Decarbonisation Technology November 2025 Issue

Surviving the ‘advanced gasification’ valley of death: seven critical enablers

u Modularity and scalability Factory-built modules reduce Capex risk, shorten construction timelines, and enable replication. While modularity may not deliver the same per-unit Capex efficiency as large, single-build plants, it offers something more valuable in the early stages: reliability and bankability. Standardisation and replication reduce execution risk, build an operating track record, and unlock confidence from financiers. Over time, these repeated deployments create learning curves that drive down the levelised cost of production – just as wind and solar achieved cost competitiveness through replication, not through building ever larger single assets. v Policy and regulatory alignment Strong, consistent policy signals are essential to build investor confidence. Initiatives such as the legacy Energy Technologies Institute (ETI) programmes ( ETI, 2025 ), the EU Innovation Fund ( European Commission, 2025 ), and national support schemes for low-carbon gases, fuels, and chemicals all play a role in bridging the gap between demonstration and commercialisation. Without predictable, long-term frameworks, capital providers remain reluctant to commit. w Feedstock supply and product offtake certainty Bankable projects require certainty across the value chain, from waste feedstock inputs through to products. Long-term waste supply agreements reduce input risk and build a joint understanding of acceptable variability in feedstock quality, while product offtake contracts can co-shape product specifications – whether for SAF, methanol, methanol-to-olefins, hydrogen, or methane. These will underpin revenue security and investor confidence. x Strategic partnerships and capital depth No single player can cross the valley of death alone. Alignment between feedstock providers, technology providers and/or developers, infrastructure funders, and offtakers is vital. Strategic joint ventures and partnerships unlock capital depth and risk- sharing that enable projects to move from pilot to full commercial scale. Equally important, however, is choosing the right type of capital and partners. Government innovation grants can accelerate development, but also expose pre-revenue companies to hard-tech budget overruns they cannot sustain. Similarly, some energy offtakers may offer funding that accelerates CRL milestones but have shorter-term horizons that are not always aligned with the development timelines of emerging technologies. Surviving the valley of death demands longer-term, patient capital – partners who can support the full TRL-CRL journey rather than focus solely on near-term outcomes. y Demonstration, scale-up discipline, and performance risk allocation through delivery structures Progression through TRL and CRL must be paced, disciplined, and evidence-based. Rushing to secure commercial deals before proving technical reliability at demonstration scale leads to failures that damage the entire sector’s credibility. Controlled, modular scale-up de-risks delivery and builds a track record that investors can trust. For advanced gasification projects to become bankable, risk management must extend beyond the technology itself. Investors and offtakers will only engage if performance risks are clearly allocated and mitigated. This means deploying proven delivery structures: wrapping engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contracts to manage construction risk, operational and maintenance (O&M) frameworks to ensure operational reliability, and insurance mechanisms to provide coverage against unforeseen underperformance. These are essential to align TRL progress with CRL maturity, ensuring that technical proof is backed by credible assurances on delivery and long-term performance. z Integration with downstream synthesis and CCUS Advanced waste gasification needs to integrate seamlessly with downstream synthesis technologies (for example, methanol/ methane synthesis, methanol-to-olefins, Fischer-Tropsch) and be CCUS-ready to meet tightening climate policies. Integration capability is, therefore, a critical enabler of both TRL and CRL advancement. { Transparency and trust-building Given the legacy of failed first movers, rebuilding trust is vital. Transparent reporting of performance, honest communication of risks, and demonstration of real-world success are as important as technical innovation. By sharing lessons and successes openly, technology providers and/or developers can shift perceptions and strengthen investor and policymaker confidence. Trust also depends on the calibre of management. As projects move from concept to hard-tech deployment, the skills required shift dramatically. Leading a company with dozens of employees and managing significant capital budgets often demands a very different capability set from that of the entrepreneurial engineer who originated the concept. Building leadership teams that combine technical vision with delivery and governance experience is, therefore, critical to sustaining investor and stakeholder confidence.