A Review on the State-of-the-Art and Commercial Status of Carbon Capture Technologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbon capture technologies are largely considered to play a crucial role in meeting the climate change and global warming target set by Net Zero Emission (NZE) 2050. These technologies can contribute to clean energy transitions and emissions reduction by decarbonizing the power sector and other CO2 intensive industries such as iron and steel production, natural gas processing oil refining and cement production where there is no obvious alternative to carbon capture technologies. While the progress of carbon capture technologies has fallen behind expectations in the past, in recent years there has been substantial growth in this area, with over 700 projects at various stages of development. Moreover, there are around 45 commercial carbon capture facilities already in operation around the world in different industrial processes, fuel transformation and power generation. Carbon capture technologies including pre/post-combustion, oxyfuel and chemical looping combustion have been widely exploited in the recent years at different Technology Readiness level (TRL). Although, a large number of review studies are available addressing different carbon capture strategies, however, studies related to the commercial status of the carbon capture technologies are yet to be conducted. In this review article, we summarize the state-of-the-art of different carbon capture technologies applied to different emission sources, focusing on emission reduction, net-zero emission, and negative emission. We also highlight the commercial status of the different carbon capture technologies including economics, opportunities, and challenges.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".