MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415984902 · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-03687-2_17

CO2 Compressors

2025· book-chapter· en· W4415984902 on OpenAlexaff
Neetin Ghaisas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Bible College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon capture and storage (timeline)Modular designContext (archaeology)Global warmingGas compressorFossil fuelCombustion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropogenic CO2 emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels and various industrial activities are a primary driver of global warmingGlobal warming and its related climate impactsClimate. To address this challenge, carbon captureCarbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS)Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologiesDecarbonization play a vital role in global decarbonization strategies. A range of commercially available carbon capture solutions exist, each adaptable to specific CO2 recovery applications. Once captured and purified, CO2 must be compressed for efficient transport, further processing, and long-term storage. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of key CCUSCarbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) considerations, includingDecarbonization the context of global decarbonization initiatives, CO2 product requirements, available capture technologies, and the unique thermodynamic challenges associated with CO2 compressionCO compression. It also explores the mechanical design aspects, common construction materials, compressor train configurations, shaft sealing techniques, capacity control methods, and modular design strategies for the two predominant types of CO2 compressors: centrifugal and integrally geared.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.030

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
GenreOther

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 topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207