Sweden has set a goal to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045, as per Sweden’s Climate Act and Climate Policy Framework, which defines net zero GHG emissions as a balance between residual emissions excluding the LULUCF sector and so-called supplementary measures, such as increased carbon sequestration by forests, verified emissions reductions carried out outside of Sweden, and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS).

Note: In its 2024 yearly report, the Swedish Climate Council found that Sweden was not on track to reach its 2030 and 2045 climate targets.

Sweden’s Climate Act and Climate Policy Framework sets out binding milestone targets for 2020, 2030 and 2040 – of 40%, 63% and 75% lower than 1990 GHG emissions respectively. These targets only apply to sectors covered by the EU Effort Sharing Regulation, such as buildings and transport.

The Climate Act mandates the Swedish Government to design a climate policy action plan every four years describing how the climate targets will be met.

In the 2023 government climate action plan, the government specifies that “supplementary measures” (which include but are not limited to CDR) can contribute up to 8% of the 2030 target and 2% of the 2040 target.

The action plan also sets an emission reduction target for the domestic transport sector (excluding domestic aviation) of 70% by 2030 compared to 2010 emissions.

Stemming from the EU Effort Sharing Regulation and LULUCF Regulation, Sweden also has national targets for 2030 for sectors covered by the two regulations.

Under the European Climate Law, the EU as a whole must reduce its emissions by 55% by 2030. This commitment is reflected in the EU’s Nationally Determined Contribution to the Paris Agreement.

Sweden’s Climate Act and Climate Policy Framework stipulates that Sweden needs to reduce its GHG emissions by at least 85% in order to reach its net zero GHG emissions target by 2045. The remaining 15% can be attained through additional measures, namely increased carbon sequestration by forests, verified emissions reductions initiatives carried out outside of Sweden, and BECCS. Given that this 15% includes emission reduction and CDR, it cannot be counted as a fully-fledged separate target. Additional measures should be strictly separated between emission reduction and CDR activities to provide a CDR target.

Sweden’s Climate Act and Climate Policy Framework does not set distinct targets for LULUCF removals and permanent removals

Sweden has a legally binding LULUCF target for 2030 through the EU LULUCF Regulation, to deliver an additional net removal capacity of 3.9 MtCO2 by 2030. Achieving this target would bring Sweden’s total LULUCF CDR target for 2030 to 47 MtCO2 per year. Under the regulation, Sweden must increase its net LULUCF removal capacity to -47 MtCO2 per year in 2030. Additionally, Sweden must develop an additional net removal capacity of at least 3.9 MtCO2 by 2030.

A 2020 public inquiry proposed that BECCS deliver up to 1.8 MtCO2/year by 2030 and, indicatively, 3-10 MtCO2/year by 2045. This report also estimated a feasible potential for BECCS of at least 10 MtCO2/year in 2045, and a technical potential of twice this amount. The technical potential was based on point sources of pure biogenic CO2 above a threshold value (>500KtCO2/year). The feasible potential took cost estimates into account. However, the cost data are outdated and, therefore, the feasible potential should only be considered a rough estimate.

Sweden’s Climate Act and Climate Policy states that Sweden must achieve net negative emissions after 2045. There is no quantified target for this in terms of total net removals in law or in policy documents.

At the EU level, the latest version of the European Climate Law states that the EU as a whole shall reach climate neutrality by 2050, and aim for net negative emissions thereafter, establishing the legal basis to introduce a quantified net negative target in the future.

In the case of Sweden, the net negative target covers only sectors under the Effort Sharing Regulation and EU Emission Trading System, while the EU target covers emissions from ESR, ETS and LULUCF sectors.

Biomass sustainability

The main law that regulates biomass use in Sweden is the Act on Sustainability Criteria, which transposes the EU Renewable Energy Directive into Swedish law. This Act is currently being amended to include the latest changes to the EU Renewable Energy Directive, adopted in 2023. Complementing the Act, the Swedish Government’s Ordinance on Sustainability Criteria contains slightly more detailed rules on biomass use than the Act on Sustainability Criteria. Finally, the Swedish Energy Agency developed the Regulation on Sustainability Criteria, which provides further binding requirements on sustainability criteria, GHG calculation and reporting requirements. The Swedish Energy Agency also published guidance on how these regulations should be interpreted and applied.

In its final updated National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP), Sweden indicated that the use of bioenergy for energy production is expected to decrease slightly until 2025 and remain stable until the 2040s, which means that BECCS potentials will remain constant. Sweden has indicated that net removals in the LULUCF sector are not expected to be significantly affected by the harvesting of biomass for other uses, especially by the use of biofuels.

