Carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation method based on analytic hierarchy process

Abstract

A carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation method based on an analytic hierarchy process comprises the following steps: obtaining a carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation task, and constructing an evaluation model of the evaluation task according to the evaluation task; obtaining an evaluation region range of suitability and potential of carbon dioxide, and setting rows and columns according to the evaluation range to subdivide the grid; setting carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation indexes; the evaluation indexes are uploaded to the evaluation model, and the evaluation indexes are quantified; dividing the weights of the evaluation indexes, and performing overlay analysis on the weights of the evaluation indexes; and based on the overlay analysis result, performing evaluation classification division to generate an evaluation chart. The carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation method can be widely applied to suitability and potential evaluation of various different types of carbon dioxide, and provides powerful data support and scientific guidance for government decision making, enterprise investment and the like.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation, and particularly relates to a carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation method based on the analytic hierarchy process. Background Art

[0002] With the intensification of global climate change, carbon dioxide emissions have become one of the main factors affecting global warming. Carbon dioxide capture and storage technology (CCS) is widely regarded as an effective means to reduce the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. However, the selection, evaluation of carbon dioxide storage sites and the accurate evaluation of their potential have always been one of the difficulties in the development of technology. At present, although there are some evaluation methods, such as geological surveys, remote sensing technology, etc., these methods are often limited by factors such as spatial resolution and time cost.

[0003] The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a decision-making method that combines qualitative and quantitative analysis, and is particularly suitable for dealing with complex and difficult-to-quantify decision-making problems. It was first proposed by the American operations researcher Thomas L. Saaty in the early 1970s. When Saaty was researching the topic of "electricity distribution according to the contribution of each industrial sector to national welfare" for the US Department of Defense, he applied the network system theory and multi-objective comprehensive evaluation method, thus proposing this hierarchical weight decision analysis method. Since then, the analytic hierarchy process has also been developed in international relations theory. Especially under the promotion of Kenneth Waltz, David Singer and others, the analytic hierarchy process has become an important tool in international relations research.

[0004] The core idea of the analytic hierarchy process is to systematize complex problems and make decisions through decomposition, comparison and judgment, and synthesis. This method decomposes the elements related to decision-making into levels such as goals, criteria, and solutions, and conducts qualitative and quantitative analysis of these elements by constructing a hierarchical structure model. The analytic hierarchy process not only pays attention to quantitative data, but also attaches importance to the subjective judgment of experts, and determines the relative importance of each factor through pairwise comparison. Summary of the Invention

[0005] In view of the above problems, the present invention is proposed to provide a carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation method based on the analytic hierarchy process that overcomes the above problems or at least partially solves the above problems.

[0006] To solve the above technical problems, the embodiments of the present application disclose the following technical solutions:

[0007] In a first aspect, the embodiments of the present invention disclose a carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation method based on the analytic hierarchy process, including:

[0008] S100. Obtaining a carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation task, and constructing an evaluation model for the evaluation task according to the evaluation task;

[0009] S200. Obtaining the evaluation area range of carbon dioxide suitability and potential, and dividing the grid into rows and columns according to the evaluation range;

[0010] S300. Set up carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation indicators;

[0011] S400. Uploading the evaluation index to the evaluation model and quantifying the evaluation index;

[0012] S500. Divide the evaluation index weights and perform superposition analysis on the evaluation index weights;

[0013] S600. Based on the overlay analysis results, perform evaluation classification and generate an evaluation graph.

[0014] Furthermore, in S100, an evaluation model of the evaluation task is constructed, and the evaluation model at least includes an evaluation model name, an evaluation area, and a grid size based on the area.

