MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966878594 · doi:10.3390/min4020399

Strategizing Carbon-Neutral Mines: A Case for Pilot Projects

2014· article· en· W1966878594 on OpenAlexafffund
Ian Power, Jenine McCutcheon, Anna L. Harrison, Sasha Wilson, Gregory M. Dipple, Simone Kelly, Colette Southam, Gordon Southam

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCarbon Management Canada
KeywordsTailingsEnvironmental scienceCarbonationWaste managementNatural resource economicsEnvironmental economicsEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultramafic and mafic mine tailings are a valuable feedstock for carbon mineralization that should be used to offset carbon emissions generated by the mining industry. Although passive carbonation is occurring at the abandoned Clinton Creek asbestos mine, and the active Diavik diamond and Mount Keith nickel mines, there remains untapped potential for sequestering CO2 within these mine wastes. There is the potential to accelerate carbonation to create economically viable, large-scale CO2 fixation technologies that can operate at near-surface temperature and atmospheric pressure. We review several relevant acceleration strategies including: bioleaching of magnesium silicates; increasing the supply of CO2 via heterotrophic oxidation of waste organics; and biologically induced carbonate precipitation, as well as enhancing passive carbonation through tailings management practices and use of CO2 point sources. Scenarios for pilot scale projects are proposed with the aim of moving towards carbon-neutral mines. A financial incentive is necessary to encourage the development of these strategies. We recommend the use of a dynamic real options pricing approach, instead of traditional discounted cash-flow approaches, because it reflects the inherent value in managerial flexibility to adapt and capitalize on favorable future opportunities in the highly volatile carbon market.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations84
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralsSame topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207