ReviewEnergy & fuels : an American Chemical Society journal2025
Site Selection for Underground Hydrogen Storage in Porous Media: Critical Review and Outlook.
Review in Energy & fuels : an American Chemical Society journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Coupled Hysteresis and Variogram-Controlled Heterogeneity Effects on Underground Hydrogen Storage in Saline Aquifers.Energy & fuels : an American Chemical Society journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Underground hydrogen storage in porous media is promising for large-scale energy storage. However, its technical and financial effectiveness is heavily dependent on a reliable site selection strategy. In this review, we critically assess the available literature across disciplines to identify the most influential criteria for reliable site selection. Drawing from this evaluation, we propose a systematic, multidisciplinary framework for early stage reservoir screening, integrating key criteria from reservoir performance, geomechanics and containment, location and techno-economics, and biogeochemistry. Our framework allows for rapid identification and ranking of the most suitable reservoirs by proposing 11 elimination criteria and 15 screening criteria. The presented framework consists of practically applicable and scientifically grounded criteria to support consistent, early stage decisions based on readily available data while allowing for detailed site-specific analysis in later project development phases. By unifying diverse disciplinary insights into a structured methodology, this study contributes to more informed, inclusive, and effective site selection.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.