2018).
98. Gutknecht, V., Snæbjörnsdóttir, S. Ó., Sigfússon, B.,
Aradóttir, E. S. & Charles, L. Creating a carbon dioxide
removal solution by combining rapid mineralization
of CO2 with direct air capture. Energy Procedia 146,
129–134 (2018).
99. Goldberg, D. et al. Geological storage of CO2 in
sub-​seafloor basalt: the CarbonSAFE pre-​feasibility
study offshore Washington State and British Columbia.
Energy Procedia 146, 158–165 (2018).
100. Wolff-​Boenisch, D. On the buffer capacity of CO2-
charged seawater used for carbonation and subsequent
mineral sequestration. Energy Procedia 4,
3738–3745 (2011).
101. Luhmann, A. J. et al. Whole rock basalt alteration from
CO2-rich brine during flow-​through experiments at
150°C and 150 bar. Chem. Geol. 453, 92–110 (2017).
102. Schaef, H. T., McGrail, B. P. & Owen, A. T. Carbonate
mineralisation of volcanic province basalts. Int. J.
Greenh. Gas Control 4, 249–261 (2010).
103. Aradóttir, E. S. P., Sonnenthal, E. L. & Jónsson, H.
Development and evaluation of a thermodynamic
dataset for phases of interest in CO2 mineral
sequestration in basaltic rocks. Chem. Geol. 304–305,
26–38 (2012).
104. Husebye, J., Brunsvold, A. L., Roussanaly, S. &
Zhang, X. Techno economic evaluation of amine based
CO2 capture: impact of CO2 concentration and steam
supply. Energy Procedia 23, 381–390 (2012).
105. Webb, R. M. & Gerrard, M. B. Overcoming impediments
to offshore carbon dioxide storage: legal issues in the
U.S. and Canada. Environ. Law Rep. 49, ELR10634
(2019).
106. European Commission. Report from the Commission
to the European Parliament and the Council. Report
on the functioning of the European carbon market
(European Commission, 2019).
107. Folger, P. Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) in
the United States (Congressional Research Service,
2018).
108. Gaillardet, J., Dupré, B., Louvat, P. & Allégre, C. J.
Global silicate weathering and CO2 consumption
rates deduced from the chemistry of the large rivers.
Chem. Geol. 159, 3–30 (1999).
109. Sanna, A., Uibu, M., Carmanna, G., Kuusik, R. &
Maroto-​Valer, M. M. A review of mineral carbonation
technologies to sequester CO2. Chem. Soc. Rev. 43,
8049–8080 (2014).
Reviews the potential of in situ and ex situ storage
through mineral carbonation.
110. Mervine, E. M. et al. Potential for offsetting diamond
mine carbon emissions through mineral carbonation of
processed kimberlite: an assessment of De Beers mine
sites in South Africa and Canada. Mineral. Petrol. 112,
755–765 (2018).
111. Harrison, A. L., Power, I. M. & Dipple, G. M. Accelerated
carbonation of brucite in mine tailings for carbon
sequestration. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 126–134
(2012).
112. Power, I. M. et al. Strategizing carbon-​neutral mines:
a case for pilot projects. Minerals 4, 399–436 (2014).
113. Hartmann, J. & Moosdorf, N. The new global
lithological map database GLiM: a representation
of rock properties at the Earth surface. Geochem.
Geophys. Geosyst. 13, Q12004 (2012).
114. Whittaker, J. M. et al. Long-​term interaction between
mid-​ocean ridges and mantle plumes. Nat. Geosci. 8,
479–483 (2015).
115. Müller, R. D. et al. Ocean basin evolution and
global-​scale plate reorganization events since Pangea
breakup. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 44, 107–138
(2016).
116. Johansson, L., Zahirovic, S. & Müller, R. D. The
interplay between the eruption and weathering of
Large Igneous Provinces and the deep-​time carbon
cycle. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 5380–5389 (2018).
117. Bales, R. C. & Morgan, J. J. Dissolution kinetics of
chrysotile at pH 7 to 10. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta
49, 2281–2288 (1985).
118. Gudbrandsson, S., Wolff-​Boenisch, D., Gislason, S. R.
& Oelkers, E. H. An experimental study of crystalline
basalt dissolution from 2 ≤ pH ≤ 11 and temperatures
from 5 to 75°C. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 75,
5496–5509 (2011).
119. Critelli, T. et al. Dissolution rates of actinolite and
chlorite from a whole-​rock experimental study of
metabasalt dissolution from 2 ≤ pH ≤ 12 at 25°C.
Chem. Geol. 390, 100–108 (2014).
120. Gebald, C., Repond, N. & Wurzbacher, J. A. Steam
assisted vacuum desorption process for carbon dioxide
capture. US Patent 2017/0203249 (2015).
121. Jackson, S. & Brodal, E. A comparison of the energy
consumption for CO2 compression process alternatives.
IOP Conf. Ser. 167, 012031 (2018).
Acknowledgements
S.Ó.S., B.S., C.M., S.R.G. and E.H.O. work on the CarbFix
project funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agree­
ment 764760 (CarbFix2), 818169 (GECO) and 764810
(S4CE). D.G. works on the Solid Carbon project funded
by the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions. The authors
thank E.S. Aradóttir Pind, R.B. Bragadóttir, K. Helgason,
M. Voigt and R. Þrastarson for discussions and assistance
in developing Fig. 2.
Author contributions
The authors contributed equally to all aspects of the article.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests
Peer review information
Nature Reviews Earth & Environment thanks G. Gadikota and
the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the
peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
© Springer Nature Limited 2020