MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1910002142

Life Cycle Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Mining and Milling of Uranium in Saskatchewan

2015· article· en· W1910002142 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoal and Its By-products
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceUranium miningUraniumWaste managementLife-cycle assessmentMetallurgyEngineeringGeologyMaterials scienceProduction (economics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents a detailed study of life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity during the uranium mining-milling phase of the nuclear fuel cycle for three paired uranium mine-mill operations in northern Saskatchewan (SK). The study period runs from 2006 – 2013 for two of the three pairs, and from 1995-2010 for the third. The life cycle analysis has been conducted based on the ISO 14040:2006 standard using a Process Chain Analysis methodology. This study differs from previous studies of GHG emissions intensity during the uranium mining-milling phase of the nuclear fuel cycle in two key respects. First, it has a very large system boundary which includes the uranium exploration and mine-mill decommissioning phases. Second, it utilizes a life cycle inventory database to include many processes which would normally fall outside of the system boundary due to their small individual contributions. These differences contribute to a more accurate result. The production-weighted average life cycle GHG emissions intensity is estimated as 45 kg CO2e/kg U3O8 at an average ore grade of 9.12% U3O8 based on relative U3O8 production volumes at Mine-Mill A, B, and C from 2006 to 2010. The 95% confidence interval for the production-weighted average result ranges from 42 to 49 kg CO2e/kg U3O8, indicating that overall uncertainty in the result is low. Life cycle GHG emission intensity for the three uranium mine-mill pairs are 84, 66, and 35 kg CO2e/kg U3O8 at average ore grades of 0.71%, 1.54%, and 11.5% U3O8 respectively. Nearly 90% of life cycle GHG emissions are associated with operation of the uranium mine-mills, primarily from energy consumption during operation (69% of total) transport of materials and personnel (7.0%), and use of reagents (5.6%). Remaining processes each individually account for less than 5% of the total. In calculating emissions from electricity consumption, the base-case emission intensities reported above use a province-wide electricity emission factor because the utility does not differentiate its emissions by region. However, the facilities included in this study are all located in Northern Saskatchewan, which is powered exclusively by hydropower. Application of a regional emission factor reduces the production-weighted average life cycle GHG emission intensity to 26 kg CO2e/kg U3O8 with a 95% confidence interval of 25 to 29 kg CO2e/kg U3O8. This represents a 42% reduction in life cycle GHG emission intensity from the base case. Due to the high uranium ore grades found in SK uranium deposits, life cycle GHG emissions intensity for uranium from SK is among the lowest in the world. Further, the life cycle GHG emission intensity estimate from uranium mining-milling in SK is a small (approximately 10%) contributor to the life cycle GHG emissions intensity from the nuclear fuel cycle for light water reactors overall, amounting to approximately 1.2 g CO2e/kWh electricity (0.6 g CO2e/kWh electricity calculated using the regional hydroelectric power source).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicCoal and Its By-productsFrench-language works237,207