MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171131039 · doi:10.1002/bbb.208

The international logistics of wood pellets for heating and power production in Europe: Costs, energy‐input and greenhouse gas balances of pellet consumption in Italy, Sweden and the Netherlands

2010· article· en· W2171131039 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiofuels Bioproducts and Biorefining · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelletsTonneGreenhouse gasRaw materialEnvironmental scienceRenewable energyCoalWaste managementPelletFossil fuelElectricityAgricultural economicsEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringEconomicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The European wood pellet market is booming: concerns about climate change and renewable energy targets are predominant drivers. The aim of this analysis is to compare typical wood pellet chains from the purchase of the feedstock from sawmills to the conversion into heat or electricity. Cost structures, primary energy inputs and avoided greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are reviewed. Three cases are defined: pellets for district heating (DH) in Sweden (replacing heavy fuel oil); bagged pellets for residential heating in Italy (natural gas); and Canadian pellets for electricity production in the Netherlands (coal). Supply may cost €110–€170 per tonne of delivered pellets, with the main cost factors being feedstock collection, drying and long‐distance ocean transportation (for Canadian pellets only). Largest avoided emissions are for power production (1937 kg CO 2 eq/tonne of pellets), followed by district heating (1483 kg). In relative terms, the GHG reduction varies from 81% for residential heating (with pre‐dried feedstock) to 97% for DH. Based on a wood‐pellet consumption of 8.2 million tonnes, the EU27 plus Norway and Switzerland avoided about 12.6 million tonnes of CO 2 emissions in 2008. Concluding, wood pellets can achieve substantial GHG savings, especially when substituting coal for power production. However, wood pellets are relatively expensive, especially compared to coal. Only in the case of high oil prices, can the substitution of heating oil for DH be commercially viable. In most other cases, substitution is only possible with financial support from national governments, for example, feed‐in tariffs or carbon taxes. The commercial markets for CO 2 emission rights may cover some costs, but their impact is still limited. Copyright © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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