MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319071019 · doi:10.1177/0958305x15627546

An economic appraisal of solar versus combined cycle electricity generation for African countries that are capital constrained

2016· article· en· W2319071019 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

VenueEnergy & Environment · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemEconomicsElectricity generationSolar powerGrid parityPower stationNatural resource economicsEnvironmental economicsCapital costInvestment (military)Net present valueEnvironmental scienceBusinessProduction (economics)EngineeringPower (physics)PhotovoltaicsMicroeconomicsElectrical engineeringMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many public electric utilities in Africa are capital constrained. In this paper, an economic analysis is carried out to investigate the efficiency of investing in solar photovoltaic power plants, as an option for on-grid power generation. A comparison is made in terms of the economic net present value as well as greenhouse gases savings if the same amount were invested in a combined cycle thermal power generation. The results show that economic net present value is negative for solar photovoltaic plant, whereas it is a large positive value for the combined cycle plant. In addition, the combined cycle plant would be two times as effective in reducing greenhouse gases as the same value of investment in solar photovoltaic plant. Even with solar investment costs falling, it will take 9–18 years of continuous decline before solar generation technology will become cost-effective for most of Africa.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.202 · 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