Fibre use, net calorific value, and consumption of forest-derived bioenergy in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lack of data about current bioenergy production in British Columbia severely limits stakeholder analyses of the true value and growth potential of bioenergy within the province and the forest industry's sustainability. Fifty-two facilities were surveyed to gather statistics on rates of fibre use for energy, thermal and electrical energy capacity and net production. We estimated that from 2000 to 2011, on average 9.4 Mt of wood fibre (oven-dry) was used annually to produce energy, which was about one-third of the total harvested biomass. However, bioenergy does not drive the harvest. Bioenergy uses residual fibre from other operations—primarily black liquor from pulp mills. In total, the forest sector produced approximately 118 PJ of thermal and electrical energy in 2011, based on the net calorific value provided by respondents. Based on these results, we concluded that wood-based bioenergy supplied approximately 10% of British Columbia's energy demands in 2011. Forestry sector commodity and economic statistics likely underestimate the more than 640 M$ worth of energy it produced. The survey results also showed a wide variation in the efficiency of energy production between different facilities. Given the large discrepancy between the theoretical high heating values and what the producers achieved, it may be prudent to use an operationally-derived net calorific value or low heating value for estimating energy supply from biomass, especially for policy or business development.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".