MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981619911 · doi:10.1177/0270467605282980

Thirteen Years After Rio: The State of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Canada

2005· article· en· W1981619911 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shahram Karimi

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasKyoto ProtocolRenewable energySummitNatural resource economicsClimate changeBiosphereEnvironmental impact of the energy industryGlobal warmingGreenhouse effectClimate change mitigationEarth SummitEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental protectionEnergy policySustainable developmentEconomicsPolitical scienceGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Greenhouse gas emissions are adversely affecting the earth’s climate, a global common and a public good. The contribution of individual countries has a limited effect on the biosphere, implying that only globally coordinated efforts may result in significant climate improvements. The Rio Earth Summit (1992) and Kyoto Protocol (1997) are manifestations of international efforts to achieve sustainable development through efficient use of energy and incorporating more renewable sources in global economy. In this article, the author examines the energy-related emissions of greenhouse gases and the utilization of renewable energy sources in Canada with respect to Agenda 21 commitments. An overview of the results of Canada’s policies on climate change since Rio in terms of energy consumption, various sources of energy, and emission rates of greenhouse gases is also presented. It is concluded that the current plans of the Canadian government to deal with greenhouse gas emissions have not been effective.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.178 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Science Technology & SocietySame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207