{"id":"W1970776849","doi":"10.1142/s1464333209003373","title":"CALCULATING THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF A CHEMICAL PLANT: A CASE STUDY OF AKZONOBEL","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management","topic":"Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies","field":"Energy","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"Athabasca University; AkzoNobel (Canada)","funders":"AkzoNobel","keywords":"Carbon footprint; Greenhouse gas; Chemical industry; Fugitive emissions; Sustainability; Chemical plant; Environmental science; Carbon fibers; Waste management; Natural resource economics; Global warming; Environmental engineering; Environmental protection; Engineering; Climate change; Economics","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000268193,0.0001720273,0.0003039989,0.0001539497,0.00006053197,0.00001160347,0.0001521722,0.00003802654,0.00001097604],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000004237221,0.0001244941,0.0001038844,0.00008789355,0.0001013805,0.00005018754,0.00006388055,0.000137695,1.154203e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001040782,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000009597799,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001266265,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00006757689,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984426,0.00007390788,0.0007384282,0.0001431358,0.0004178243,0.0001840831],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.999055,0.00006024095,0.0005863136,0.0002133099,0.000004942129,0.00008019309],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008422982,0.02653179,0.06683502,0.0006582186,0.005791655,0.005501019,0.04129293,0.09831253,0.213836,0.3302854,0.00004400309,0.2100691],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.01346546,0.005880449,0.8621388,0.0003071484,0.002027,0.002043489,0.07610025,0.001724032,0.02607773,0.004265479,0.005015569,0.0009546109],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9956141,0.00008643634,0.00004013739,0.0002555968,0.00003071044,0.0002167173,0.000007687458,0.000004000014,0.003744625],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9989015,0.0004151748,0.0004144138,0.0001176409,0.00007642298,0.00000676123,0.000002389777,0.00001088619,0.00005479108],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7953038,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5076721,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.01168286678203882,"score_gpt":0.2692354036288713,"score_spread":0.2575525368468324,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}