MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065905399 · doi:10.2118/0609-0034-jpt

Global Possibilities of Future Methane and Hydrogen Economies

2009· article· en· W2065905399 on OpenAlex
Roberto F. Aguilera, Roberto Aguilera

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyPontificia Universidad Católica de ChileNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversidad de Chile
KeywordsHydrogenHydrogen economyFossil fuelEarth scienceNatural resource economicsChemistryHydrogen fuelEconomicsGeologyEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Management Jules Verne, the father of science fiction, wrote several books using ideas that eventually became reality. Some examples include: From the Earth to the Moon in 1866, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea in 1870 where he envisions submarines, Robur the Conqueror in 1886 where he describes the precursor of helicopters, and The Mysterious Island in 1875 where he wrote: Yes, my friends, I believe that water will one day be employed as fuel, that hydrogen and oxygen which constitute it, used singly or together, will furnish an inexhaustible source of heat and light, of an intensity of which coal is not capable. Vaitheeswaran (2003) asks, "Could the man who forecast the development of such technological marvels as submarines, helicopters, and space travel have gotten energy right, too?" We believe that the answer is most likely positive. Hydrogen accounts for approximately 75% of the universe's mass and is the most abundant of all elements. Stars are made mainly of hydrogen. However, hydrogen does not generally exist in a free state in Earth. Consequently, it has to be extracted from different materials including, for example, biomass, fossil fuels, and water. This means that it takes energy to free hydrogen for use, no matter how it is produced. As a result, hydrogen is not strictly an energy source but an energy carrier much in the same way as electricity. At present, while society is deeply concerned about the environment, hydrogen might emerge as a white knight. There is evidence that, since 1850, the relative hydrogen consumption has been increasing steadily (Fig. 1). Research shows continuous decarbonization from 1850 to 1970. At this point, the hydrogen/carbon (H/C) ratio becomes approximately constant (in the order of 1.8). Hefner (2002) describes this history for the US as follows: "For more than 100 years, free markets and the ingenuity of humankind worked efficiently to decarbonize our energy systems…. It was only starting in the 1950s, when governments began to tinker with price controls and later, reacting to the ‘sky is falling’ cries of shortages by the energy industry, allocated fuels among sectors of consumers, that we once again began to recarbonize the energy system." The recarbonization period described by Hefner occurs between approximately 1970 and 2006. However, the Global Energy Market (GEM) model tends to show a slight improvement in the H/C ratio as we advance toward the year 2030. This suggests an increase in production of natural gas which, we anticipate, will pave the way to an "energy revolution that will transform an industry, change our lives, and maybe even save the planet" (Vaitheeswaran, 2003).

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.249 · 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