MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409644524 · doi:10.1016/j.ptlrs.2025.04.004

Achieving low-carbon future through CO2 storage: A comprehensive review of global projects and policies

2025· review· en· W4409644524 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Malik Muhammad Ali Awan, Farzain Ud Din Kirmani

Bibliographic record

VenuePetroleum Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural resource economicsCarbon capture and storage (timeline)BusinessEnvironmental scienceEconomicsClimate changeEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change mitigation efforts require innovative solutions to reduce GHG emissions. CCUS is a crucial technology for achieving a low-carbon economy. However, significant research gaps exist in understanding the intersection of CCUS policy and the United Nations' SDGs. This review article addresses these gaps by comprehensively analyzing CO 2 storage projects across six global regions, examining 53 notable CCUS projects, and assessing CCUS policies in 15 leading countries. The primary objectives of this study are to (1) analyze regional trends, challenges, and technological advancements in CO 2 storage projects across diverse geological formations; (2) investigate the integration of CCUS into national strategies across leading economies, including the US, Canada, Brazil, China, Japan, India, the UK, France, the Netherlands, Germany, Australia, KSA, the UAE, and Qatar. The integration of CCUS with renewable energy sources and BECCS is explored, emphasizing its potential to achieve harmful emissions and support net-zero ambitions. Future perspectives focus on advancing CCUS efficiency and economic viability through innovations in sorbents, membranes, and process optimizations. The findings demonstrate significant alignment between CCUS policies and SDG targets, emphasizing the importance of integrated approaches to achieve a low-carbon future. This review serves as a valuable resource for policymakers, researchers, and industry stakeholders involved in the development of CO 2 storage solutions, providing insights into future perspectives and opportunities for CCUS.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePetroleum ResearchSame topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207