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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.128
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