Mitigation deterrence

Sweden’s Climate Act and Climate Policy Framework puts the focus first on reducing emissions, indicating that it seeks to reduce emissions across society.

Note: Mitigation deterrence is explained in a separate report by Carbon Gap.

Like-for-like principle

Given that the share of permanent removals within the Swedish supplementary measures is not clearly defined, it is hard to assess whether the like-for-like principle will be met in Sweden. Given that fossil emissions still account for quite a large share of Sweden’s emissions, a target for permanent CDR, such as BECCS, should cover all remaining fossil emissions by 2045.

Note: The like-for-like principle is a precondition to reach a state of durable net zero, in which all fossil GHG emissions are compensated by durable removals.

At the EU level, the Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming Framework (CRCF), an EU-wide certification mechanism, entered into force in November 2024. Methodologies for each CDR method will be developed by the EU Commission, and will be applicable across EU member states.

During the negotiations on the CRCF, Sweden pushed for a clear distinction between more and less durable CDR methods.

At the EU level, the Green Claims Directive, combined with the Directive on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition, is expected provide a comprehensive framework for climate-related claims, including what is defined as a compensation claim.

Stemming from the EU Climate Law, only land-based removals from the LULUCF sector can be accounted for in the Swedish national inventory, and reported in Sweden’s contribution towards the EU nationally determined contribution (NDC).

BECCS can be reported under the Effort Sharing Regulation, but not accounted for towards national emissions targets set by the Regulation, as per new guidelines by the European Commission.

Furthermore, the CRCF states that all certified units should count towards the EU’s NDC. However, inclusion in the NDC might not take place prior to the IPCC’s methodology report is published in 2027, which will provide guidance as to how durable CDR should be accounted for.

As part of Sweden’s reverse auction scheme for BECCS, the Swedish Energy Agency (SEA) was tasked by the Swedish Government to clarify how the negative emissions generated thanks to the scheme should be reported and accounted for. The Agency advised the Government to have all the negative emissions count towards Sweden’s national climate goals and nationally determined contribution (NDC) within the EU and Paris Agreement frameworks. The SEA also advises that credits should be allowed to be sold on the voluntary carbon market. In this instance, the seller of credits would be required to inform the buyer that the buyer cannot use the credits to compensate for their emissions, as it would raise a double-claiming issue.

No clear international rule or best practice have yet been established regarding how countries should manage this issue.

The CRCF states that by 31 July 2026, the Commission needs to assess whether the CRCF and Article 6 of the Paris Agreement could be aligned. This would mean that Article 6 credits would be eligible to become CRCF units. For now, the EU’s NDC and its targets set in the European Climate Law are to be achieved only through domestic measures.

However, Sweden also expressed its intention to establish collaborations under Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement. It has already signed memorandums of understanding with Nepal, the Dominican Republic, Rwanda and Zambia.

The Swedish Energy Agency’s Article 6 programme for buying credits from international projects is currently financed with SEK 1.5 billion (EUR 126 million) until 2032, which could also target carbon removal projects.

In its position on the EU-CRCF, the Swedish government has stated its support for alignment between the CRCF and Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, ensuring the same levels of requirements for sustainability criteria.

Together with Switzerland, Sweden is also pioneering the exchange of durable CDR under Article 6.2 as part of a memorandum of understanding signed in 2023.

Key instruments relevant to CO₂ transport and storage in Sweden include:

• The Swedish Environmental Code
• Ordinance 2014:21 on geological storage of CO₂
• Ordinance 2018:1326 amending ordinance 2014:21
• Environmental Assessment Ordinance (2013:251)
• Act (1978:160) on certain pipelines

(a) Legality of CO₂ transport and storage

Chapter 15 of the Swedish Environmental Code allows for CO₂ storage within Swedish territory and designated areas of the Swedish continental shelf, as set out by national regulations. The Ordinance on Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide (2018:1326) includes provisions on storage operations, establishing clear criteria for areas eligible for CO₂ storage, particularly through permitting and the supervisory oversight of CO₂ injection and containment.

Sweden is also subject to the EU TEN-E Regulation, which provides the regulatory framework for establishing transnational CO₂ storage networks within the EU. Cross-border transport and storage projects are addressed under Swedish law with the requirement for collaboration with the regulatory authorities of other affected EU states, supporting alignment with EU-wide standards for cross-border carbon management.

Through the Industrial Carbon Management Strategy, the EU signalled the upcoming development of a dedicated regulatory package for CO₂ transport to cover remaining gaps in the CO₂ transport legal framework, including coordination between the many actors in the CCS value chain, and standards for CO₂ purity.