[0015] Furthermore, in S300, the evaluation indicators include primary indicators, secondary indicators and tertiary indicators; wherein the primary indicators include geological suitability indicators of carbon sinks, ground suitability indicators of carbon sinks and economic indicators; the secondary indicators include reservoir conditions and storage capacity, geological characteristics of top caprocks, seismic activity, feedback effects of energy development, national land space security and environmental risks, drilling economics and CO 2 Pipeline transportation and land occupation costs; the three-level indicators include the proportion of main reservoir potential, storage potential per unit area, lithology, thickness, burial depth, peak seismic acceleration, fault development, distribution of coal, oil and natural gas, susceptibility to geological disasters, population density, leakage risk, terrain complexity, main reservoir drilling depth, transportation distance and source-sink altitude difference.

[0016] Furthermore, in S400, the evaluation index is uploaded to the evaluation model, and the evaluation index includes index data content and evaluation fields, and supports vector data, Shp data and raster data.

[0017] Furthermore, in S400, the first-level indicators include multiple second-level indicators, and the second-level indicators include multiple third-level indicators; among them, the geological suitability indicators of carbon sinks include storage conditions and storage capacity, geological characteristics of the top cover, seismic activity, and the mutual feedback impact of energy development; the ground suitability indicators of carbon sinks include national space security and environmental risks; and the economic indicators include drilling economics and CO2 pipeline transportation and land use costs.

[0018] Furthermore, the reservoir conditions and storage capacity include the proportion of the main reservoir potential and the storage potential per unit area; the geological characteristics of the top caprock include lithology, thickness, and burial depth; the seismic activity includes the peak ground acceleration and the fracture development; the mutual influence of energy development includes the distribution of coal, oil, and natural gas; the national territorial space security and environmental risks include the susceptibility to geological disasters, population density, leakage risk, and terrain complexity; the drilling economy includes the drilling depth of the main reservoir; the CO2 pipeline transportation and land occupation cost include the transportation distance and the elevation difference between the source and sink.

[0019] Furthermore, in S400, the evaluation indicators are quantified. The specific method includes setting scores for the third-level indicators respectively according to the thresholds or attributes in the third-level indicators. Among them, setting scores for the third-level indicators according to the thresholds includes the proportion of the main reservoir potential, the storage potential per unit area, thickness, burial depth, peak ground acceleration, population density, terrain complexity, the drilling depth of the main reservoir, the transportation distance, and the elevation difference between the source and sink; setting scores for the third-level indicators according to the thresholds includes lithology, fracture development, susceptibility to geological disasters, leakage risk, and terrain complexity.

[0020] Furthermore, in S500, the weights of the evaluation indicators are divided, and the superposition analysis of the weights of the evaluation indicators is carried out. The specific method includes: setting weights for the first-level indicators, second-level indicators, and third-level indicators respectively. Among them, the sum of the weights of the first-level indicators is 1, the sum of the weights of the second-level indicators belonging to the same first-level indicator weight is 1, and the sum of the weights of the third-level indicators belonging to the same second-level indicator weight is 1; after determining the quantization values and weights of each indicator, multiplying the score of each indicator by its weight to obtain the weighted score, and adding the weighted scores of each indicator to obtain the comprehensive score of each grid.

[0021] Furthermore, in S600, based on the superposition analysis result, the evaluation classification is carried out to generate an evaluation map. The specific method includes: classifying the three types of evaluation criteria according to the grid comprehensive score interval and setting standard colors, and merging and color rendering the grids in the same area within the range according to the interval classification and colors, and finally generating an evaluation map by plotting.

[0022] In the second aspect, an embodiment of the present invention discloses an electronic device, including:

[0023] One or more processors;

[0024] A memory for storing one or more programs;

[0025] When the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the suitability and potentiality evaluation method.

[0026] The beneficial effects of the above technical solutions provided by the embodiments of the present invention at least include:

[0027] The present invention discloses a method for evaluating the suitability and potentiality of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process, including: obtaining the evaluation task of the suitability and potentiality of carbon dioxide, and constructing an evaluation model for the evaluation task according to the evaluation task; obtaining the evaluation area range of the suitability and potentiality of carbon dioxide, and dividing the grid by rows and columns according to the evaluation range; setting the evaluation indicators for the suitability and potentiality of carbon dioxide; uploading the evaluation indicators to the evaluation model and quantifying the evaluation indicators; dividing the weights of the evaluation indicators and performing superposition analysis on the weights of the evaluation indicators; based on the superposition analysis result, performing evaluation classification and generating an evaluation map.

