Carbon removal market shifts from promises to delivery: what buyers and procurement teams need to know now

The carbon removals market is undergoing a structural shift, moving away from climate tech experimentation and into a phase defined by delivery, financeability, and infrastructure, according to a new report on the sector. Investors, buyers, and policymakers are all recalibrating their expectations, placing execution at the centre of purchasing and funding decisions. The days when bold future promises were enough to secure a deal appear to be closing. Supply constraints are now a defining feature of the landscape rather than a temporary friction.

For corporate buyers building out net zero strategies, the implications are immediate. Procurement teams that have been waiting for the market to mature before committing to carbon removal contracts are now entering a tighter supply environment. The report describes growing supply constraints as a feature of this maturing phase, meaning organisations that delay purchasing decisions may face higher prices or reduced availability of high quality removal credits. This is particularly relevant for companies with SBTi aligned targets that include a residual emissions removal component.

The shift toward financeability signals something important for in house ESG managers assessing supplier credibility. Projects that cannot demonstrate a clear path to financial viability are increasingly being filtered out by sophisticated buyers and investors. This creates a de facto quality screen that could benefit procurement teams, but it also raises the bar for due diligence. Buyers will need to ask harder questions about project infrastructure, delivery timelines, and revenue structures before signing long term offtake agreements.

TD Bank's recently announced 10-year carbon dioxide removal deal with Canada based Deep Sky is one concrete signal of where the market is heading. Long term contracts of this kind reflect growing buyer confidence in specific projects that can demonstrate delivery capacity rather than speculative pipelines. For European sustainability managers operating under CSRD reporting obligations, long term removal contracts will need to be documented with sufficient rigour to satisfy audit requirements, including Scope 1 and Scope 3 accounting treatments where relevant.

The broader picture is one of a market that is becoming more institutionalised and less forgiving of vague commitments. Policymakers are also adjusting, with the report noting that they are increasingly focused on enabling infrastructure rather than simply mandating targets. For ESG professionals advising boards on climate strategy, the message is to treat carbon removal procurement with the same rigour applied to capital expenditure decisions. The maturation of this market is good news for credibility, but it demands that buyers show up prepared.