MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using ecosystem <scp>CO</scp><sub>2</sub> measurements to estimate the timing and magnitude of greenhouse gas mitigation potential of forest bioenergy

2012· article· en· W2163071890 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pierre Y. Bernier, David Paré

Bibliographic record

VenueGCB Bioenergy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddy covarianceBioenergyEnvironmental scienceGreenhouse gasBiomass (ecology)EcosystemForest ecologyCarbon sequestrationAgroforestryAtmospheric sciencesBiofuelEcologyCarbon dioxide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Forest bioenergy opportunities may be hindered by a long greenhouse gas (GHG) payback time. Estimating this payback time requires the quantification of forest‐atmosphere carbon exchanges, usually through process‐based simulation models. Such models are prone to large uncertainties, especially over long‐term carbon fluxes from dead organic matter pools. We propose the use of whole ecosystem field‐measured CO2 exchanges obtained from eddy covariance flux towers to assess the GHG mitigation potential of forest biomass projects as a way to implicitly integrate all field‐level CO2 fluxes and the inter‐annual variability in these fluxes. As an example, we perform the evaluation of a theoretical bioenergy project that uses tree stems as bioenergy feedstock and include multi‐year measurements of net ecosystem exchange (NEE) from forest harvest chronosequences in the boreal forest of Canada to estimate the time dynamics of ecosystem CO2 exchanges following harvesting. Results from this approach are consistent with previous results using process‐based models and suggest a multi‐decadal payback time for our project. The time for atmospheric carbon debt repayment of bioenergy projects is highly dependent on ecosystem‐level CO2 exchanges. The use of empirical NEE measurements may provide a direct evaluation of, or at least constraints on, the GHG mitigation potential of forest bioenergy projects.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGCB BioenergySame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207