The Norwegian environmental organisation Bellona has issued a report in response to a cost-benefit analysis by the engineering consultancy Atkins on the proposed Norwegian project to build a CO2transport and storage network across north-west Europe. Though the Atkins report is available, it is in Norwegian, meaning that a reading of it has not been possible. From Bellona’s criticism, however, it appears to have argued that the proposed network is not advantageous from the cost-benefit point of view adopted, and that Norway would better meet its climate reduction goals by buying international offsetting credits and other means. Bellona argues, in contrast, that the cost-benefit scope was flawed, as it assumed the use of the EU Emissions Trading System as “the sole basis for an assessment of methods for Norway to reach its climate commitments and investment in CCS full-scale deployment in particular,” whereas the EU-ETS has not provided a strong incentive to European industry to date to limit carbon emissions. This, Bellona argues, is demonstrated by the fact that several nations, including France, the UK, Sweden and the Netherlands have set their own national carbon price floors. Bellona goes on to argue that a failure to pursue European CO2 transport and storage networks will doom Europe (including Norway) to deindustrialisation in order for countries to meet their emissions reduction targets. More widely still, the lack of European storage networks would discourage industrial facilities from capturing carbon, and create a knock-on effect retarding CCS development worldwide. It is difficult to argue against the wider importance of the Norwegian project, and what the Norwegian government chooses to do will be of high interest to the combustion industry worldwide.