MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003724116 · doi:10.4296/cwrj2503255

Climate Change: Implications for Canadian Water Resources and Hydropower Production

2000· article· en· W2003724116 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Yves Filion

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface runoffHydropowerSnowpackEnvironmental scienceHydroelectricityHydrology (agriculture)Climate changeWater resourcesStreamflowFlash floodStormSnowFlood mythStructural basinPrecipitationDrainage basinGeographyGeologyEcologyOceanographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper the possible effects of climate change on Canada’s water resources, and the attendant implications for hydropower production are discussed. A change in climatic conditions could spawn drastic changes in the way that the Canadian hydroelectric sub-sector manages the operations of its hydropower stations. Supporting arguments draw largely on four modelling studies in which general circulation models (GCMs) and hydrological models have been used to predict significant climatic and hydrological changes in Canada’s major watersheds. The areas investigated include the interior of British Columbia and southern Yukon (Coulson, 1997), the basins surrounding James Bay in Quebec (Singh, 1988), the Great Lakes Basin in Ontario (Cohen, 1986), and the Saskatchewan sub-basin which transects the provincial borders of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba (Cohen, 1991). A synthesis of the results of these studies is used to decipher the multitude of annual and seasonal changes in runoff, precipitation and evaporation that may occur in the future. There are indications that the annual volume of runoff and hydropower capacity may increase in northern regions, and decrease in southern regions. As for seasonal changes, northern areas may see a more intense spring runoff due to an increase in snowpack, while southern areas may experience heavier winter runoff due to larger winter rainfalls. A greater number of spring or winter floods could force hydropower installations to divert flood water to their spillways more frequently, amounting to missed opportunities to produce energy. The frequent occurrence of extreme events such as large storms and flash floods could also jeopardize the integrity of certain hydropower stations. Other problems such as melting glaciers, ice jams, sediment loading and hydraulic surging could adversely affect the operations of hydropower stations. These problems may be exacerbated by increases in demand for domestic and irrigation water, as well as energy for interior cooling. The paper concludes by enumerating mitigatory and managerial strategies to alleviate the possible difficulties faced by the hydropower sub-sector.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207