Costs, CO2-emissions and energy balance for applying Nordic methods of forest biomass utilization in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A devastating mountain pine beetle (MPB) infestation in British Columbia has had enormous economic consequences for the lumber industry and has been one of the drivers for the development of bioenergy systems. Transportation is the link between forests and the end-users and also a critical factor for profitability. Transport efficiency can in the bioenergy context be evaluated by the costs, but also by the discharged CO2-emission levels and its energy balance. \n \nThe objective of this study was to evaluate three transportation systems with the central difference in the processing level of slash. The feasibility of MPB-killed biomass was compared with vigorous biomass and all systems were modeled over a range of transport distances. Results are expressed in Canadian $/MWh, kg CO2/MWh and ratio between consumed and harvested energy (%). \n \nThe Hog fuel-system, with a grinder allocated to the roadside, was generally the most economical alternative irrespective of slash amount at landing or transport distance. To produce bundles at roadside and transport to the end-user was the most economical alternative for small amount of slash (corresponding to 10 ha final felling) at landing and transport distances over 250 km. Under such conditions the combination of fairly good truckload capacity and low allocation costs compensated for the low bundler productivity. It was in all assessed comparisons least economical to transport the slash in its uncomminuted form to grind it into hog fuel after deliverance to industry. The Bundle-system and the Hog fuel-system had the lowest respectively the highest levels of discharged CO2-emissions. The systems' energy consumption corresponded to 3-10% of the harvested energy, with the Bundle-system and the Hog-fuel system being the most and least, respectively, energy efficient system. \n \nBoth the Hog fuel-system and the Bundle-system are viable opportunities for the recovery of B.C.'s available biomass resources. MPB-killed biomass increased the transport efficiency as it resulted in lower costs and lower levels of discharged CO2-emissions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".