Liability for CO₂ storage

The Swedish Environmental Code and the Ordinance on Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide establish the liability framework for operators involved in CO₂ storage. Operators are obligated to prove they can maintain a position of financial security throughout the full lifetime of the storage site until responsibility is transferred to the supervisory authority – typically 20 years after closure, unless an earlier transfer is justified (Ordinance 2019:296, §38). Operators must demonstrate the ability to cover the costs of monitoring, remediation and potential damages, ensuring that any risks or failures are mitigated.

Should CO₂ leaks or other issues arise post-transfer due to negligence, lack of compliance or misrepresentation by the operator, liability provisions under paragraph 68 place responsibility for costs and remediation on the operator. This provision supports long-term accountability and stability within Swedish CO₂ storage operations.

Environmental safety and remediation

The EU Environmental Liability Directive provides an EU-wide liability framework for environmental damages, including those induced by geological CO₂ storage sites. The Directive has primarily been transposed through the Swedish Environmental Code.

Environmental safety and long-term site monitoring are central to the Swedish framework for CO₂ storage. Under the Ordinance, operators are required to implement comprehensive monitoring plans (§42) that include assessment of CO₂ behaviour, containment verification, and detection of any significant effects on human health and the environment. Annual inspections are mandated for three years following site closure, transitioning to a five-year interval until the transfer of responsibility is completed.

The Environmental Code’s Chapter 26 provisions on environmental reporting require operators to submit detailed environmental reports covering monitoring outcomes, a list of injected CO₂ streams, and verification of financial security.

London Protocol

Sweden is one of the few countries that has ratified the London Protocol’s amendment to Article 6, provisionally allowing contracting parties to transport CO₂ for geological storage across maritime borders, under the condition that an arrangement is in place between the countries concerned. It also signed memorandums of understanding with Norway and Denmark in this regard. As Sweden does not have any ongoing permitting applications for geological CO₂ storage sites, facilities planning to capture and remove CO₂ in Sweden will need to use storage sites abroad. Therefore, agreements under the London Protocol are a key requirement to enable projects in Sweden.

In 2022, the European Commission released guidance on understanding the amendment to Article 6 of the London Protocol. It concluded that the EU legal framework is well aligned with the London Protocol requirements and that the EU CCS Directive and the EU ETS Directive acted as a sufficient “arrangement” between countries in the European Economic Area (EEA). Therefore, according to the Commission, there is no need for bilateral agreements to implement the amendment to Article 6 of the Protocol. Bilateral agreements could be concluded only on issues not covered by the two directives.

(b) Legal framework covering all types of CO₂

The EU ETS Directive only recognises fossil CO₂ under its scope, as it only puts a price on emissions of fossil CO₂.

The TEN-E Regulation does not explicitly recognise all types of CO₂, causing confusion regarding whether projects transporting and storing biogenic and atmospheric CO2 can be labelled as Projects of Common Interest or not.

Sweden’s CCS programme, including the Industriklivet programme and the CCS Centre, considers fossil and biogenic CCS. The support system (reversed BECCS auction scheme) only considers biogenic CO₂.

Note: In the context of carbon management, there are three main types of CO₂, depending on their sources: atmospheric, biogenic and fossil CO₂. Atmospheric CO₂ is generally sourced from direct air capture, biogenic CO₂ from bio-energy with carbon capture and fossil CO₂ by point-source carbon capture in industrial facilities burning fossil fuels. Legal frameworks must cover all types of CO₂ to ensure equal access to CO₂ transport and storage infrastructure.

(a) Physical storage capacities

Geological storage

So far, Sweden has not carried out a comprehensive assessment of its capacity for the geological storage of CO₂. The Swedish Geological Survey is conducting an assessment of potential storage sites, with a report due in 2026.

Mineral and product storage

There has been no quantification of mineral and product storage capacities to date. However, the Swedish Geological Survey recognises that mineral storage in basalt rock could be an alternative to geological storage. Luleå University of Technology is conducting a project to explore the possibility of CO₂ storage in Swedish basalt rocks.

(b) Estimation of CO₂ storage needs

Nothing found.

Ownership of infrastructure

The Act 1978:160 on “certain pipelines” states that operators of CO₂ pipelines are obligated to transport carbon dioxide for others if capacity allows. If the operator refuses, it must state the reason for refusal and make the improvements needed to enable transport for others, which provides compensation to the operator for these investments.

