Pricing, Attributes, and Blockers: Durable CDR Market Dynamics Through 2030

For the second year running, CDR.fyi and OPIS, a Dow Jones Company, surveyed buyers and suppliers of durable CDR to better understand how market participants view pricing, value, and barriers to participation. Last year’s survey focused primarily on the gap between purchaser and supplier price expectations. It showed that across most durable CDR methods, the prices purchasers viewed as expensive were often below the prices suppliers said they needed to earn a reasonable profit. That finding became a useful reference point because it helped put numbers around a tension that many market participants were already feeling: durable CDR is needed to reach net zero, but the market was not yet clearing at prices that worked for both sides.

This year’s survey goes further. It still tracks price expectations, but also examines what buyers value, what suppliers think buyers value, and what keeps transactions from happening. Durable CDR procurement is no longer only about willingness to pay. It is about internal budgets, delivery risk, verification confidence, policy alignment, contracting structures, and whether buyers can justify the purchase internally.

The result is our new report with OPIS, Pricing, Attributes, and Blockers: Durable CDR Market Dynamics 2026–2030. The abridged version is available for download, and the full report is available in the CDR.fyi Portal Reports section.

Key findings

The survey points to a market that is beginning to organize, but not yet harmonize:

• The buyer-supplier price gap narrowed from $107/t to $98/t, with expectations of further narrowing to ~$48/t by 2030
• Biochar and BECCS, the most active pathways today, show narrower current-year pricing gaps but wider projected gaps by 2030
• Buyers and suppliers broadly agree that 100+ year permanence, supplier transparency, and supplier track record are core requirements, while buyers are most willing to pay premiums for co-benefits, 1,000+ year permanence, and policy alignment
• The main blockers remain budget constraints, delivery risk, internal business case, and lack of policy incentives
• Durable CDR is unlikely to broadly reach $100/t by 2030

[Download the abridged report]
To download the abridged report which is also available for free, sign up through the pop-up form on this page. Please REFRESH the page in case the pop-up window for does not appear for you or contact us at team@cdr.fyi.

The price gap is narrowing, but not disappearing

One of the clearest findings is that buyer and supplier expectations are converging, but the gap remains material. Across all methods, the average price spread between durable CDR buyers and suppliers declined from $107 per tonne in last year’s survey to $98 per tonne this year. Respondents expect that gap to narrow further to $48 per tonne by 2030.

That is a meaningful signal of market learning. It suggests participants are responding to real transactions, delivery experience, and clearer method-level cost structures. It may also indicate that the durable CDR market is beginning to develop a bid-offer spread in certain areas, especially for more mature pathways such as Biochar Carbon Removal and BECCS.

At the same time, convergence is uneven. The methods with the highest contracted volumes, Biochar and BECCS, show narrower current-year gaps, but wider projected gaps in 2030. This is an important nuance. It suggests that while near-term pricing for mature pathways may be negotiable, buyers and suppliers do not necessarily agree on where those prices are headed. Buyers often continue to expect prices to fall as the market scales, while many suppliers appear to see structural cost floors, tightening biomass constraints, financing costs, or stronger future demand limiting further declines.

The market is becoming more defined, but not necessarily more aligned.

The $100 per tonne narrative is losing force

For years, $100 per tonne has been used as a shorthand for where carbon removal prices might eventually need to land. It is a useful benchmark for ambition, but it can also obscure the diversity of durable CDR pathways and cost structures.

This year’s survey suggests that durable CDR credits are unlikely to broadly reach $100 per tonne by 2030. That does not mean prices will not decline; rather, it means outcomes will vary significantly by method. Some pathways may approach lower price levels, while others are likely to remain materially above $100 per tonne due to capital intensity, energy requirements, MRV costs, and delivery risk.

This matters for buyers. Organizations that are waiting for durable CDR to fall below $100 per tonne before engaging may find that the market does not move uniformly in that direction and may be shut out of supply options if the market tightens. It also matters for suppliers. The survey confirms that cost reduction remains essential, but it also suggests that suppliers may need to compete on more than price alone.

What buyers value: core requirements vs. premium attributes

A major addition to this year’s survey was a deeper examination of what buyers value. Rather than asking only what purchasers are willing to pay, we asked buyers and suppliers to classify a common set of project attributes as core requirements, premium attributes, or nice-to-haves.

The distinction is important. A core requirement is not something a buyer necessarily pays more for. It is something without which the purchase may not happen. A premium attribute, by contrast, is something that can justify a higher price once the core requirements are met.

The results show meaningful alignment between buyers and suppliers on the basics. Both sides identified 100+ year permanence, supplier transparency, and supplier track record as core requirements for durable CDR purchases. This is encouraging. It suggests that suppliers generally understand the minimum credibility bar buyers are using.

Beyond those core requirements, buyers most often identified certified co-benefits, 1,000+ year permanence, and alignment with government or policy frameworks as premium attributes. This is a useful market signal. Buyers appear to be saying that integrity is non-negotiable, but differentiation can still matter once the core credibility bar is met.

