MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976998558 · doi:10.1109/evs.2013.6914837

Electric vehicles — A ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution for emission reduction from transportation?

2013· article· en· W1976998558 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hajo Ribberink, Evgueniy Entchev

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsGreenhouse gasAutomotive engineeringElectricityEnvironmental scienceMiles per gallon gasoline equivalentBattery electric vehicleElectrificationFuel efficiencyBattery (electricity)EngineeringPower (physics)Electrical engineeringGreen vehiclePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric vehicles are broadly considered to have a great potential for reducing emissions from transportation and are sometimes presented as a `one-size-fits-all' solution. A simulation study was performed to forecast least emitting options for single vehicles as well as for total light duty vehicle fleets in the Canadian provinces of Québec, Ontario and Alberta for the year 2025. The study used the Plug-in Electric Vehicle - Charge Impact Model (PEV-CIM), a software tool developed by Natural Resources Canada for evaluating the impact of PEVs on the electricity grid, on fuel costs, and on emissions. Simulation results from PEV-CIM indicate that battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVS) offer a great potential to drastically reduce GHG emissions in the provinces of Québec and Ontario thanks to the low emission intensity of their electrical grids. However, the slow turnover of the light duty vehicle fleet limits the overall emission reduction of the provincial fleets for the year 2025 to only 5-12%. Power generation in the province of Alberta is dominated by the use of coal and natural gas. Its GHG emission intensity is higher than the threshold of 720 gCO <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sub> eq per kWh at which the emissions of BEVs and PHEVs are equal to those of hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs). For this province, HEVs will give the lowest emissions. Electric vehicles do reduce GHG emissions compared to gasoline vehicles. However, a `one-size-fits-all' does not exist as local conditions greatly influence which type of electric vehicle (HEV, PHEV, or BEV) is the best option. Besides, short term solutions may differ from those for the long term.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207