MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414511011 · doi:10.5539/jms.v15n2p82

Carbon Capture and Storage Technology Management and Public-Private Collaboration Opportunities

2025· article· en· W4414511011 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ikechukwu Nwabufo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Industrial Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveCarbon capture and storage (timeline)Government (linguistics)Climate change mitigationClimate changeProduction (economics)Greenhouse gasGlobal warming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing concern over climate change has highlighted the importance of implementing technologies such as carbon capture and storage to mitigate the impact of emissions on the environment. This technology, which captures, transports, and securely stores carbon dioxide emissions from sources such as factories and power plants, has been used increasingly in industries such as cement production, steel manufacturing, and chemical processing. Despite its significance, the high costs, unclear regulations, and inadequate infrastructure pose challenges for its implementation. This paper analyzes policy frameworks and economic incentives alongside strategic alliances between the government and businesses to highlight the significant role played by well-designed carbon capture policies in attracting investments from the private sector. The results identify several factors that can help carbon capture and storage evolve from a developing solution to a component of worldwide climate plans. The first is building connections between businesses and governments. Second, transnational cooperation and sharing knowledge resources and best practices among nations are vital for combating climate change through such initiatives. Third, financial incentives can also catalyze the development of the infrastructure that supports energy production and consumption patterns that lead to fewer carbon emissions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicSustainable Industrial EcologyFrench-language works237,207