An investigation into 30% post-consumer recycled wood fiber paper and wheat paper
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This report outlines the feasibility of adopting wheat fiber paper over 30% recycled wood fibre paper at University of British Columbia (UBC) and bringing wheat paper technology into Canada using a triple bottom line assessment (TBL). Minto Roy, from Royal Social Print Paper (RSPP), approached Paula Goldspink from UBC’s supply management department, with the proposition of having UBC replace the 30% recycled wood fibre paper they currently purchase from Domtar with a paper made of wheat straw. The company’s product is currently being produced in India with hopes of bringing the technology to Canada. The use of a TBL for this report requires the investigation of the environmental, economic and social benefits and fallbacks of using wheat paper on a local and national scale. Environmentally, the pros and cons of the two raw material options and their associated pulp and paper processes were explored. The ecological footprint of each resource was found along with the amount of air emissions, solid wastes, and water effluent produced for the two alternatives. An assumption made during this analysis is that the pulping process for both materials is different but the paper making process is nearly identical. Economically, the relative cost of wheat paper to wood paper was determined by comparing the raw materials, labour, storage, transportation, pre-processing, pulping, and bleaching costs, as well as the production loss of the two options. Next, bringing wheat paper technology into Canada’s pulp and paper industry was investigated by determining the availability of wheat straw along with revenue trends and retrofitting costs. To determine the social benefits two key problems were explored. Whether farmers can make a significant profit by selling wheat straw and what new job could be created in the farming sector along with the social impact wheat paper would have on the current wood pulp and paper mills in Canada. Overall, the proposal of adopting wheat paper at UBC and potentially Canada was found to have more benefits then disadvantages. The price of manufacturing/operating was found to be similar for both material types and that the price of wheat will be more stable and cheaper than that of wood in the future. Wheat paper will reduce the trees consumed and ecological footprint while producing less air emissions and solid wastes than the conventional wood pulping process. Finally, wheat paper will add an increase in farmer income nationally, help create awareness of paper fibre alternatives locally, and continue to promote UBC’s image as a leader in sustainable technologies. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».