The First North American Carbon Storage Atlas
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada, Mexico and the United States formed the North American Carbon Atlas Partnership (NACAP) in December 2008 to collaborate in the development of a North American Carbon Storage Atlas (NACSA). This partnership was formally announced by the Presidents of the United States and Mexico and the Prime Minister of Canada at their meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico, in August 2009. The NACAP effort identified and quantified large stationary sources of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions, identified and screened sedimentary basins suitable for CO 2 storage, and estimated the CO 2 storage resources of the three most common types of geological media—oil and gas reservoirs, unmineable coal and deep saline formations—in those basins using publicly available geological data. To develop the atlas NACAP had to harmonize storage resource estimation methodologies, define a common scale and resolution, and develop procedures for the treatment of shared sedimentary basins across national borders. Although North America is a large emitter of CO 2 , the results of the assessments by the three countries demonstrate that potential CO 2 storage resources in North America are hundreds, if not thousands, of times greater than current CO 2 emissions. Certainly, practical considerations will reduce these estimates. The maps of the large stationary CO 2 sources and of the CO 2 storage resources show that the sources and storage resources frequently either overlay each other or are within manageable distances of each other, making carbon capture and storage an attractive option to reduce CO 2 emissions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it