Electronic waste diversion strategies at the Vancouver International Airport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research Question: What strategies should the Vancouver International Airport Authority pursue in order to effectively expand its electronic waste diversion program? This study assessed the e-waste generation trends at the Vancouver International Airport (YVR). The findings of this research have informed the composition of a set of recommendations for an expanded e-waste diversion program at the airport. The airport authority currently has programs in place for the replacement and recycling of all end-of-life lighting products, batteries, cellular phones and computers. Opportunities for expanding this program were determined through an online survey, an audit and interviews It was found that a highly assorted range of e-waste categories are currently produced by the airport authority. Furthermore, it was found that airport tenants have been responsible for generating a large proportion of YVR's e-waste stream. Recommendations: 1. The Community and Environmental Affairs department in the airport authority harmonize the diversion of all end-of-life electronics at the airport. This can occur through the creation of a designated e-waste drop off location at the airport that is accessible to members of the airport authority as well as airport tenants. 2. The airport should register as a Large Volume Generator with Encorp Pacific or a certified BC recycler to receive no-cost e-waste removal service. 3. In order to ensure this system of e-waste diversion has high participation, effective communication about the program must occur through online channels, bulletin boards and meetings. 4. Guidelines for e-waste management should be developed and disseminated amongst YVR staff and tenants.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".