MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2586889745

Sustainability assessment of energy systems

2013· dissertation· en· W2586889745 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyrke Gaudreau

Notice bibliographique

RevueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2013
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineEnergy
ThématiqueGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSustainabilityEnergy (signal processing)Energy systemEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental sciencePhysics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This research project set out to develop and apply a framework for assessing how energy systems may be structured to help society progress towards sustainability. The general intent was to outline a way to decide upon the things that matter in order to make better decisions that will lead to positive near- and long-term outcomes. There are various ways of reaching the goal described above, and the path chosen in this dissertation centred on Gibson’s (2006) sustainability assessment framework, an approach to integrated sustainability-based decision-making. In order to contribute to extending and specifying Gibson’s approach to sustainability assessment for energy undertakings, this project developed a theoretical framework grounded in various forms of complexity and energy.
\n
\nThe journey described in the dissertation begins with an exploration of the complexity of science, the subject of Chapter 2. We live in a world characterized by inherent uncertainty, multiple worldviews, conflicting values, power dynamics and a whole host of other challenges to science and decision-making. Many of the environmental and human challenges we currently face have arisen in part because we do not sufficiently respect the limits to knowledge and the personal biases we all bring to the table. Chapter 2 develops a framework for knowledge generation and decision-making situated within its social context, and operationalizes this framework through the process of criteria specification. Drawing from multiple sources of data – particularly documentary analysis, semi-structured interviews and observation – the criteria specification cycle provided the means of and determining and deciding upon the things that matter in a given case and context. 
\n
\nThe complexity of science is only half the story emerging from the complex systems literature. From a different perspective, it is evident that we live in a world of complex dynamics and interconnections, and it is important to ensure that whatever energy paths we set out on recognize these dynamics. Fortunately, there is a wide range of literature relating to the characteristics of complex systems in general, as well as their energy and material flows in societies. These literatures are explored in Chapter 3 to develop an understanding of and guidelines for managing complex systems to the extent possible and appropriate. 
\n
\nBuilding on the theory developed in Chapters 2 and 3, the discussion in Chapter 4 began to develop an understanding of energy systems and energy decision-making and was structured around three general questions: (1) what is the energy problem? (2) what are the characteristics of an appropriate and constructive relationship with energy? and (3) how can the necessary and desired sociotechnical systems changes be achieved. These questions were largely addressed through an exploration of the soft energy path and transition management and led to two sets of guidelines designed to address energy systems structure and change.
\n
\nThe theoretical framework developed over Chapters 2-4 was consolidated into a proposed set of sustainability criteria for energy undertakings. The sustainability criteria set represents the principal theoretical contribution of the dissertation to the academy and the broader assessment community, and outlines a suite of generally desirable system attributes and actions for achieving progress towards sustainability, as opposed to an acceptability threshold. The proposed sustainability criteria are primarily intended for application regarding energy undertakings at a wide variety of scales, but are much more broadly relevant. 
\n
\nIn a manner that is more iterative than can be described in this abstract, the sustainability assessment framework described in this dissertation was applied in, and enriched through, four distinct case studies that assessed
\n(1)\tthe 2006 Ontario Integrated Power Systems Plan proposed by the Ontario Power Authority. The Integrated Power Systems Plan was originally framed as a coal versus nuclear problem, as opposed to a critical appraisal of power systems planning; and in doing so it underplayed potential for conservation, demand management, increased renewable energy, and social change;
\n(2)\ta small-scale biodiesel operation in Barbados. The plant owner collected used cooking oil from restaurants, roadside stands, and individual homes, and converted it into biodiesel using a first-generation processing technology known as transesterification.
\n(3)\ta sugarcane-ethanol plant in the Tietê-Jacaré Watershed of São Paulo, Brazil. The sugarcane ethanol mill harvests approximately 21,000 hectares of sugarcane crops from seven municipalities and produces hydrated ethanol for domestic markets, and sugar for domestic and international markets; and 
\n(4)\tthe agricultural and energy systems in Senegal. Senegal suffers from significant deforestation and soil fertility decline coupled with demographic change. The many interconnections between the energy and agricultural systems require an integrated assessment of both.
\nEach individual case study stands alone in providing novel insights emerging from application of the framework in the particular case and context. At the more general level, five important insights emerged from the case studies, including: (1) the benefits of, and need for, maintaining a flexible unit of analysis so as to improve problem structuring; (2) the importance of grounding an assessment within its context; (3) the benefits of seeking integration and positive indirect effects; (4), the need to plan for and develop energy bridges towards feasible and desirable energy futures; and (5), the need for caution in the face of thresholds and uncertainty. 
\n
\nThe individual and general insights from the case studies were incorporated into the most recent version of the sustainability assessment framework described in this dissertation. The framework is suitable for application, with specification for particular case and context, to all types of energy systems at all scales.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,868
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,240
Écart entre enseignants0,232 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Même sujetGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchTravaux en français237 207