[0028] By constructing a refined hierarchical structure model, the present invention comprehensively and systematically considers multi-dimensional influencing factors such as geological conditions, ground coverage, and economic conditions, ensuring the accuracy and scientific nature of the evaluation. It can not only perform quantitative analysis on each factor, but also further reveal the interaction relationship between factors through means such as sensitivity analysis, providing a more in-depth and comprehensive evaluation basis for decision-makers. The present invention can flexibly adjust the evaluation index system and weight distribution according to the special needs of different regions and different evaluation objects, ensuring the practicality and pertinence of the evaluation. This flexibility enables the analytic hierarchy process to be widely applied to various types of carbon dioxide suitability and potentiality evaluations, providing strong data support and scientific guidance for government decision-making, enterprise investment, etc.

[0029] The technical solutions of the present invention will be further described in detail below through the drawings and embodiments. Description of the Drawings

[0030] The drawings are used to provide a further understanding of the present invention and constitute a part of the specification. They are used together with the embodiments of the present invention to explain the present invention and do not constitute a limitation to the present invention. In the drawings:

[0031] Figure 1 is a flowchart of a method for evaluating the suitability and potentiality of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process in Embodiment 1 of the present invention;

[0032] Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of the division of the suitability and potentiality evaluation indicators in Embodiment 1 of the present invention;

[0033] Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of the quantification of the suitability and potentiality evaluation indicators in Embodiment 1 of the present invention;

[0034] Figure 4 is a schematic diagram of the weights of the suitability and potentiality evaluation indicators in Embodiment 1 of the present invention;

[0035] Figure 5 This is a schematic structural diagram of an electronic device in Embodiment 2 of the present invention. Detailed implementation manners

[0036] Hereinafter, exemplary embodiments of the present disclosure will be described in more detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. Although the exemplary embodiments of the present disclosure are shown in the drawings, it should be understood that the present disclosure can be implemented in various forms and should not be limited by the embodiments set forth herein. On the contrary, these embodiments are provided so that the present disclosure can be more thoroughly understood and the scope of the present disclosure can be fully conveyed to those skilled in the art.

[0037] To solve the problems existing in the prior art, an embodiment of the present invention provides a method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process.

[0038] Embodiment 1

[0039] The present invention discloses a method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process, as Figure 1 , including:

[0040] S100. Obtain the evaluation task of the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide, and construct an evaluation model for the evaluation task according to the evaluation task; in S100 of this embodiment, when constructing the evaluation model for the evaluation task, the evaluation model at least includes the name of the evaluation model, the evaluation area, and the grid size based on the regional dissection.

[0041] S200. Obtain the evaluation area range of the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide, and set rows and columns to dissect the grid according to the evaluation range; specifically, upload the evaluation range of the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide, and set rows and columns to dissect the grid. When dividing the evaluation area into a series of small, uniform or grid cells with specific attributes, so as to conduct independent evaluation and analysis on each cell.

[0042] S300. Set the evaluation indexes for the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide; in S300 of this embodiment, the evaluation indexes include primary indexes, secondary indexes and tertiary indexes; among them, the primary indexes include the geological suitability index of carbon sink, the surface suitability index of carbon sink and the economic index; the secondary indexes include reservoir conditions and storage capacity, geological characteristics of the top caprock, seismic activity, mutual influence of energy development, national land space security and environmental risks, drilling economy and CO 2Pipeline transportation and land occupation costs; the tertiary indicators include the proportion of main reservoir potential, the potential for storage per unit area, lithology, thickness, burial depth, peak ground acceleration, fracture development, distribution of coal, oil, and natural gas, susceptibility to geological disasters, population density, leakage risk, terrain complexity, drilling depth of the main reservoir, transportation distance, and elevation difference between the source and sink.

