Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
This research addresses the global imperative to tackle climate change by evaluating different carbon capture technologies based on various criteria in hard-to-electrify sectors such as steel, cement, petrochemicals, and fertilizers, providing practical insights for policymakers engaged in the shift toward low-carbon industrial processes. The study employs a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach, specifically the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), using a systematic and objective evaluation process, integrating rigorous pairwise comparisons using the Saaty scale through logical reasoning, along with eigenvalue calculations, resulting in a criteria and strategy ranking. In evaluating carbon capture technologies for heavy industry, external support (regulatory adherence, global collaboration, and financial incentives) is crucial for technology evaluation, which carries the highest weight (21.3 %). Technology maturity and reliability follow closely (17.4 %), emphasizing the importance of proven track records. Carbon capture efficiency and environmental and health impacts share a relatively high weight (13.7 %). Scalability and integration with existing infrastructure carry moderate weights (7.8 %). Energy requirements are less critical (6.7 %), while the cost-effectiveness criterion has a relatively low weight (3.9 %). Duration of operation and public acceptance and social impact also carry low weights (3.9 %), creating a balanced evaluation considering both technical and socio-economic factors. Post-combustion capture excels with a high score, making it suitable for emission reduction in hard-to-abate industries. Pre-combustion capture and oxy-fuel combustion have moderate scores, indicating balanced performance. Direct Air Capture faces challenges, resulting in a lower score, while carbon mineralization and biomass co-firing with carbon capture receive the lowest scores, suggesting potential limitations. We discuss the impact of climate change on carbon capture technologies, the influence of critical materials, the practical implications for Moroccan industries such as Lafarge Holcim (cement), OCP (phosphate mining and petrochemical processing), and Sonasid (steel), as well as for emerging and industrialized economies, including hydrogen, ammonia, and kerosene production from fossil fuels.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.177754 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!