Injustiças da sustentabilidade: Conflitos ambientais relacionados à produção de energia “limpa” no Brasil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este trabalho discute as contradições existentes na implementação de projetos de energia “limpa”, a partir de quatro casos do contexto brasileiro: agrocombustíveis via cana‑de‑açúcar, hidrelétricas, parques eólicos e, por fim, energia nuclear. Todos geram inúmeros impactos sociais, ambientais e à saúde que caracterizam o que denominamos provocativamente “injustiças da sustentabilidade”. Assumimos que os conflitos ambientais existentes nos casos são inevitáveis em sociedades de mercado, cuja visão hegemônica de desenvolvimento econômico das corporações e, frequentemente, órgãos de governo é confrontada por populações atingidas e movimentos sociais. Portanto, consideramos estratégico reconhecer as injustiças ambientais como forma de articular as bases materiais da sustentabilidade com questões econômicas, sociais, culturais e filosóficas acerca da noção de progresso.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".