The economic operation of carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities hinges on the availability of CO₂ transport infrastructure, and the financing structure of new transport assets will affect CO₂ transport cost. Building on economic studies of infrastructure finance in other sectors, we empirically calibrate the cost of capital and operational efficiency under different financing structures, considering CO₂ transport via pipelines, barges, trains, and ships in a levelized transport cost model. Our results show that the choice of financing structure can result in transport cost differences of up to 26% for pipelines, with smaller effects observed for the other transport modes. Generally, public finance emerges as the most cost-effective financing structure for all CO₂ transport modes; the advantages of a lower cost of capital compared to private finance options outweigh the associated operational efficiency disadvantages. While additional aspects beyond cost must be considered when selecting financing structures for new infrastructure assets, our ex-ante analysis underlines the importance of financing structures for the economic viability of CO₂ transport assets, and for CCS more broadly.

Correction to: Nature Energyhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-022-01152-0, published online 24 October 2022 In the version of the article initially published, Gebrekidan Gebresilassie Eshetu’s name appeared incorrectly as Eshetu Gebrekidan Gebresilassie and has now been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.

Aligning development and climate goals means Africa’s energy systems will be based on clean energy technologies in the long term, but pathways to get there are uncertain and variable across countries. Although current debates about natural gas and renewables in Africa are heated, they largely ignore the substantial context specificity of the starting points, development objectives and uncertainties of each African country’s energy system trajectory. Here we—an interdisciplinary and majority African group of authors—highlight that each country faces a distinct solution space and set of uncertainties for using renewables or fossil fuels to meet its development objectives. For example, Ethiopia is headed for an accelerated green-growth pathway, but Mozambique is at a crossroads of natural gas expansion with implicit large-scale technological, economic, financial and social risks and uncertainties. We provide geopolitical, policy, finance and research recommendations to create firm country-specific evidence to identify adequate energy system pathways for development and to enable their implementation.