MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058435337 · doi:10.3354/esep007023

Ethical risks of attenuating climate change through new energy systems: the case of a biofuel system

2007· article· en· W2058435337 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah M. Jordaan

Bibliographic record

VenueEthics in Science and Environmental Politics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeBiofuelBusinessNatural resource economicsEnergy (signal processing)Environmental economicsEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceEconomicsWaste managementEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been estimated that a quarter of global energy could be consumed by transport, accounting for approximately 25% of total carbon dioxide emissions.This provides opportunity to reduce emissions through alternative fuels.As a result, biofuels have recently become the focus of many climate change policy discussions.However, those produced from agricultural crops are not greenhouse gas neutral and have the potential to transform many of the earth's natural landscapes into monocultures.This land transformation leads to ethical trade-offs that should be addressed before policy is put in place.These trade-offs will likely result in competing social institutions with different values.A scientific approach to assessing ethics is too reductionistic to achieve a fair outcome.Normative ethical theory is discussed as a means to deal with competing values in a just manner.The Wide Reflective Equilibrium (WRE) process should be used to achieve the fairest policy.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.039
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0170.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthics in Science and Environmental PoliticsSame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207