There is also a caution for suppliers. The survey suggests that suppliers may overestimate the importance of some non-core attributes, including geographic alignment and jurisdictional risk. In a market where buyers are price-sensitive and internal budgets remain constrained, suppliers may benefit from focusing less on adding every possible differentiator and more on clearly demonstrating the attributes buyers consider essential.

The largest blocker is still price, but not only price

The survey also asked buyers and suppliers what is holding back greater market participation. Here, the two sides diverged in revealing ways.

For buyers, price relative to internal budgets was the dominant constraint, cited by 65% of purchaser respondents. Delivery risk followed at 40%, while a lack of a clear internal business case, a lack of policy or compliance incentives, and verification or MRV confidence were also significant.

Suppliers saw the market differently. Two-thirds identified the lack of a clear internal business case for purchasing durable CDR as a top blocker, while only 17% identified price relative to internal budgets. Nearly half cited the absence of policy or compliance incentives, and 40% pointed to lower-cost alternatives.

This misalignment may reflect the different groups each side interacts with. The purchaser respondents were generally experienced buyers. They may already have internal permission to buy durable CDR, but not at the scale or price level they would prefer. Suppliers, by contrast, likely engage with a broader set of prospective buyers, including many organizations that have not yet made a first purchase and may still lack an internal case for doing so.

Even with that caveat, the message is clear: price remains the biggest market constraint, but reducing price alone will not solve the problem. Buyers also need confidence that credits will be delivered, verified, and defensible. Suppliers need clearer demand signals, better financing pathways, and stronger policy or standards support.

Download the abridged report for the full breakdown of buyer and supplier responses by method and segment.
To download the abridged report which is also available for free, sign up through the pop-up form on this page. Please REFRESH the page in case the pop-up window for does not appear for you or contact us at team@cdr.fyi.

Contracting is becoming part of price discovery

This year’s full report also examines contract structures, forward discounts, benchmarks, and insurance. These topics were included because the durable CDR market is moving beyond simple spot-price comparisons. Increasingly, the question is not only “What is the price?” but “What is the price for what structure, what delivery timeline, and what risk allocation?”

Purchasers preferred offtake and spot contracts, while suppliers and buyers showed different expectations for forward discounts. Buyers expected larger discounts for pre-purchases than suppliers were prepared to offer. That difference matters because much of the capital supporting durable CDR has historically flowed through forward agreements. If buyers require larger discounts to accept future delivery risk, and suppliers cannot offer those discounts without undermining project economics, forward contracting may remain difficult for many projects.

Both buyers and suppliers placed meaningful value on independent pricing and delivery benchmarks, with around 70% of respondents on both sides rating benchmarks as very or somewhat important. That result is consistent with a market seeking more reference points. As durable CDR matures, benchmark infrastructure may become increasingly important for internal budgeting, procurement, negotiations, and financing.

Insurance produced a nuanced signal. Suppliers generally believed delivery or reversal insurance could help unlock more pre-purchase demand, but most buyers did not say insurance would materially change their pre-purchasing behavior in this context. That does not mean insurance is unimportant. Buyers identified delivery risk as their second-most significant blocker, and the question focused on a specific use case: pre-purchase. Insurance may still matter for offtakes, larger commitments, or internal approvals. However, the results suggest that insurance is not a standalone solution to demand formation.

A market beginning to organize, but not yet harmonize

The most useful way to interpret this year’s results may be this: the durable CDR market is beginning to organize, but not yet harmonize. There is progress, but also friction.

There are signs of maturation. Buyer and supplier expectations are narrowing in some areas. Suppliers understand many of the core attributes buyers require. Buyers are increasingly specific about what blocks additional purchasing. Contract structures, benchmarks, and risk transfer tools are becoming part of the conversation.

But durable CDR is not yet a well-ordered market. Price expectations remain far apart for several methods. Buyers and suppliers disagree on what is blocking demand. The role of policy is still uncertain. Some methods remain difficult to interpret because they include heterogeneous approaches with different cost structures, delivery risks, and MRV pathways.

This is not unusual for an emerging market. In fact, it is what market formation looks like. Expectations become visible before they become aligned. Price ranges appear before benchmarks. Contract structures develop before standardization. Trust is built not all at once, but through repeated evidence of delivery, performance, and transparency.

Why this matters

Durable CDR will not scale on aspiration alone. It will scale when buyers understand what they are buying, suppliers understand what buyers truly value, and both sides can transact with enough confidence to support real deployment.

That is what this survey is designed to support: a clearer view of where expectations are moving, where they align, and where the remaining frictions are.

The abridged report is available for download below. The full 55-page report, including additional charts and analysis on contract formats, forward discounts, benchmarks, insurance, market perspectives, respondent composition, and implications for market actors, is available in the CDR.fyi Portal Reports section for CDR.fyi Data Partners and Platform Subscribers, and to OPIS Premium Users.

[Download the abridged report]
To download the abridged report which is also available for free, sign up through the pop-up form on this page. Please REFRESH the page in case the pop-up window for does not appear for you or contact us at team@cdr.fyi.

[Log in to the Portal to access the full report]