Cross-border cooperation

The framework for cross-border cooperation is set under the EU TEN-E Regulation through the “Project of Common Interest” (PCI) label. PCIs can apply for funding under the Connecting Europe Facility for Energy. Earning the PCI label can help projects reach a final investment decision, as the label adds a seal of assurance that the project is robust.

State support

No state support has been given to develop CO₂ infrastructure so far.

Indication of capture and storage volumes

The EU Net Zero Industry Act (NZIA) sets a mandatory injection capacity target of at least 50MtCO₂/year by 2030 in the EU. However, given that CO₂ storage capacities have not yet been mapped, and given the absence of concrete CDR and CCS targets in Sweden, indications of capture and storage volumes in Sweden are unclear.

The permitting process of CO₂ transport and storage facilities is regulated by the Geological CO₂ Storage and the Environmental Assessment ordinances.

Before applying for a permit, CO₂ storage operators must follow several steps laid out in the Ordinance on geological storage of CO₂:

• Produce a “suitability assessment”. The Ordinance provides guidelines on what this assessment must include.
• Draw up a proposal that includes:
  1. A plan that describes which measures will be taken in case of CO₂ leakage and related remediation measures;
  2. A monitoring plan;
  3. A plan for the maintenance of the storage site after its closure.

Furthermore, permits are only granted if the operator can prove it has the necessary financial resources to operate the storage site and the related monitoring.

The Ordinance does not apply to RD&I projects with a capacity of less than 100 ktCO₂.

In parallel, the Environmental Assessment Ordinance provides guidelines regarding which permit obligations apply to specific projects depending on their size and scope.

Operators need to be granted a concession to build pipelines longer than 20 kilometres for transporting CO₂ for geological storage. These concessions can be valid for up to 40 years and prolonged, as per Act 1978:160 on certain pipelines.

In the “First, second, third… Proposal for the design of a support system for bio-CCS” report, the Swedish Energy Agency estimates that more than 67 facilities in Sweden emit over 100 kilotonnes of biogenic CO₂ per year, amounting to around 33 MtCO₂ per year. The report estimates that by 2030, the amount of biogenic carbon that could be feasibly captured and stored sits between 1.2 and 2.2 MtCO₂/year.

This report also touches upon the role of biochar, finding that BECCS is more energy efficient and could deliver more negative emissions than biochar. The report notes DACCS as a potential CDR method playing a role in the long term but offers limited further detail. However, it does not mention other CDR methods, such as ocean-based removals and enhanced rock weathering.

Two research projects funded by the Bio-Innovation programme (a public-funded innovation programme) were tasked with looking at sources and flows of biomass, and biogenic carbon flows.

In Sweden, RD&I funding for CDR is scattered across multiple funding programmes with various focuses. These include:

• The Bio+ project – a SEK 511 million programme focused on a range of bio-based value chains, running from 2021-2027;
• The Bio-Innovation project – an innovation programme focused on the circular bioeconomy, funded by multiple government agencies;
• Industriklivet (Industrial Leap Programme) – an innovation programme funded by the Swedish Energy Agency focused on industrial decarbonisation, which includes BECCS within its remit;
• The National Centre for CCS;
• The Swedish Research Council – the main research funding body in Sweden.

There is no clear roadmap for RD&I funding for CDR.

A good portion of funding for CDR in Sweden takes place through Industriklivet. A total of SEK 370 million (around EUR 32 million) has been allocated to CCS projects so far, most of which were BECCS projects.

The Bio+ research and innovation programme dedicates an innovation cluster to biochar and bioenergy from pyrolysis, with a budget of SEK 4.5 million (around EUR 400,000) between 2023 and 2025.

The University of Luleå is conducting a research project on the “Use of mining waste to form carbonate minerals via a symbiotic CC and DAC biostrategy” with funding from the Swedish Energy Agency. This project will run from 2023 to 2029 with a budget of SEK 14.5 million (around EUR 1.3 million).

The Bio-Innovation programme funded several projects related to CDR, including CO₂ storage in concrete, the use of biochar in buildings, sources and flows of biomass, and biogenic carbon flows. The Bio-Innovation programme is a strategic innovation programme co-funded by Vinnova (the Swedish Innovation Agency), the Swedish Energy Agency and Formas (a government research council for sustainable development).

The Swedish Research Council also finances research projects at the fundamental science level, such as chemical processes to optimise carbon capture. However, there is no dedicated funding earmarked, as the relevant calls for projects are common to all projects within natural and engineering sciences.

