MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038100046 · doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2009.02.254

Legal and regulatory developments associated with carbon dioxide capture and storage: A global update

2009· article· en· W2038100046 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tom Kerr, Ian Havercroft, Tim Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Procedia · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean CommissionU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsCarbon capture and storage (timeline)European unionScale (ratio)BusinessPresentation (obstetrics)Environmental planningEnvironmental economicsEngineeringEnvironmental resource managementInternational tradeEnvironmental scienceClimate changeGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) is widely seen as a critical technology to de-carbonise the power and industrial sectors. As such, many nations have ambitious plans to demonstrate and then promote commercial scale development of CCS. To facilitate early demonstrations and lay the groundwork for widespread use of CCS, governments are rapidly developing new CCS regulations and policies. There have been a number of important regulatory and legal developments in the European Union, United States, Australia, Canada, Norway and several other jurisdictions. This paper and presentation will provide a brief but comprehensive update of these developments and will document and synthesise discussions and activities that were undertaken as part of the IEA’s International CCS Regulator’s Network. It is hoped that information sharing of this kind can help to facilitate harmonised global approaches to regulating CCS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy ProcediaSame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207