On Sudbury-Area Wind Speeds—A Tale of Forest Regeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A 34% reduction in 10-m wind speeds at Sudbury Airport in Ontario, Canada, over the period 1975–95 appears to be a result of significant changes in the surface roughness of the surrounding area that are due to land restoration and reforestation following historical environmental damage caused by high sulfur dioxide and other industrial emissions. Neither 850-hPa winds extracted from the NCEP–NCAR reanalysis database nor wind measurements at meteorological stations 200 km to the north and 120 km to the east of Sudbury show the same decrease. To assess these changes in observed wind speed quantitatively, geostrophic drag laws were employed to illustrate potential changes in near-surface wind speeds in areas surrounding the airport. A model of the internal boundary layer flow adjustment associated with changes in the surface roughness length between the surroundings and the grass or snow surface of the airport was then applied to compute expected annual average wind speeds at the airport site itself. The estimates obtained with this relatively simple procedure match the observations and confirm that reforestation is likely the major cause of the reduced wind speeds. This finding bears economic, social, and ecological importance, because it will influence wind energy potential, wind loads on structures, wind chill, and home heating costs through to the biology of small- to medium-sized lakes.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".