Holcim opens CaptureLab to test carbon capture
Holcim opens CaptureLab in France to test capture with real cement gases; the business case must separate capture from thermal efficiency.
Fuente: Holcim
CaptureLab opens an industrial test environment
Holcim announced on 10 June 2026 that it had opened CaptureLab in France, describing it as the cement industry's first carbon capture test platform. The site covers 2,500 m² and is connected to real gases from cement manufacturing. That connection allows equipment to be tested against an industrial stream rather than only under laboratory conditions.
The [Holcim release](https://www.holcim.com/media/media-releases/first-carbon-capture-test-platform) identifies Air Liquide as the operator of the first pilot. The [Air Liquide release](https://www.airliquide.com/group/press-releases-news/2026-06-10/air-liquide-starting-co2-capture-pilot-unit-dedicated-decarbonization-cement-industry) corroborates the start of that pilot unit dedicated to cement decarbonization. Neither company disclosed measured pilot performance at CaptureLab, cost per tonne, energy savings or operating results for the platform in these announcements.
What it measures and what it does not
A platform connected to real gases can narrow the gap between a capture technology and its behaviour in a cement environment. Yet the capture balance begins after the kiln has already produced the gas: it measures how much carbon dioxide is separated, at what energy demand and under which operating conditions. The thermal balance has a different boundary: fuel, air, combustion stability, clinker output and the capacity to accept AFR.
Combining those balances would create a misleading business case. A capture unit can treat the gas it receives, while a thermal improvement can first change the volume and composition of that gas. CaptureLab provides a place to measure the first part; the releases present no kiln baseline and attribute no thermal-efficiency improvement to the platform.
The Knergy Angle
To assign a value in euros to uncaptured efficiency, the starting point is not the nominal capacity of a capture unit. It is an operating kiln baseline: specific heat consumption, fuel mix, AFR level, clinker output, stability and quality over a comparable period. Only then can the value of burning less fuel or accepting more alternatives be separated from the distinct cost and benefit of capturing carbon dioxide.
The public sources report no thermal-savings range for this installation, and KNERGY has no measured result here either. It must not be entered as assumed savings in a financial model. Its proper role is to frame the test: which part of the thermal opportunity exists, which operating constraints limit it, and how would it change the stream subsequently sent to capture? Answering that requires plant data, a mass and energy balance, and a business case with traceable assumptions. KNERGY would need to demonstrate the baseline and mechanism in the kiln before linking any figure to economic value.
Data still needed for the business case
The announcements establish who opened the platform, where it operates, its physical scale and the identity of the first pilot. They do not report measured pilot performance at CaptureLab, energy demand, test cost, a results timetable or an associated thermal baseline. Those data are required to compare two different decisions: optimizing the kiln before the stack and then capturing the residual carbon dioxide.
CaptureLab already provides industrial infrastructure connected to real gas; the complete business case will remain open until Holcim and the participants publish measured results and comparable balance boundaries.