[0043] Specifically, such as Figure 2 , in the process of evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process, setting evaluation indicators is a complex and delicate task. Through scientific and reasonable indicator setting and weight allocation, the suitability and potential of the evaluation area in carbon dioxide geological storage can be comprehensively and accurately reflected, providing a strong scientific basis for site selection and planning. Currently, the suitability evaluation indicators are mainly divided into 3 first-level indicators, 7 second-level indicators, and 15 specific indicators.

[0044] The main first-level indicators are the geological suitability indicators of carbon sinks, the surface suitability indicators of carbon sinks, and economic indicators;

[0045] The second-level indicators are considered from aspects such as reservoir conditions and storage capacity, geological characteristics of the top caprock, seismic activity, mutual feedback effects of energy development, national land space security and environmental risks, drilling economy, and CO2 pipeline transportation and land occupation costs;

[0046] The 15 tertiary indicators include the proportion of the main (maximum) reservoir potential, the potential for storage per unit area, lithology, thickness, burial depth, peak ground acceleration, fracture development, distribution of coal, oil, natural gas, etc., susceptibility to geological disasters, population density, leakage risk, terrain complexity, drilling depth of the main reservoir, transportation distance, and elevation difference between the source and sink.

[0047] S400. Upload the evaluation indicators to the evaluation model and quantify the evaluation indicators; in S400 of this embodiment, upload the evaluation indicators to the evaluation model, and the evaluation indicators include indicator data content and evaluation fields, supporting vector data, Shp data, and raster data.

[0048] In S400 of this embodiment, the first-level indicators include multiple second-level indicators, and the second-level indicators include multiple third-level indicators; such as Figure 2, wherein the geological suitability indicators of carbon sinks include reservoir conditions and storage capacity, geological characteristics of the top caprock, seismic activity, and the mutual influence of energy development; the surface suitability indicators of carbon sinks include national land space security and environmental risks; the economic indicators include drilling economy and the cost of CO2 pipeline transportation and land occupation. The reservoir conditions and storage capacity include the proportion of the main reservoir potential and the storage potential per unit area; the geological characteristics of the top caprock include lithology, thickness, and burial depth; the seismic activity includes the peak acceleration of ground motion and the development of fractures; the mutual influence of energy development includes the distribution of coal, oil, and natural gas; the national land space security and environmental risks include the susceptibility of geological disasters, population density, leakage risk, and terrain complexity; the drilling economy includes the drilling depth of the main reservoir; the cost of CO2 pipeline transportation and land occupation includes the transportation distance and the elevation difference between the source and sink.

[0049] In S400 of this embodiment, the evaluation indicators are quantified. The specific method includes setting scores for the third-level indicators respectively according to the thresholds or attributes in the third-level indicators. Among them, setting scores for the third-level indicators according to the thresholds includes the proportion of the main reservoir potential, the storage potential per unit area, thickness, burial depth, peak acceleration of ground motion, population density, terrain complexity, drilling depth of the main reservoir, transportation distance, and elevation difference between the source and sink; setting scores for the third-level indicators according to the thresholds includes lithology, fracture development, susceptibility of geological disasters, leakage risk, and terrain complexity.

[0050] Specifically, quantitative indicators can transform abstract goals or tasks into specific numerical values, enabling decision-makers to more clearly understand the goals and directions. In the process of evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide, quantitative indicators not only help to evaluate the separation efficiency and storage potential of carbon dioxide, but also provide clear data support for further optimization. For example, by quantifying the separation efficiency, the separation effect under different conditions can be clarified, providing a basis for improving the separation technology; by quantifying the storage potential, the storage capacity of carbon dioxide under different conditions can be understood, providing a reference for optimizing the storage technology. The results of quantifying the first-level indicators, second-level indicators, and third-level indicators are as Figure 3 shown.

