A Scaled, Cost-Effective Approach to Removing Residual Emissions
Intro
As your company evaluates a long-term carbon removal partnership with Charm Industrial, it’s natural to scrutinize the viability of their approach. Based on an independent techno-economic and environmental analysis from Iowa State University (ISU), this briefing addresses six of the most important concerns—using clear, accessible language and data-backed insights.
1. Is there enough sustainable biomass to actually scale this?
The concern:
Biomass is scattered, seasonal, and may not be available in the volumes needed to scale up.
The reality:
The U.S. produces nearly 1 billion tons of biomass waste annually, much of which is underutilized. Charm taps into agricultural residues and forestry byproducts—materials that would otherwise rot or burn. ISU’s modeling shows that just the U.S. Midwest could support hundreds of small, mobile Charm pyrolysis units located directly on or near farms. This cuts transport costs and ensures scalable supply without disrupting food production.
)
Image Caption: “about 720 million metric tons (MM Mt) of CO2 per year could be removed from biomass in the United States through biomass pyrolysis and bio-oil sequestration.” Section 1.4
2. Isn’t this approach too expensive to compete with centralized carbon removal facilites?
The concern:
Pyrolysis might seem cheap now, but can it scale affordably?
The reality:
Yes! Charm’s costs fall dramatically with scale thanks to “economies of numbers,” like those that made solar panels cheaper. The ISU study shows that capital costs drop from $440/ton CO₂ (for a first unit) to under $100/ton with mass production. By comparison, DAC systems are still in the $250–$600/ton range, with slower cost-down curves.)
3. Is this really carbon negative—or just less bad than burning fossil fuels?
The concern:
Some “carbon removal” technologies just shuffle emissions around instead of removing them permanently.
The reality:
Charm’s system is genuinely carbon-negative. It converts plant waste into carbon-rich oil, then injects that oil underground—permanently removing the carbon from the atmosphere. ISU’s lifecycle analysis shows up to 1.55 kg CO₂ removed per kg of bio-oil produced from corn stover. Even when accounting for crop growth, machinery, transportation, and well plugging, the net impact remains strongly negative.)
4. Isn’t pyrolysis dirty or environmentally harmful in other ways?
The concern:
People worry about pollution, water use, or toxic byproducts from biomass processing.
The reality:
Charm’s pyrolysis units are clean, closed-loop systems that reuse their own byproduct gases as fuel. They emit very little, and produce biochar—a solid material that improves soil health and stores additional carbon. The ISU study shows Charm’s environmental footprint (including smog and ecotoxicity) is low.
5. Can Charm scale up without stalling like many hardware startups?
The concern:
Building physical machines is hard. Many startups never make it past early prototypes.
The reality:
Charm sidesteps this by building many small, repeatable units, not one big plant. This modular approach, validated by the ISU analysis, allows rapid iteration and cost reductions with each unit built. In the ISU study, the authors found that at 1000 modular pyrolysis units it only cost $146/metric ton to deliver net removals.)
6. Which approach provides more local community benefits—large, centralized carbon removal or Charm’s modular pyrolysis system?
The concern:
Carbon removal needs to create local, long-lasting jobs
The reality:
Charm’s system offers permanent benefits to many local communities because of the low impact modular nature of the removal strategy.
Centralized CDR facilities often involve short-term construction surges followed by limited full-time staffing. Once built, these plants require only a handful of technicians and centralized oversight—resulting in mostly temporary or highly specialized jobs.
Charm’s approach deploys small pyrolysis units directly to rural or industrial areas, creating ongoing local employment for:
Equipment operation and maintenance
Biomass collection and trucking
Coordination with farms and forestry operations
Charm’s model enables long-term, place-based roles and income streams for working communities—not just one-time construction work. It also helps reduce wildfire risk by utilizing excess forest biomass, and allows farmers to earn from agricultural waste, turning a liability into local revenue.
Bottom line:
Charm’s system distributes climate benefits and economic benefits, helping the same communities that supply the feedstock and benefit from closing oil wells.)
Read more here: www.charmindustrial.com/newjobs
Summary:
Charm Industrial is not just a promising CDR solution—it’s a credible, scalable, and community-positive pathway for permanent carbon removal. With costs already near DAC’s long-term targets and a robust real-world deployment model, the independent analysis shows Charm is well-positioned for growth. For corporate buyers seeking reliable, measurable, and equitable carbon removal, Charm stands out as a market leader.
Want to learn more about carbon removal?
Schedule time to chat with our Sustainability Partnerships team
