MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7126273967 · doi:10.46254/wc02.20250025

Analyzing the Macroeconomic and Supply Chain Impacts of CO2 Capture Technology: An Input-Output Framework for the Construction Phase

2025· article· W7126273967 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Sama Hosseini Androod, Shabana Kamal, Maham Aslam Sohail, Saqib Khan, Noha A. Razek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPetroleum Technology Research Centre
KeywordsInvestment (military)Supply chainGreenhouse gasTable (database)Phase (matter)Carbon capture and storage (timeline)Input–output modelFocus (optics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) is considered as a very important technology for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. While reducing the emissions, it enables the existing industries to continue their operations. Most of the previous studies on this topic focus only on the microeconomic analysis of CCUS and its macroeconomic aspects, in particular its construction phase has not been covered. The objective of this paper is to address this gap by evaluating the macroeconomic impact of constructing a CO₂ capture system in Saskatchewan, Canada. This study uses a provincial Input-Output (IO) table for Saskatchewan and the Leontief model to analyze how investment in the construction phase of the capture system, focusing on direct equipment costs, affects industry output, GDP, and employment. The results from this analysis show that an investment of CAD 217.8 million can result in an output increase of approximately $1.83 billion, a GDP impact of $900 million and the creation of about 5,588 jobs. These findings show that the construction of carbon capture projects in a specific region can generate significant benefits across the supply chain and can lead to economic growth in that region. This paper also highlights the steps that should be taken and limitations of such analysis and proposes future directions for addressing these limitations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207