[0051] S500. Divide the weights of the evaluation indicators and perform superposition analysis on the weights of the evaluation indicators; in S500 of this embodiment, divide the weights of the evaluation indicators and perform superposition analysis on the weights of the evaluation indicators. The specific method includes: setting weights for the first-level indicators, second-level indicators, and third-level indicators respectively. Among them, the sum of the weights of the first-level indicators is 1, the sum of the weights of the second-level indicators belonging to the same first-level indicator weight is 1, and the sum of the weights of the third-level indicators belonging to the same second-level indicator weight is 1; after determining the quantitative values and weights of each indicator, multiply the score of each indicator by its weight to obtain the weighted score, and add up the weighted scores of each indicator to obtain the comprehensive score of each grid.

[0052] Specifically, in the process of evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), determining the index weights is one of the core steps of the evaluation work. The weight is an important parameter that measures the contribution degree of each evaluation index to the overall evaluation goal, and it directly affects the accuracy and reliability of the evaluation results. Determining reasonable index weights helps to scientifically and objectively reflect the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide, providing strong support for relevant decisions.

[0053] As Figure 4 shown: The weights of the first-level, second-level, and third-level indicators are assigned. The weight values are mainly determined by methods such as the expert scoring method and the comparison judgment matrix in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. These methods require objective and fair evaluation of each indicator based on professional knowledge and experience to ensure the accuracy and reasonableness of the weights.

[0054] S600. Based on the superposition analysis result, perform evaluation classification and generate an evaluation map. In S600 of this embodiment, based on the superposition analysis result, perform evaluation classification and generate an evaluation map. The specific method includes: classifying the three types of evaluation criteria according to the grid comprehensive score interval, setting standard colors, merging the grids in the same area within the interval classification and color range, and finally generating an evaluation map by mapping.

[0055] This embodiment discloses a method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, including: obtaining the evaluation task of carbon dioxide suitability and potential, constructing an evaluation model for the evaluation task according to the evaluation task; obtaining the evaluation area range of carbon dioxide suitability and potential, setting rows and columns to divide the grid according to the evaluation range; setting the evaluation indicators for carbon dioxide suitability and potential; uploading the evaluation indicators to the evaluation model and quantifying the evaluation indicators; dividing the weights of the evaluation indicators, performing superposition analysis on the weights of the evaluation indicators; based on the superposition analysis result, performing evaluation classification and generating an evaluation map.

[0056] This embodiment constructs a refined hierarchical structure model, comprehensively and systematically considering multi-dimensional influencing factors such as geological conditions, ground coverage, and economic conditions, ensuring the accuracy and scientific nature of the evaluation. It can not only perform quantitative analysis on each factor, but also further reveal the interaction relationship between factors through means such as sensitivity analysis, providing a more in-depth and comprehensive evaluation basis for decision-makers. The present invention can flexibly adjust the evaluation index system and weight distribution according to the special needs of different regions and different evaluation objects, ensuring the practicality and pertinence of the evaluation. This flexibility enables the Analytic Hierarchy Process to be widely applied to various types of carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluations, providing strong data support and scientific guidance for government decision-making, enterprise investment, etc.

[0057] Embodiment 2

[0058] Based on the same inventive concept, an embodiment of the present disclosure also provides an electronic device. Figure 5 It is a schematic structural diagram of an electronic device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. As Figure 5 shown, an electronic device provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure includes: one or more processors 101, a memory 102, and one or more I / O interfaces 103. One or more programs are stored on the memory 102. When the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement any of the optimization methods in the above embodiments; one or more I / O interfaces 103 are connected between the processor and the memory and are configured to implement information interaction between the processor and the memory.

[0059] Among them, the processor 101 is a device with data processing capabilities, including but not limited to a central processing unit (CPU), etc.; the memory 102 is a device with data storage capabilities, including but not limited to a random access memory (RAM, more specifically such as SDRAM, DDR, etc.), a read-only memory (ROM), an electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), a flash memory (FLASH); the I / O interface (read / write interface) 103 is connected between the processor 101 and the memory 102 and can implement information interaction between the processor 101 and the memory 102, including but not limited to a data bus (Bus), etc.

