MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156471568 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2007.145

Life Cycle Analysis Methodology for Distribution Feeder Reclosers

2007· article· en· W2156471568 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsBC Hydro (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecloserEngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Reliability engineeringInvestment (military)Return on investmentCost–benefit analysisAsset managementLife-cycle assessmentEnvironmental economicsComputer scienceProduction (economics)BusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the mission of "reliable power, at low cost, for generations", BC Hydro adopts the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) approach to investment decision making that considers economic, social and environmental issues in a comprehensive, systematic and integrated way. In this paper, the life cycle analysis (LCA) methodology developed for BC Hydro Distribution-Wires assets is introduced. In this methodology, the life-cycle assessment factors, defined as cost, environment and safety, which impact the investment decisions for the entire life-cycle of assets, are quantified. It integrates with asset management principle that balances three factors of investment, performance, and risks. The LCA methodology is applied into life-cycle analyses of power system distribution feeder reclosers. The main aim is to evaluate the feasibility and benefits for equipping existing manually operated reclosers with supervisory control functionality and derive the optimal recloser implementation strategy. Two different scenarios of reclosers as "keep the existing reclosers", and "upgrade the existing reclosers into SCADA" are evaluated and compared in term of all defined LCA factors. Life cycle cost assessment methodology is adopted to evaluate the cost effectiveness of upgrading reclosers based on if the long term benefits achieved in savings of vegetation management, shortened outage response and reduced recloser operation cost can cover the increased capital cost, operation and maintenance cost for recloser upgrade. Different from traditional approaches, it also considers the safety and environmental risks. Analysis results on existing reclosers are included to demonstrate the application and effectiveness of the LCA methodology.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207