“…The obtained CO 2 capture capacity is obviously higher than those of recently reported adsorbents such as S3-MIPs (1.0 mmol·g –1 ), PVIm- n -SCD (3.6 mmol·g –1 ), HIP-Cl-1 (3.8 mmol·g –1 ), NPCM-1-700 (3.9 mmol·g –1 ), NT-POP-@800-4 (4.0 mmol·g –1 ), BILP-1 (4.3 mmol·g –1 ), PC-700 (4.7 mmol·g –1 ) (273 K, 1 bar) and S3-MIPs (0.6 mmol·g –1 ), HIP-Cl-1 (2.3 mmol·g –1 ), BILP-1 (3.0 mmol·g –1 ), PC-700 (3.0 mmol·g –1 ) KOH/PPy-700-2 (3.1 mmol·g –1 ), (298 K, 1 bar). In addition, PC-800 (5.4 mmol·g –1 ) displayed comparable CO 2 uptake to those of benchmarks like activated carbon (2.8 mmol·g –1 ), PTz4 (3.6 mmol·g –1 ), UTSA-50a (4.6 mmol·g –1 ), RN-400-4 (4.8 mmol·g –1 ), C-650-3 (5.0 mmol·g –1 ), and GC-650-4 (5.7 mmol·g –1 ) . Further, a comparison of CO 2 uptake of PCs with recently reported adsorbents is tabulated in Table S1.…”