{"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006278466,0.0005550912,0.0003125735,0.001356648,0.002763932,0.001628937,0.00124428,0.001344204,0.002386408],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001302192,0.0003448734,0.0005319648,0.003153482,0.001053059,0.001128865,0.0007780594,0.0008847226,0.0002201775],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01107059,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00431409,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4678544,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7013652,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9993499,0.0001609612,0.00002386108,0.00008194995,0.0002397272,0.0001436558],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989461,0.0005609291,0.00007900798,0.00005877588,0.0002453626,0.0001099438],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"simulation_or_modeling","study_design_gemma":"case_report","study_design_scores_codex":[0.002334849,0.003011887,0.2666585,0.001659415,0.000404451,0.0806265,0.02355509,0.4409794,0.04420424,0.01603048,0.00470831,0.1158268],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004634579,0.002892129,0.3765546,0.0004146588,0.0004159826,0.007606472,0.1775096,0.3183095,0.05257989,0.006004058,0.05677477,0.0004747454],"study_design_candidate":"case_report","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9898233,0.0001253553,0.00141377,0.0001636584,0.000006556919,0.000114521,0.0002435038,0.00002455331,0.00808474],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9924481,0.0003101253,0.003474201,0.00003225813,0.000002057408,0.00002790055,0.0001541173,0.00001828188,0.00353302],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4678544,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9302623,"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."}}