[0060] In some embodiments, the processor 101, the memory 102, and the I / O interface 103 are interconnected through a bus 104 and are further connected to other components of the computing device.

[0061] In some embodiments, the one or more processors 101 include a field programmable gate array.

[0062] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a computer-readable medium is also provided. A computer program is stored on the computer-readable medium. When the program is executed by a processor, the steps in any of the optimization methods in the above embodiments are implemented.

[0063] It should be understood that the specific order or hierarchy of steps in the disclosed process is an example of an exemplary method. Based on design preferences, it should be understood that the specific order or hierarchy of steps in the process can be rearranged without departing from the protection scope of the present disclosure. The appended method claims present the elements of various steps in an exemplary order and are not intended to be limited to the specific order or hierarchy described.

[0064] In the foregoing detailed description, various features are combined in a single embodiment to simplify the disclosure. This method of disclosure should not be interpreted as reflecting an intention that the embodiments of the claimed subject matter require more features than are expressly recited in each claim. On the contrary, as reflected in the appended claims, the invention lies in less than all of the features of a single disclosed embodiment. Accordingly, the appended claims are hereby expressly incorporated into the detailed description, with each claim standing on its own as a separate preferred embodiment of the invention.

[0065] Those skilled in the art should also understand that the various illustrative logical blocks, modules, circuits, and algorithmic steps described in connection with the embodiments herein can be implemented as electronic hardware, computer software, or combinations thereof. To clearly illustrate this interchangeability of hardware and software, various illustrative components, blocks, modules, circuits, and steps have been described above generally in terms of their functionality. Whether such functionality is implemented as hardware or software depends upon the particular application and design constraints imposed on the overall system. Skilled artisans may implement the described functionality in varying ways for each particular application, but such implementation decisions should not be interpreted as departing from the scope of the present disclosure.

[0066] The steps of a method or algorithm described in connection with the embodiments herein may be embodied directly in hardware, in a software module executed by a processor, or in a combination thereof. The software modules may be located in RAM memory, flash memory, ROM memory, EPROM memory, EEPROM memory, registers, hard disk, a removable disk, a CD-ROM, or any other form of storage medium well known in the art. An exemplary storage medium is coupled to the processor such that the processor can read information from, and write information to, the storage medium. Of course, the storage medium may also be integral to the processor. The processor and the storage medium may be located in an ASIC. The ASIC may be located in a user terminal. Of course, the processor and the storage medium may also exist as discrete components in a user terminal.

[0067] For a software implementation, the techniques described in this application can be implemented using modules (e.g., procedures, functions, etc.) that perform the functions described in this application. These software codes can be stored in a memory unit and executed by a processor. The memory unit may be implemented within the processor or outside the processor, in the latter case, it is coupled to the processor in a communication manner by various means, which are well known in the art.

[0068] The foregoing description includes examples of one or more embodiments. Of course, it is not possible to describe all possible combinations of components or methods for the purpose of describing the above embodiments, but those of ordinary skill in the art should recognize that the various embodiments can be further combined and arranged. Accordingly, the embodiments described herein are intended to cover all such changes, modifications, and variations that fall within the scope of the appended claims. In addition, with respect to the term "comprising" as used in the specification or claims, that term is inclusive in a manner similar to the term "including" as interpreted when used as a transitional word in a claim. Further, any use of the term "or" in a claim or the specification is to be meant "non-exclusive or".

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process, characterized in that: include: S100. Obtaining a carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation task, and constructing an evaluation model for the evaluation task according to the evaluation task; S200. Obtaining the evaluation area range of carbon dioxide suitability and potential, and dividing the grid into rows and columns according to the evaluation range; S300. Set up carbon dioxide suitability and potential evaluation indicators; S400. Uploading the evaluation index to the evaluation model and quantifying the evaluation index; S500. Divide the evaluation index weights and perform superposition analysis on the evaluation index weights; S600. Based on the overlay analysis results, perform evaluation classification and generate an evaluation graph.

2. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: In S100, an evaluation model of the evaluation task is constructed, and the evaluation model at least includes an evaluation model name, an evaluation area, and a grid size based on the area.

3. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: In S300, the evaluation indicators include primary indicators, secondary indicators and tertiary indicators; among them, the primary indicators include geological suitability indicators of carbon sinks, ground suitability indicators of carbon sinks and economic indicators; the secondary indicators include storage conditions and storage capacity, geological characteristics of the top cover, seismic activity, mutual feedback impact of energy development, national space security and environmental risks, drilling economics and CO2 pipeline transportation and land cost; the tertiary indicators include the proportion of main reservoir potential, storage potential per unit area, lithology, thickness, burial depth, peak seismic acceleration, fault development, distribution of coal, oil and natural gas, susceptibility to geological disasters, population density, leakage risk, terrain complexity, main reservoir drilling depth, transportation distance and source-sink altitude difference.

4. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: In S400, the evaluation index is uploaded to the evaluation model, and the evaluation index includes index data content and evaluation fields, and supports vector data, Shp data and raster data.

5. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process as claimed in claim 3, characterized in that: In S400, the first-level indicators include multiple second-level indicators, and the second-level indicators include multiple third-level indicators; among them, the geological suitability indicators of carbon sinks include storage conditions and storage capacity, geological characteristics of the top cover, seismic activity, and the mutual feedback impact of energy development; the ground suitability indicators of carbon sinks include national space security and environmental risks; economic indicators include drilling economics and CO2 pipeline transportation and land use costs.

6. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process as claimed in claim 5, characterized in that: Reservoir conditions and storage capacity include the proportion of main reservoir potential and the storage potential per unit area; geological characteristics of the top cap rock include lithology, thickness and burial depth; seismic activity includes peak seismic acceleration and fault development; the mutual feedback impact of energy development includes the distribution of coal, oil and natural gas; national land space security and environmental risks include the susceptibility to geological disasters, population density, leakage risk, and terrain complexity; drilling economics includes the drilling depth of the main reservoir; CO2 pipeline transportation and land cost includes transportation distance and source-sink altitude difference.

7. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: In S400, the evaluation indicators are quantified. The specific method includes setting scores for the three-level indicators according to the thresholds or attributes in the three-level indicators. The score setting for the three-level indicators according to the thresholds includes the proportion of main reservoir potential, storage potential per unit area, thickness, burial depth, peak seismic acceleration, population density, terrain complexity, main reservoir drilling depth, transportation distance and source-sink altitude difference; the score setting for the three-level indicators according to the thresholds includes lithology, fracture development, susceptibility to geological disasters, leakage risk and terrain complexity.

8. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: In S500, the evaluation index weights are divided and the evaluation index weights are superimposed and analyzed. The specific method includes: setting weights for the first-level index, the second-level index and the third-level index respectively, wherein the sum of the first-level index weights is 1, the sum of the second-level index weights belonging to the same first-level index weight is 1, and the sum of the third-level index weights belonging to the same second-level index weight is 1; after determining the quantitative value and weight of each indicator, multiplying each indicator score by its weight to obtain a weighted score, and adding the weighted scores of each indicator to obtain a comprehensive score of each grid.

9. A method for evaluating the suitability and potential of carbon dioxide based on the analytic hierarchy process as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: In S600, based on the overlay analysis results, evaluation classification is performed to generate an evaluation map. The specific method includes: classifying the three types of evaluation standards according to the grid comprehensive score interval, setting the standard color, merging and color rendering the grids in the same area of ​​the range according to the interval classification and color, and finally generating an evaluation map.

10. An electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; A memory for storing one or more programs; When the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the suitability and potential evaluation method.

Images