New Climate Protection, Energy Security, and Employment Creation Strategies for Latin and North America Based on Renewable Energy Collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current policy developments to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are falling behind ecological change. The prevalent policy response to mitigate climate change is based on carbon trading mechanisms, which after the 2010 U.S. House of Representatives election and the Cancún climate negotiations, face an uncertain future. After losing its political majority in congress, the Obama Administration has also lost its ability to implement a national cap and trade system in the United States. The inability of climate negotiators to cement clear GHG reduction targets and a firm commitment for a second period for the Kyoto Protocol (KP) in Cancún means that the longevity and widespread applicability of existing carbon trading mechanisms will remain in doubt until the next United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Durban, South Africa, at the end of 2011. These recent developments provide impetus to explore additional strategies to help achieve climate mitigation and the decarbonization of the energy systems of the Americas. Specifically, this article analyzes the feasibility of implementing new collaborative agreements such as the “California‐Chile Partnership for the 21st Century” to advance domestic implementation of renewable energy (RE) initiatives. This article also examines the potential role that new organizations such as the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) can play in enhancing local capacity and policy development in Latin America. El desarrollo de políticas para reducir las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero (GEI) se están rezagando frente a los cambios en materia ecológica. La principal respuesta al cambio climático está basada en los mercados de carbón que después de las elecciones de congreso y senado en Estados Unidos y de las negociaciones mundiales sobre el cambio climático en Cancún, representan una fórmula que enfrenta un futuro incierto. Después de perder su mayoría en el congreso, la administración del presidente Obama enfrenta también una reducción en sus posibilidades de implementar un sistema de límites y comercio de emisiones en Estados Unidos. Además, el hecho de que representantes gubernamentales no pudieran concretar en Cancún metas claras para reducir las emisiones de GEI o un acuerdo firme para un segundo periodo del Protocolo de Kioto, pondrá en duda hasta las negociaciones de finales de 2011, en Durban, Sudáfrica, la durabilidad y generalización de los mecanismos de comercio de emisiones que son parte del Protocolo de Kioto. Estos eventos recientes incitan a analizar estrategias adicionales que puedan ayudar a mitigar el cambio climático y a mejorar los sistemas energéticos de las Américas. Específicamente este artículo analiza la factibilidad de implementar nuevos acuerdos de colaboración similares al acuerdo “Chile‐California: Una asociación para el siglo XXI” con la meta de avanzar en la implementación de nuevas iniciativas para incrementar el uso de las energías renovables. Este artículo también explora los roles que organizaciones nuevas como la Agencia Mundial de Energías Renovables podrían ejercer para aumentar el conocimiento a nivel local y para ayudar en la gestión de políticas prácticas para el desarrollo de las energías renovables en América Latina.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".