The interview was originally published in Global Cement, on August 19th, 2025.

Low-Cost CCUS With Reticular Chemistry

 
Atoco’s use of reticular chemistry for carbon capture could reduce the cost of CCUS by a factor of 10…

Global Cement (GC): Please can you introduce Atoco to our readers?

Magnus Bach (MB): Atoco was founded in Irvine, California, in 2020 by Prof Omar M Yaghi to capitalise on decades of research by his team at the University of California, Berkeley. Prof Yaghi is widely recognised as the founder of reticular chemistry, having invented the first metal organic frameworks (MOFs), the first covalent organic frameworks (COFs), the first zeolitic imidazolate frameworks (ZIFs) and more. These structures are crystalline 3D networks of particular atoms that have internal pores large enough to host other atoms or molecules. In Atoco’s case, we use reticular chemistry for two applications: atmospheric water harvesting and CO₂ capture.

GC: Let’s focus on CO₂ capture. How does reticular chemistry help?

MB: CO₂ capture, utilisation and storage is costly, mostly due to the capture stage. The capture cost is around 65% for post combustion carbon capture (PCC) and around 80–82% for direct air capture (DAC). What reticular chemistry allows Atoco to do is substantially reduce the cost of the capture step. This is because, unlike irregular adsorption surfaces like silica, carbon and zeolites, MOFs and COFs can be tuned for selectivity to a particular molecule, in this case CO₂. As the structures are known and regular, they lend themselves well to computer modelling and optimisation using AI.

GC: How will the materials work at the cement plant?

MB: The process will feed the unprocessed exhaust gas through a MOF / COF ‘filter’ which absorbs the CO₂ selectively. When the MOF / COF is at capacity, the CO₂ will be desorbed. The advantage of Atoco’s materials is that this will be possible at lower temperatures of 40–100ºC, using low-grade waste heat from the cement production process. This will lower the operational cost of CO₂ capture enormously. It is key. There is no point doing all of this intricate chemistry if the economics don’t add up. It is also possible to desorb the CO₂ using steam or by reducing the pressure.

GG: The latest iteration of the materials requires 90% less energy to release the CO₂ than a zeolite, which we use as a standard comparison. It’s a huge reduction and it’s huge because the materials we are developing hold on to the CO₂ loosely. We also see major improvements compared to monoethanolamine (MEA)-based systems, which are the ‘go to’ option for cement sector carbon capture.

MB: I would add that, from a practical standpoint, Atoco’s approach fits in with the existing cement plant infrastructure better than amines. We recognise that cement plants are reluctant to become chemical plants. It is a very steep – and expensive – learning curve. In contrast, our sorbents are much more like a conventional filter or baghouse.

 
(…)