225 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34157836)
1. Deep CCS: Moving Beyond 90% Carbon Dioxide Capture.
Dods MN; Kim EJ; Long JR; Weston SC
Environ Sci Technol; 2021 Jul; 55(13):8524-8534. PubMed ID: 34157836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Porous materials for carbon dioxide separations.
Siegelman RL; Kim EJ; Long JR
Nat Mater; 2021 Aug; 20(8):1060-1072. PubMed ID: 34321657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The environmental and economic sustainability of carbon capture and storage.
Hardisty PE; Sivapalan M; Brooks P
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2011 May; 8(5):1460-77. PubMed ID: 21655130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Fossil-Fuel Options for Power Sector Net-Zero Emissions with Sequestration Tax Credits.
Anderson JJ; Rode DC; Zhai H; Fischbeck PS
Environ Sci Technol; 2022 Aug; 56(16):11162-11171. PubMed ID: 35926127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Market Potential for CO
Wong J; Santoso J; Went M; Sanchez D
Environ Sci Technol; 2022 Apr; 56(7):4305-4316. PubMed ID: 35255216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Separation and capture of CO2 from large stationary sources and sequestration in geological formations--coalbeds and deep saline aquifers.
White CM; Strazisar BR; Granite EJ; Hoffman JS; Pennline HW;
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2003 Jun; 53(6):645-715. PubMed ID: 12828330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Viability of Carbon Capture and Sequestration Retrofits for Existing Coal-Fired Power Plants under an Emission Trading Scheme.
Talati S; Zhai H; Morgan MG
Environ Sci Technol; 2016 Dec; 50(23):12567-12574. PubMed ID: 27792308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cost Analysis of Carbon Capture and Sequestration from U.S. Natural Gas-Fired Power Plants.
Psarras P; He J; Pilorgé H; McQueen N; Jensen-Fellows A; Kian K; Wilcox J
Environ Sci Technol; 2020 May; 54(10):6272-6280. PubMed ID: 32329614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Impacts of carbon markets and subsidies on carbon capture and storage retrofitting of existing coal-fired units in China.
Li K; Yang J; Wei Y
J Environ Manage; 2023 Jan; 326(Pt B):116824. PubMed ID: 36442336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A Techno-Economic Assessment of Hybrid Cooling Systems for Coal- and Natural-Gas-Fired Power Plants with and without Carbon Capture and Storage.
Zhai H; Rubin ES
Environ Sci Technol; 2016 Apr; 50(7):4127-34. PubMed ID: 26967583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Economic Merits of Flexible Carbon Capture and Sequestration as a Compliance Strategy with the Clean Power Plan.
Craig MT; Jaramillo P; Zhai H; Klima K
Environ Sci Technol; 2017 Feb; 51(3):1102-1109. PubMed ID: 28001378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Employment impact assessment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in China's power sector based on input-output model.
Jiang Y; Lei Y; Yan X; Yang Y
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2019 May; 26(15):15665-15676. PubMed ID: 30949943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. U-tube based near-surface environmental monitoring in the Shenhua carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) project.
Li Q; Song R; Shi H; Ma J; Liu X; Li X
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2018 Apr; 25(12):12034-12052. PubMed ID: 29453717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Storage of Carbon Dioxide in Saline Aquifers: Physicochemical Processes, Key Constraints, and Scale-Up Potential.
Ringrose PS; Furre AK; Gilfillan SMV; Krevor S; Landrø M; Leslie R; Meckel T; Nazarian B; Zahid A
Annu Rev Chem Biomol Eng; 2021 Jun; 12():471-494. PubMed ID: 33872518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Is Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Really So Expensive? An Analysis of Cascading Costs and CO
Subraveti SG; Rodríguez Angel E; Ramírez A; Roussanaly S
Environ Sci Technol; 2023 Feb; 57(6):2595-2601. PubMed ID: 36731169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Policy-Driven Potential for Deploying Carbon Capture and Sequestration in a Fossil-Rich Power Sector.
Dindi A; Coddington K; Garofalo JF; Wu W; Zhai H
Environ Sci Technol; 2022 Jul; 56(14):9872-9881. PubMed ID: 35785993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Assessment of potential, cost, and environmental benefits of CCS-EWR technology for coal-fired power plants in Yellow River Basin of China.
Xu M; Zhang X; Shen S; Wei S; Fan JL
J Environ Manage; 2021 Aug; 292():112717. PubMed ID: 34015611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Opportunities for Decarbonizing Existing U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants via CO2 Capture, Utilization and Storage.
Zhai H; Ou Y; Rubin ES
Environ Sci Technol; 2015 Jul; 49(13):7571-9. PubMed ID: 26023722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Life cycle assessment of alternative biogas utilisations, including carbon capture and storage or utilisation.
Varling AS; Christensen TH; Bisinella V
Waste Manag; 2023 Feb; 157():168-179. PubMed ID: 36549176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Air quality, health, and climate implications of China's synthetic natural gas development.
Qin Y; Wagner F; Scovronick N; Peng W; Yang J; Zhu T; Smith KR; Mauzerall DL
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2017 May; 114(19):4887-4892. PubMed ID: 28438993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
