ECR Alumni Case Study – Michael High

What did you study at university?

I studied for my MEng Chemical Engineering at UCL which included spending my final year abroad at the University of Melbourne, where I took my first module on CCS. It was probably the most engaging module I’d taken and was taught by the passionate Professor Colin Scholes, who communicated the topic with a real vibrancy. That would have been in 2017, just as CCS was starting to gain renewed momentum in popularity and research interest. After Melbourne, I took a year out and then began a PhD in Chemical Engineering at Imperial College under Professor Paul Fennell. My research focused on developing oxygen carriers for chemical looping processes.

With your PhD, was the chemical looping related to CCS?

Yes, I was looking at chemical looping combustion (CLC) and chemical looping oxygen uncoupling (CLOU) which are both carbon capture technologies used in power generation systems.

In conventional combustion, e.g. burning coal, the fuel is burned in air, which contains a lot of nitrogen. That means the resulting flue gas is diluted and you then have to separate the CO₂, which is energy intensive. With chemical looping, you transport oxygen from the air to the fuel using a solid oxygen carrier. The fuel burns without coming into contact with nitrogen, so the output is essentially just CO₂ and water. The water can be condensed easily, leaving a pure CO₂ stream without the need for complex separation. In theory, you get CO₂ capture “for free,” with far lower energy penalties than traditional post-combustion capture methods.

Were you able to go around the world to look at any projects as part of your PhD?

Unfortunately, Covid limited international travel for a big part of my PhD, so I wasn’t able to do as much as I’d originally hoped. But I was able to attend an annual chemical looping conference in Zaragoza, Spain, hosted by a leading research institute who have built many pilot chemical looping reactor systems. Visiting those facilities was really interesting to see how the technology worked at greater scales.

Closer to home, I was able to visit Cranfield University which also has a pilot-scale system, plenty of space and some excellent academics working in the field, including my external examiner, Professor Ben Anthony.

So, you were doing your PhD over the pandemic – how much did it affect what you did and what you’d planned to do?

I’d actually planned to do my PhD in 3 years, but the pandemic hit just as I’d finished writing the first draft of my first paper. As an experimental lab-based PhD, this meant I couldn’t generate any more experimental results to even process over the initial lockdown period. When we got back into the lab, only half occupancy was allowed, which slowed my research. So, I used lockdown to develop computational skills and write my literature review, though it was tough feeling the clock counting down on my funding when all I wanted was to be back in the lab.

When did you finish your PhD?

I finished in 2023 in the end. I think what the pandemic gave me was a bit of perspective, not needing to finish as quickly as possible. When I got back, I spent a year doing solid lab research and then I started to take any opportunity I could to expand my prospects post-PhD. I managed to work on a few consultancy projects and briefing papers as well as undertaking a Parliamentary Fellowship at Senedd Cymru to bolster my skills ready for the job market. These opportunities gave me a raft of experience which then, I think, made me very competitive in the job market afterwards compared to a lot of other postgrads. Importantly, it gave me a great feel for what I liked to do and where I want to go after defending my thesis.

Over that time, how did you engage with the UKCCSRC?

Another PhD student who was involved with the UKCCSRC flagged it to me. I started attending in-person networking events and continued when they transitioned to online. I think it’s always really interesting to see what other researchers are doing across the country with regards to CCS, so I found the online seminars really engaging. And then, once Covid lifted, I started attending the in-person events again, which are such a good networking opportunity for early career researchers. I also wish I’d used it slightly differently too though and engaged in more research and networking, perhaps supporting others in developing a research paper or joining up some siloed thinking.

As part of my push to take more opportunities post-Covid, I joined the UKCCSRC ECR Working Group. It was very valuable experience to be in the room with people who were making decisions about the ECR programme and help shape what kind of skills or training needed to be developed. Representing ECRs on the Advisory Council was particularly interesting as it gave me a much broader view of the CCS community.

What did you do after you finished your PhD?

Climate change was the reason I studied chemical engineering in the first place. By the end of my Master’s, I felt like I hadn’t yet made a meaningful contribution in that area. When I graduated, there weren’t a lot of sustainability specific roles in the job market, so I decided to hedge my bets and do a PhD. This enabled me directly contribute to climate change research and action while waiting for sustainability roles to become more prevalent.

