US lawmakers have reintroduced legislation that would require the Department of Energy to procure up to 10 million tonnes of CO2 removals per year from 2036 onwards. For carbon removal developers, buyers, and investors, H.R. 9975 is the most concrete attempt yet to turn the US federal government into a standing anchor buyer for durable carbon removal, and it arrives just as private-sector deal flow in the sector is picking up.
The bill matters less for what it would do this year than for what it signals: a decade-long, legally mandated demand curve for a market that today runs almost entirely on voluntary corporate commitments.
What the Carbon Dioxide Removal Leadership Act of 2026 Proposes
The legislation, introduced by Representative Paul Tonko as the Carbon Dioxide Removal Leadership Act of 2026, sets a procurement schedule that ramps over time. According to a summary of the bill text, the DOE would be required to purchase 5 million net metric tons of CO2 removals per year for fiscal years 2031 through 2035, rising to 10 million net metric tons per year for fiscal year 2036 and after.
The approach is a revival, not a new idea. The Carbon Dioxide Removal Leadership Act of 2024 proposed directing the DOE to procure an increasing amount of technology-based carbon dioxide removal, and the new bill carries that framework forward with a defined tonnage trajectory. The 2026 version arrives in a different market context: the CDR sector now has operating projects, repeatable offtake structures, and a track record of deliveries that did not exist when the earlier bill was drafted.
Procurement is the key design choice. Rather than a tax credit or a grant program, the bill would make the federal government a direct purchaser of verified tonnes, competing for supply in the same market as corporate buyers.
Why a Government Anchor Buyer Changes the CDR Equation
Durable carbon removal has a structural demand problem. Supply is capital-intensive and slow to build, while demand depends on voluntary commitments from a relatively small group of companies willing to pay premium prices for tonnes that may not be delivered for years. That mismatch makes financing difficult: lenders and infrastructure investors want revenue certainty that spotty offtake agreements cannot always provide.
A mandated federal procurement program attacks that problem directly. A government buyer with a statutory purchase schedule gives developers something close to a long-term offtake anchor, the kind of revenue visibility that turns pilot projects into financeable infrastructure. It also diversifies demand away from a handful of large tech buyers, reducing the concentration risk that currently hangs over the sector’s order books.
For the wider market, a 10 Mt per year federal commitment would also function as a price discovery mechanism. Government tenders with published volumes and prices would give the market reference points it currently lacks.
Private Demand Signals Are Already Moving
The bill lands in a week when the US carbon removal supply chain showed signs of commercial momentum. Frontier Infrastructure Holdings, a US ethanol bioenergy with carbon capture and storage developer, and climate platform Carbonfuture announced a partnership to deliver 750,000 carbon removal credits to global markets, one of the larger ethanol BECCS credit deals announced to date.
On the infrastructure side, ExxonMobil was contracted to transport and store up to 1 million tonnes of CO2 per year from a natural gas processing facility on the US Gulf Coast, adding to the buildout of the transport and storage network that any large-scale procurement program would depend on.
Neither development depends on the bill passing. But together they sketch the shape of the market H.R. 9975 would buy into: ethanol BECCS and other technology-based pathways producing verified tonnes, moving through dedicated CO2 infrastructure, sold to buyers who need long-term durability.
What It Means for Buyers, Developers, and Investors
For corporate buyers, a federal procurement program is a double-edged signal. It validates carbon removal as a compliance-grade asset class, but it also introduces a large, price-insensitive competitor for the same durable tonnes. Companies planning multi-year CDR procurement strategies should consider that the supply available to voluntary buyers could tighten if a statutory government buyer enters the market from 2031.
For developers, the value is bankability. A legislated purchase schedule, even one that starts five years out, strengthens the revenue case in front of project lenders and infrastructure funds. The critical details will be in implementation: which removal pathways qualify, what durability and monitoring standards apply, and how the DOE would structure contracts.
For investors, the signal is directional rather than immediate. Bill introduction is not passage, and a procurement mandate of this scale would ultimately depend on sustained appropriations. But the reintroduction shows that federal CDR procurement now has a continuing legislative vehicle rather than a one-off proposal.
What to Watch Next
Three markers will show whether H.R. 9975 has real momentum. First, co-sponsorship and committee movement: whether the bill attracts bipartisan support and advances beyond introduction. Second, the eligibility rules: the definition of qualifying removals will determine which pathways, from BECCS to direct air capture to mineralization, stand to benefit. Third, the funding question: a 10 Mt per year commitment implies a multi-billion-dollar annual outlay at current durable CDR prices, and how Congress proposes to fund it will say a lot about how seriously to take the schedule.
Until those questions are answered, the prudent read is that the bill is a signal of intent, not a bankable offtake. But intent matters in a market built on long lead times. Developers making capacity decisions today plan for the early 2030s, and H.R. 9975 tells them exactly who might be buying when those projects come online.
