MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386419932 · doi:10.3390/en16176385

From Lab to Fab: Development and Deployment of Direct Air Capture of CO2

2023· article· en· W4386419932 on OpenAlexafffund
Vahid Barahimi, Monica Ho, Eric Croiset

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEnvironment CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsSoftware deploymentScalabilityIncentiveProcess engineeringEfficient energy useComputer scienceEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental scienceEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct Air Capture (DAC) is a promising technology to fight climate change by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air. For DAC to be a negative emissions technology, the captured CO2 must be removed permanently, but can also be used as a net-zero technology to produce sustainable chemicals, fuels or other materials. This review presents a comprehensive survey of recent advancements, challenges, and potential applications of DAC technology, with an emphasis on the recent rapid increase in the number of DAC developers, the majority of them being founded in the past 4 years. Through pilot projects and recent commercial deployments, several DAC companies have made significant advances and demonstrated their scalability. Cost and energy efficiency remain significant impediments to the wide deployment of DAC. Integration with emission-free energy sources and utilization of waste heat are being researched to boost the total energy efficiency of DAC systems. Further research of electrochemical technologies for regeneration or direct capture are needed, as well as the development of new, modified, or hybrid adsorbents for improved capture efficiencies. Moreover, favorable regulations and financial incentives are crucial for enhancing the viability of DAC projects and will need to substantially increase if Paris Agreement goals are to be achieved.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207