The Government of Sweden led the development of a reverse auction scheme for BECCS, ran by the Swedish Energy Agency. This scheme was officially approved in 2024 and will provide economic support to actors who have submitted the winning bids during the auctioning process. So far, the Swedish Government has attributed SEK 36 billion (about EUR 3,3 billion) to the scheme for the 2026 - 2046 period. The first SEK 20 billion have been attributed to Stockholm Exergi, aiming to deliver over 11 MtCO2 over 15 years. The remaining SEK 16 billion will be attributed in the future.

The Ministry of Finance proposed a tax reduction on the electricity used for capturing CO₂ to the minimum level. This would have meant that companies would have paid the lowest energy tax level of 0.6 öre (EUR 0,055 cents) per kilowatt hour for the electricity consumed in the installation. This proposal was rejected in September 2024 as it would constitute additional state aid and jeopardise the efficacy of the BECCS reverse auction scheme.

Biochar projects can receive support from the Klimatklivet (Climate Leap) Programme.

The Swedish Forest Agency provides four deployment incentives for less durable CDR methods:

• A one-off compensation to rewet peatlands through “rewet agreements”;
• Financial compensation to preserve natural ecosystems through “nature conservation agreements”;
• Grants to support multiple nature conservation practices through the “Nokås” scheme;
• Financial support to preserve broadleaf forestry.

A motion to extend the financial incentives provided by the Swedish Forest Agency is currently under consideration in the Swedish Parliament. If adopted, new financial incentives would be provided to landowners to abandon clearcutting forests.

The EU Common Agricultural Policy sets up direct payments through ecoschemes aiming to support environmentally friendly practices. Some activities enhancing soil carbon sequestration are among the recognised practices.

The European Commission is due to publish a report by July 2026 examining the possible inclusion of CDR into the EU –Emissions Trading System or another compliance regime.

Sweden has supported the development of EU incentive mechanisms for CDR alongside Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway to contribute to the EU climate neutrality target, recognising that this could be within or outside the EU ETS.

The Swedish Government tasked the Swedish Energy Agency to investigate and propose new policy instruments to support CCS and CDR. The resulting policy proposals are:

• Use public procurement to steer towards materials with less embodied emissions, such as concrete with CO₂ removed from the air and the creation of a hub for the procurement of such materials;
• Ensure that carbon infrastructure can benefit from green credit guarantees;
• Investigate how a plastic liability could finance CCS and CCU through extended producer responsibility.

It remains to be seen if and how the government might advance these proposals.

In the last few years, several taxes on pollution have been scraped or reduced. For example, the tax on waste incineration was discontinued in 2023, and the tax on petrol, diesel and agricultural diesel was reduced in that same year. The tax on air travel will be abolished on 1 July 2025.

However, Sweden also decided to unilaterally extend the scope of the EU ETS 2 to include railways, waterborne navigation, and vehicles used in agriculture, forestry, and fishing, as well as off-road machinery used in harbours and airports.

The Swedish Energy Agency has created several platforms for stakeholders to interact with CCS development through the National Centre for CCS:

• An authority dialogue platform, coordinating with the Swedish Geological Survey, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Sea and Water Authority.
• Annual CCS network events on specific themes to gather insights from academics, industry and civil society. The 2023 event focused on transborder CO₂ transport by ship, and the 2024 event focused on the geological storage of CO₂ in Sweden and its surrounding areas. The next event will take place in Stockholm on 22 May 2025.
• Dialogues with individual actors in the entire CCS value chain, including with national and international companies, authorities, academia and interest organisations.

The EU Just Transition Mechanism makes funding available for member states to support the green transition in territories most at risk from losing jobs due to the transition.

As part of the mechanism, Sweden was granted around EUR 156 million (to be matched with national co-financing) targeted to finance projects in counties in the Norrboten, Västerbotten and Gottland provinces. The selected projects needed to facilitate the transition of the steel, metal and mineral industries in these regions.

A few projects were related to CO₂ infrastructure and CCS at large, though none are direct CDR projects:

• Around EUR 6.1 million were granted to preparatory measures for a CCS project on a cement plant;
• Around EUR 220k were granted to a project exploring how to transport CO₂ using ships;
• Around EUR 220k were granted to a project exploring how to store CO₂ in mineral residues from the mining, metallurgical and construction industries.

Several research projects have looked into social and ethical dimensions of CDR so far:

• Tradeoffs between negative emissions and near-term emission reductions?: Integrating the discursive and material dimensions of mitigation deterrence.
• Opening the portfolio of negative emissions technologies: A comprehensive study of social, techno-economic and ethical dimensions of biomass-based NETs in Sweden and Tanzania.
• Carbon capture and storage in Sweden: Historical lessons, current perceptions, and policy instruments.
• Negative emissions and the politics of a projected future: Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS), political economy, and the responsibilisation of climate research