After the PhD, I thought, okay, I’ve done all this work, but I’ve not taken a single ton of carbon out of the atmosphere. So, I looked into energy-related jobs and a role at Sizewell C came up. For context, Sizewell C is a 3.2 MWe nuclear power station currently under construction. Once operational, it’ll generate low-carbon electricity and displace higher-carbon electricity from the grid. My role as a Sustainability Specialist within the Environmental Sustainability department is focused on reducing the whole-life carbon associated with the project across the lifecycle – from design through to decommissioning. It felt like the right next step to move into a strategic role where I could use my technical background to make real decisions and start delivering on the ambitions that had drawn me into the field in the first place.

It’s a project that’s not just focused on environmental sustainability, but also on the social benefits. Sizewell C has pledged significant levels of regional and national investment (in the billions!), supporting local industries and creating thousands of jobs. I think it’s an amazing project to be a part of because you’re making such a difference in so many people’s lives.

Another really interesting aspect is the approach we’re taking to design. Sizewell C is essentially replicating much of the design from Hinkley Point C, which means we can build on lessons already learned and accelerate the schedule. That allows us to bring low-carbon power onto the grid more quickly and efficiently.

At the moment, a lot of the focus is on construction and looking at how we can reduce emissions through materials, logistics and procurement. But we’re also thinking much further ahead. For example, minimising carbon during operation by reviewing our uranium sourcing, and even considering decommissioning strategies decades down the line.

What’s it like to work in the nuclear industry? Whenever the word “nuclear” gets mentioned, people can immediately think that’s bad, and there’s undoubtedly a lot of misinformation around.

Yeah, it’s an interesting one, because if you speak to people local to nuclear plants under construction, then the main issues for them aren’t normally the nuclear aspect, but how many lorries are going to be on the roads, how does the actual construction impact us? But when you get to the national level, when you’re not in the area, it becomes a nuclear story.

From a sustainability point of view, it can be a tricky space to navigate as well. I try to be careful about how I communicate and be backed up by data and evidence. I’m personally very anti-greenwashing and think if we exaggerate or oversimplify claims, we damage trust in the whole transition. Being honest about trade-offs is far more powerful than pretending they don’t exist.

One thing I’ve learned is that nuclear is often misunderstood because it doesn’t fit neatly into the usual narratives. It’s low-carbon, but it isn’t renewable. It’s high-tech and complex, but incredibly reliable. It requires a large upfront investment, but then delivers stable power for decades. Working in the industry gives you a much more nuanced appreciation of those realities.

Do you have any other thoughts you’d like to share about CCS – its present, its future, any concerns, anything you’re excited about?

I keep a close eye on updates from organisations like the Global CCS Institute, and it’s genuinely encouraging to see how momentum is building. Every year the number of planned and operational facilities increases, and CCS is slowly shifting from being seen as an experimental technology to a core part of decarbonisation strategies worldwide.

Even within Sizewell C, we have a small pilot plant which shows how seriously large infrastructure projects are starting to consider CCS as part of the wider energy ecosystem. That kind of integration is really promising.

One project that’s really stood out to me recently is Heidelberg Materials’ evoZero and capture facility in Brevik, Norway. evoZero is pitched as “the world’s first carbon captured near-zero cement”. The concept is brilliant, customers can buy cement produced from any Heidelberg plant and an equivalent amount of CO₂ is captured from the Brevik plant, with the associated carbon reductions claimed as carbon insets.

What I found amazing is how quickly the market responded. I believe as soon as they launched evoZero, it effectively sold out immediately and their entire low-carbon supply is now committed. That’s such a strong signal that demand is there, not just from governments and policy, but from real customers willing to pay for lower-carbon materials.

That’s one of the most exciting developments I’ve seen. It shows CCS isn’t just a theoretical decarbonisation tool, it can create genuinely competitive, desirable products. As the carbon reduction can be claimed as insets, it creates a practical way for businesses to support early CCS deployment, even if the technology hasn’t yet been implemented in their own regions. In effect, early adopters help to de-risk the technology and accelerate its rollout to new locations, creating a positive cycle where initial projects pave the way for wider, global deployment of CCS. I really hope their success encourages other cement and steel companies to follow suit.

Ultimately, I think that’s what will drive CCS forward. Practical commercial examples where companies prove it can work at scale. Once you have those proof points, the whole conversation changes from “Can we do this?” to “How fast can we roll it out?”.