MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152729742 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2000.849684

Feasibility study of a cogeneration plant for University of Calgary

2002· article· en· W2152729742 on OpenAlexaffabout
N.D. Rao, Serban Iosif Sporea

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCogenerationDeregulationLiberian dollarElectricityCollateralPower stationProfit (economics)Environmental economicsBusinessEconomicsEngineeringFinanceElectricity generationPower (physics)Electrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents the initial results of a research project on the technical and economic feasibility and logistics of installing a cogeneration plant on the University of Calgary Campus in the light of the upcoming electricity deregulation at the retail level, mandated by the provincial government starting 1 January, 2001. Part of the electric power generated will be used to supply the campus needs and the excess sold to ENMAX at the prevailing competitive price. The steam byproduct will be used to satisfy campus hot water needs. A range of sizes for the cogeneration plant will then be determined so as to maximize return on invested capital under the retail post-deregulation scenario, using a range of dollar figures per kWhr above and below the estimated mean value. The following collateral issues are also addressed: (1) siting of the cogeneration plant; comparative merits will be evaluated along with the appropriate recommendation; (2) gas-fired turbine? Contractual arrangements with a natural gas supplier for protection from gas price fluctuations are analyzed; logistics of standby diesel fuel in case of gas supply interruption are explored; (3) relative merits of the university undertaking this endeavor alone or in collaboration with an operator such as ENMAX are investigated on a cost and profit-sharing basis; and (4) contractual arrangements with ENMAX to supply emergency power, in case of cogeneration unit failure, are also addressed. KWhr dollar figure estimates are done for the retail post-deregulation scenario and their impact on cogeneration assessed.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.152 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207