Harvesting surface charges on metals for energy-efficient CO2 capture: A first-principles investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The CO2 capture industry predominantly relies on energy-intensive liquid amine solutions for capturing carbon dioxide, resulting in reduced efficiency and increased costs during regeneration. In response, we investigate the potential of surface charges induced by various stimuli (e.g., sunlight and voltage) on metal surfaces as an energy-efficient alternative for CO2 capture. This study employs density-functional theory calculations to examine the interaction between CO2 molecules and a diverse set of metal surfaces under varying charge conditions, encompassing both plasmonic and non-plasmonic transition metals, including Cu, Zn, Co, Fe, V, Pt, Ni, and Al. Our objective is to comprehensively understand how surface charges impact CO2 adsorption and desorption processes. Key factors under investigation include CO2 adsorption energy, the d-band center of pristine metal surfaces, surface charge distributions, and structural changes in CO2 upon adsorption. Our findings emphasize that the d-band center of metal surfaces is an insufficient descriptor for CO2 adsorption and desorption. Different metals exhibit distinct behaviors in response to surface conditions when it comes to CO2 adsorption and desorption. Specifically, this study concludes that the metals that display optimum CO2 adsorption and desorption efficiency include Cu, Zn, Co(alpha), and Al(beta). CO2 adsorption on these metal surfaces occurs under neutral conditions, while desorption takes place in electron-rich or electron-deficient conditions. These findings have implications for future experimental studies aiming to manipulate CO2 interactions with neutral or charged metal surfaces, potentially driving innovative advancements in CO2 capture technologies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".