MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399616151 · doi:10.54097/4gp32g05

Exploration and Applications of Carbon Utilization and Sequestration Technologies

2024· article· en· W4399616151 on OpenAlexaff
Fengjie Dong, Xiyin Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueHighlights in Science Engineering and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon sequestrationGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceEnhanced oil recoveryFossil fuelCarbon capture and storage (timeline)Greenhouse gas removalNatural resource economicsCarbon dioxideWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringClimate changeClimate change mitigationOceanographyEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the surge in global energy demand due to rapid technological advances has led to a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions, resulting in a climate and energy crisis. Against this backdrop, the challenge for the global energy sector is to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of different carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies in order to select the most appropriate method for each situation. This study focuses on Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and ocean sequestration technologies and analyzes their theories, advantages, obstacles, and applications. EOR technology improves the efficiency of crude oil extraction by storing carbon dioxide (CO2) in deep strata and reducing the viscosity of the oil. This technology not only helps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but also increases the rate of extraction of crude oil, providing a double benefit that makes it a commercially viable technology. However, the challenge with enhanced oil recovery technology is the high cost of facilities, which may limit its development prospects. Ocean sequestration refers to the storage of CO2 in the deep seabed to delay its contact with the atmosphere. The delay in the time of CO2 emissions brings a huge time value. However, ocean storage also has negative impacts, such as excessive CO2 in the ocean leading to acidification of seawater, disrupting the stability of ocean pH values, and ultimately leading to the extinction of deep-sea organisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHighlights in Science Engineering and TechnologySame topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207