MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043831517 · doi:10.5558/tfc78843-6

Saskatchewan forest carbon sequestration project

2002· article· en· W2043831517 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tony C. Lemprière, Mark Johnston, Al Willcocks, Bryan E.C. Bogdanski, Deb Bisson, Mike Apps, Oliver Bussler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSaskTel (Canada)Prince Albert Grand CouncilNatural Resources CanadaSaskatchewan Research Council (Canada)Environment and Climate Change CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon sequestrationGreenhouse gasCarbon creditCarbon stockEnvironmental scienceStock (firearms)Carbon accountingForest managementNatural resource economicsForestryBusinessEnvironmental protectionAgroforestryClimate changeEconomicsGeographyEcologyCarbon dioxide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2002 a project in Saskatchewan became the first forest carbon (C) sequestration project to be formally reviewed and approved in Canada under the Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading (GERT) Pilot. GERT concluded that the project will result in real, measurable, verifiable and surplus net sequestration, calculated as C stock changes in the with-project case less C stock changes in the reference (without project) case. The project is a 50-year agreement (2000–2050) in which Saskatchewan Environment sells net C sequestration to the provincial electrical utility Saskatchewan Power Corporation. Net sequestration of 1.6 Mt C is expected to result from the establishment of white spruce plantations on 3300 ha and from forest protection through creation of 206 000 ha of Forest Carbon Reserves. Issues that arose in the review included leakage, the permanence of the sequestered carbon and risk of losses, establishment of the reference case, methodologies for projections of impacts, approaches for sampling and measurements, and accounting methods. GERT established a number of reporting and other conditions to be fulfilled when estimates of actual net sequestration are registered. Future forest C sequestration projects, project reviews and policy development will be able to draw upon the lessons learned from the Saskatchewan project. Key words: carbon sequestration, carbon sequestration projects, Saskatchewan, Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Trading Pilot, plantations, forest protection, leakage, permanence, carbon accounting, carbon measurement

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207