1 Introduction
Fig. 1 The integrated conceptual framework of CCUS source-sink matching |
2 Evaluation of CCUS source-sink matching model based on the integrated conceptual framework
2.1 Model selection and evaluation system
Table 1 The evaluation system of the CCUS source-sink matching model |
| Model attributes (1-10 points) | Criterion 1 (1-2 points) | Criterion 2 (3-4 points) | Criterion 3 (5-6 points) | Criterion 4 (7-8 points) | Criterion 5 (9-10 points) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mitigation targets | No temporal characteristics; local or regional scale | A few simple temporal characteristics (e.g., demand-driven); local or regional scale | Explicit temporal characteristics (e.g., dynamic evolution); regional or national scale | A variety of temporal characteristics (e.g., demand-driven, dynamic evolution, etc.); national or intercontinental scale | A variety of temporal characteristics (e.g., demand-driven, dynamic evolution, technological competition, capital changes, etc.); intercontinental or global scale |
| Carbon sources | An insufficient amount of carbon source data | Limited carbon source data | Moderate carbon source data covering a single industry; cost accounting | A large amount of carbon source data covering multiple industries; cost accounting | A large amount of carbon source data covering all industries; cost accounting; technical solutions |
| Carbon sinks | An insufficient amount of carbon sink data | Limited basin/reservoir data | Moderate basin/reservoir data; storage potential; cost accounting | A large amount of basin/reservoir/grid data; storage potential; injection rate capacity; cost accounting | A large amount of basin/reservoir/grid data; storage potential; injection rate capacity; cost accounting; technical solutions; performance and risk |
| Transportation network | 0-1 factors involved: candidate pipeline; transportation distance; trunk pipeline; terrain conditions; cost accounting | 2 factors involved: candidate pipeline; transportation distance; trunk pipeline; terrain conditions; cost accounting | 3 factors involved: candidate pipeline; transportation distance; trunk pipeline; terrain conditions; cost accounting | 4 factors involved: candidate pipeline; transportation distance; trunk pipeline; terrain conditions; cost accounting | 5 factors involved: candidate pipeline; transportation distance; trunk pipeline; terrain conditions; cost accounting |
| Utilization | Briefly considered 0-1 approach: EOR; EWR; ECBM; green carbon supply (chemical, biological, mineralization) | Elaborately considered 1 approach: EOR; EWR; ECBM; green carbon supply (chemical, biological, mineralization) | Elaborately considered 2 approaches: EOR; EWR; ECBM; green carbon supply (chemical, biological, mineralization) | Elaborately considered 3 approaches: EOR; EWR; ECBM; green carbon supply (chemical, biological, mineralization) | Elaborately considered more than 3 approaches: EOR; EWR; ECBM; green carbon supply (chemical, biological, mineralization) |
| Integration & Synergy | Briefly considered 0-1 aspect: layout optimization; clusters (hubs); synergy (renewable energy, BECCS, DACCS); investment decisions (commercial mode, policy incentives); social risk | Elaborately considered 1 aspect: layout optimization; clusters (hubs); synergy (renewable energy, BECCS, DACCS); investment decisions (commercial mode, policy incentives); social risk | Elaborately considered 2 aspects: layout optimization; clusters (hubs); synergy (renewable energy, BECCS, DACCS); investment decisions (commercial mode, policy incentives); social risk | Elaborately considered 3 aspects: layout optimization; clusters (hubs); synergy (renewable energy, BECCS, DACCS); investment decisions (commercial mode, policy incentives); social risk | Elaborately considered more than 3 aspects: layout optimization; clusters (hubs); synergy (renewable energy, BECCS, DACCS); investment decisions (commercial mode, policy incentives); social risk |
Note: EWR refers to enhanced water recovery; ECBM refers to enhanced coal bed methane recovery; BECCS refers to biomass energy with carbon capture and storage; DACCS refers to direct air capture and storage |
2.2 Analysis of model evaluation results
Fig. 2 Results of the six key attributes from 16 CCUS source-sink matching models |

