MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1578047622 · doi:10.2172/978357

FY-09 Summary Report to the Office of Petroleum Reserves on the Western Energy Corridor Initiative Activities and Accomplishments

2010· report· en· W1578047622 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas R. Wood

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Scope (computer science)CommercializationInterimTask (project management)Energy policyEnergy securityOil reservesBusinessPetroleumEngineeringPolitical scienceRenewable energyMarketingComputer scienceSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To meet its programmatic obligations under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Office of Naval Petroleum and Shale Oil Reserves (NPSOR) has initiated the Western Energy Corridor Initiative (WECI). The WECI will implement the Unconventional Strategic Fuels Task Force recommendations for accelerating and promoting the development of domestic unconventional fuels to help meet the nations’ energy needs. The mission of the WECI is to bolster America’s future fuel security by facilitating socially and environmentally responsible development of unconventional fuels resources in the Western Energy Corridor, using sound engineering principles and science-based methods to define and assess benefits, impacts, uncertainties, and mitigation options and to resolve impediments. The Task Force proposed a three-year program in its commercialization plan. The work described herein represents work performed by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in support of the DOE’s WECI. This effort represents an interim phase of work, designed to initiate only select portions of the initiative, limited by available funding resources within NPOSR. Specifically, the work presented here addresses what was accomplished in FY-09 with the remaining carryover (~$420K) from NPOSR FY-08 funds. It was the intent of the NPOSR program to seek additional funding for full implementation of the full scope of work; however, the original tasks were reduced in scope, terminated, or eliminated (as noted below). An effort is ongoing to obtain funding to continue the tasks initiated under this project. This study will focus on the integrated development of multiple energy resources in a carbon-neutral and environmentally acceptable manner. Emphasis will be placed on analyses of the interrelationships of various energy-resource development plans and the infrastructure, employment, training, fiscal, and economic demands placed on the region as a result of various development scenarios. The interactions at build-out during the design, permitting, and construction of individual and multiple energy developments are not fully considered at the local, state, regional, or national levels. The net impacts to the Western Energy Corridor cannot be understood and the design optimized under the current approach. A regional development plan is needed to model cumulative impacts, determine the carrying capacity of the basin, and provide valuable technically based information to both skeptics and advocates. The INL scope of work for FY-09 involved six tasks: 1. Evaluation of the ASPEN Code as a dynamic systems model for application and use under the WECI and communications with Alberta Oil Sands Research Institutions as an “analog” resource development in the Western Energy Corridor 2. Application of the Aspen Plus computer model to several oil shale processes to consider energy balances and inputs and outputs (e.g. water consumption, CO2 production, etc.) 3. Development of a regulatory roadmap for oil shale developments 4. Defining of the physiographic extent of the natural resource reserves that comprise the Western Energy Corridor 5. A review of the Unconventional Fuels Task Force Report to Congress for ideas, concepts and recommendations that crosscutting plans 6. Program development with stakeholders, including industry, academics, state and federal agencies, and non government organizations. This task also includes project management, strategic development and reporting.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.030

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPetroleum Processing and Analysis→French-language works237,207→