Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 594

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 104 of the 104 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A systematic review on CO2 capture with ionic liquids: Current status and future prospects

Aghaie, Mahsa, Rezaei, Nima, Zendehboudi, Sohrab·2018·Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

Abstract

Abstract Global warming due to the emission of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), has a significant effect on the climate change and has become a widespread concern in the recent years. Carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS) strategy appears to be effective in decreasing the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere. Despite a great progress in this field, there are still major limitations in commercialized the CO2 capture methods that rely on absorption phenomena. High capital costs of for the CO2 capture, low absorption and desorption rates (which require large facilities), solvent losses due to evaporation, and the use of corrosive solvents are among main obstructions. Recently, CO2 capture with ionic liquids (ILs) has appreciably attracted researchers’ attention. The distinct properties of ILs such as negligible vapor pressure and their affinity to capture the CO2 molecules make them a feasible alternative for currently available solvents including, different amines. This paper covers a brief review of previous engineering and research works on various CO2 capture techniques, the description of CO2 capture process using ILs, mechanisms of the CO2 capture with ILs at molecular level, CO2 and ILs properties, characterization of the CO2/IL systems, impacts of operating and fluids conditions on CO2 absorption capacity by ILs, and CO2 solubility and selectivity in ILs. Moreover, the technical and economic aspects of the CO2 capture with ILs, screening criteria for ILs/CO2 systems, and important results obtained from previous studies will form the last parts of this manuscript. This review offers a proper/systematic guideline that assists researchers and engineers to comprehensively understand and to effectively design the CO2/ILs processes, focusing on the thermodynamic and mass transfer aspects.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rser.2018.07.004

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 104 references

Cited by

See all 594

Metadata

Authors
Aghaie, M., Rezaei, N., & Zendehboudi, S.
Venue
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
96
Pages
502-525
ISSN
1364-0321 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2888871318
Cited by
594
References
104
FWCI
10.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A systematic review on CO2 capture with ionic liquids: Current status and future prospects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.rser.2018.07.004
The paper
Aghaie, M., Rezaei, N., & Zendehboudi, S. (2018). A systematic review on CO2 capture with ionic liquids: Current status and future prospects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.07.004

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.