Potential, Efficiency, and Leakage Risk of CO2 Sequestration in Coal: A Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CO2 sequestration in coal is effective for reducing carbon emissions, but related projects have encountered challenges in sustained CO2 injection, highlighting the need for a comprehensive understanding of CO2 sequestration in coal. This study reviews variations in the properties of coal/rock during/after CO2 injection, demonstrating the potential and stability of CO2 sequestration in coal. The coal with a high VL-CO2/VL-CH4 is accompanied by high CO2 sequestration capacity. The matrix swelling and acid corrosion restrict CO2 sequestration efficiency, which can be enhanced by employing coatings and increasing permeability. Long-term CO2–water–rock interactions weaken the integrity of coal/caprocks and decrease the adsorption capacity of coal, leading to the CO2 leakage risk. Three issues are critical in future studies: (1) Increasing CO2 adsorption capacity. (2) Establishing optimal approaches to enhance CO2 injection efficiency. (3) Accurately predicting variations in the adsorption capacity of deep coal and the integrity of coal/caprocks during long-term CO2–water–rock interactions. This review provides foundations for formulating CO2 sequestration strategies in coal.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it