Are There Realistic Possibilities for a Higher “Batting” Average? On Improving Residential Energy Efficiency in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main use of energy in the residential sector in Canada is for space heating. Reductions in residential energy use, therefore, are likely to be achieved primarily through energy-saving retrofits, such as improved insulation. Reasons advanced to explain the foot-dragging of the residential sector in this regard are examined here, along with various policy options. Canadian survey data from 2003 are used to examine and compare the most energy-inefficient households who saw no need for retrofits with other households who provided a similar response, with a view to assessing whether there are factors that can be exploited to increase the uptake of such retrofits. The results suggest there is likely to be no quick fix. In the absence of large retrofit subsidies, with their accompanying free-rider problem, or a multi-pronged strategy that includes a whole array of policy instruments, including one that changes the relative importance of energy costs in household budgets, the outlook for sizeable improvements in residential energy efficiency in Canada via residential retrofits does not appear to be overly promising.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".