MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990135710 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v3n3p3

Leveraging Solar Photovoltaic Technology for Sustainable Development in Ontario's Aboriginal Communities

2010· article· en· W1990135710 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Dirk V. P. McLaughlin, Nicole C. McDonald, Ha T Nguyan, Joshua M Pearce

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemRenewable energyTariffFeed-in tariffRevenueSolar energyBusinessElectricityEnvironmental economicsSustainable developmentSoftware deploymentEnvironmental resource managementNatural resource economicsEconomic growthEconomicsPolitical scienceEnergy policyEngineeringFinanceInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ontario feed-in tariff (FIT) for solar photovoltaic (PV) technology has provided Ontario's Aboriginal communities with an opportunity to i) weaken the cycle of poverty; ii) directly counteract climate change by producing renewable energy; and iii) become more self-sufficient. This paper critically analyzes the technical, cultural, and economic viability of leveraging the FIT for PV to provide green electricity and revenue to assist First Nations communities in sustainable development. A generalized free GIS-energy-based protocol was developed to determine the PV potential for Aboriginal communities. This model was applied to a case study of the Constance Lake First Nations community and an economic analysis showed financially-viable rates of return over 20 years. By generalizing these findings to Ontario, the potential PV deployment on First Nation rooftops alone is over 200MW, which clearly provides an opportunity for developing pride associated with owning a community-led, environmentally beneficial, local energy project.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207