MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063236973 · doi:10.1177/0270467606291534

The Hydrogen Economy as a Technological Bluff

2006· article· en· W2063236973 on OpenAlexaff
Willem H. Vanderburg

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Academic Research Areas
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy carrierHydrogen economyBluffElectricityHydrogenEnergy (signal processing)PaceFossil fuelPrimary energyEnergy sourceService (business)Hydrogen fuelEnvironmental scienceBusinessEconomyEconomicsEngineeringWaste managementPhysicsElectrical engineeringMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hydrogen economy is a technological bluff in its implied assurance that, despite the accelerating pace at which we are depleting the remaining half of our fossil fuels, our energy future is secure. Elementary thermodynamic considerations are developed to show that a hydrogen economy is about as feasible as a perpetual motion machine. Hydrogen is not an energy source but an energy carrier, and when produced renewably, it is an energy carrier to the second degree, with electricity being the energy carrier to the first degree. As such, it greatly elongates the chain of energy transformations required to deliver a desired service from a primary source of energy. There will undoubtedly be applications in which hydrogen may be essential, but they will be limited because the services it delivers will come at a substantial energy premium.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Science Technology & SocietySame topicDiverse Academic Research AreasFrench-language works237,207