Carbon dioxide storage well permitting Market Outlook 2026–2036: Growth Drivers, Key Companies, Strategic Developments & Adoption Forecast — A Meticulous Next™ Foresight Brief

This Meticulous Next™ brief examines the permitting of Class VI wells, the injection wells that store carbon dioxide underground in the United States, and the drilling, monitoring and engineering services that follow each permit. It tests whether the shift of permitting from the federal agency to the states moves storage projects from application to injection before 2036.

The backlog is large. The Environmental Protection Agency had 239 Class VI well permits under review at 3 September 2025, 64 of them in Texas, and federal review generally takes 24 months or longer. The conclusion is that federal review has been the main limit on storage, and every permit moved to a state with primacy removes a source of delay.

Primacy is spreading. North Dakota received it in 2018, Wyoming in 2020, Louisiana in December 2023, West Virginia in February 2025, Arizona in September 2025 and Texas in a final rule of November 2025 that took effect on 15 December 2025, followed by Colorado in October 2026 and proposed approvals for Utah and Alaska the same month. The conclusion is that seven states hold authority and two more are proposed, and the largest backlog, in Texas, now sits with a state regulator.

State authority speeds decisions but does not guarantee volume. States with primacy can approve an application in under a year, North Dakota has issued eight permits since 2018, and Wyoming has issued nine for construction since 2020 with one well authorised to inject, while Louisiana paused review of new applications in September 2025 after issuing its first permit. The conclusion is that state capacity and policy, not federal rules alone, set the pace of permits.

The brief treats carbon dioxide storage well permitting as a high-impact signal with a ten year horizon to 2036. It identifies which states, project types and companies move first and what each means for emitters, developers and regulators. It is a focused 103-page decision brief that presents an indicative trajectory rather than a segmented market model.

A Class VI well injects carbon dioxide into deep rock formations for permanent storage, and the permit covers site characterisation, well construction, injection limits, monitoring, financial responsibility and care after injection. Class VI was created as a category of injection well in 2010 under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Federal review has taken 24 months or longer, and states with primacy can decide in under a year, as the Wyoming example shows. The conclusion is that moving an application from the federal agency to a state can save more than a year of project time.

A state must adopt regulations equal to or stronger than federal rules to receive primacy, and the federal agency keeps an oversight and review role afterwards. In Texas, the Railroad Commission became the main contact for applications, technical review, monitoring, corrective action plans, financial responsibility and post-injection care, and reported 18 applications received by December 2025.

Each permit leads to test wells, injection wells, monitoring wells and years of data collection, which makes services the larger and longer part of the market.

The limits are state staffing, pauses in permitting, public opposition and the rules that tie the tax credit for geologic storage to reporting of net removals. The period turns on whether new primacy states issue permits at the pace of the early states.

The carbon dioxide storage well permitting market, covering the drilling, completion, monitoring, engineering and permit application services for Class VI injection wells in the United States, and excluding carbon capture equipment, transport pipelines, other classes of injection wells, and tax credit value, is valued at USD 0.8–1.4 billion in 2026 and is projected to reach USD 5.38–9.42 billion by 2036, at a CAGR of 21%.

The 2026 base rests on permit applications, test wells, engineering and monitoring services for storage sites, mainly in Texas, Louisiana, North Dakota and Wyoming. Growth then follows the clearing of backlogs, first injection at new sites and the addition of primacy states.

The forecast is sensitive to state review times, the tax credit for geologic storage and public acceptance. Regionally, the Gulf Coast holds the largest base, followed by the Northern Plains and the Mountain West.

Base case.

The base case assumes new primacy states decide applications within a year and the tax credit stays in place, bringing the inflection to about 2029.

Accelerated case.

An accelerated case assumes fast state reviews and strong emitter demand, bringing the inflection to 2028 and lifting the 2036 value to the top of the range.

Delayed case.

A delayed case assumes pauses in state permitting and weaker incentives, moving the inflection to 2032 and holding growth at the bottom of the range.

Growth drivers

• Shorter state review times.
• Tax credit for geologic storage.
• Backlog of permit applications.
• Emitters and developers seeking storage.

Enablers

• Transfer of applications from federal to state review.
• State regulations equal to federal rules.
• Service and drilling capacity.
• Oversight by the federal agency.

Restraints and barriers

• Federal review times of 24 months or more.
• Pauses in state permitting.
• Reporting rules for removals.
• Public opposition.

The direction of storage well permitting is set by state primacy, tax credit support, emitter demand for storage, review time and backlog, and public acceptance.

The key participants in carbon dioxide storage well permitting and storage projects include Exxon Mobil Corporation, Occidental Petroleum Corporation, Chevron Corporation, Archer-Daniels-Midland Company, Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., CF Industries Holdings, Inc., Talos Energy Inc., ConocoPhillips, Shell plc, BP p.l.c., Equinor ASA, TotalEnergies SE, Schlumberger Limited, Halliburton Company, Baker Hughes Company, California Resources Corporation, Kinder Morgan, Inc., Summit Carbon Solutions, LLC, Enbridge Inc., Linde plc, Marathon Petroleum Corporation, Valero Energy Corporation, Phillips 66, Nutrien Ltd., Dow Inc., LyondellBasell Industries N.V., Southern Company, NRG Energy, Inc., Wolf Carbon Solutions, Frontier Carbon Solutions, LLC, Texas Railroad Commission, North Dakota Industrial Commission, Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Bipartisan Policy Center and United States Department of Energy.

The brief profiles representative participants in each archetype and assesses which are positioned to lead as state permitting expands.

ExxonMobil, Occidental and Chevron lead among storage developers with large Gulf Coast positions, SLB, Halliburton and Baker Hughes lead among drilling and monitoring service companies, and Air Products, CF Industries and Archer-Daniels-Midland lead among emitters with storage projects. Competitive intensity is moderate, with developers competing for sites and service capacity.

Where value migrates.

In 2026 value sits with permit applications, test wells and engineering for storage sites. By 2031 it moves toward injection wells, monitoring and the service companies that build them. By 2036 it settles with operation, monitoring and post-injection care, where contracts run for decades. Margins hold for developers with permits in primacy states and narrow for those still in federal review.

The signals converge on faster decisions as primacy spreads. Seven approvals since 2018, two open proposals and the move of a federal backlog of 239 permits support growth, while pauses in state review, staffing and public opposition hold back permits.

Structural limits show where progress could slow: state capacity, review quality, reporting rules for removals and public acceptance. The brief therefore tracks four indicators: permits issued per year, wells authorised to inject, applications pending and states with primacy.

Permits in early primacy states first, then Texas and the Gulf Coast, then Mountain West and Alaska is the expected order of adoption.