Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Large-scale carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) requires coordinated source–sink matching (SSM), transport infrastructure, and geological storage planning. This review examines how published studies couple source allocation, network topology and capacity, CO 2 flow, and storage availability. Following PRISMA 2020 guidance, a reproducible Web of Science and Scopus search identified 17 studies for direct evidence synthesis. The evidence shows that integrated models can jointly represent source–sink allocation, transport-network investment, operational flow, and storage constraints, whereas sequential approaches may overlook system-wide trade-offs. Mathematical programming remains the most auditable basis for strategic planning because it provides explicit feasibility constraints and, in some cases, optimality bounds. Hub-and-cluster and multimodal configurations can improve infrastructure sharing, but their value depends on utilization, phased connection, access conditions, and cost recovery. Evidence for metaheuristics and AI-enabled methods remains case-specific; their comparative value cannot be established without common instances and complete reporting of feasibility, solution quality, and computational effort. Future research should develop physically valid large-scale benchmarks, adaptive planning models, and governance-aware mechanisms for shared CCUS infrastructure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: