Geothermal Energy Potential in Low Enthalpy Areas as a Future Energy Resource: Identifying Feasible Targets, Quebec, Canada, Study Case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat flow of the sedimentary succession of the Eastern Canada Sedimentary Basins varies from 40 mW/m2 close to the exposed shield in the north to high 60–70 mW/m2 in the southwest–northeast St. Lawrence corridor. As high fluid flow rates are required for a successful geothermal application, the most important targets are deep existing permeable aquifers rather than hard rock, which would need to be fracked. Unfortunately, the ten most populated Québec urban centers are in the areas where the Grenville (Canadian Shield) is exposed or at shallow depths with sedimentary cover where temperatures are 30 °C or less. The city of Drummondville will be the exception, as the basement deepens sharply southwest, and higher temperatures reaching >120 °C are expected in the deep Cambrian sedimentary aquifers near a 4–5-km depth. Deep under the area where such sediments could be occurring under Appalachian nappes, temperatures significantly higher than 140 °C are predicted. In parts of the deep basin, temperatures as high as 80 °C–120 °C exist at depths of 3–4 km, mainly southeast of the major geological boundary: the Logan line. There is a large amount of heat resource at such depths to be considered in this area for district heating.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".