The value of British Columbia’s natural gas used as liquefied natural gas (LNG) for export to Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this thesis is to determine the value of British Columbia's natural gas used as liquefied natural gas (LNG) for export to Japan. This value is calculated by a computer model simulating an LNG project in B.C. The model starts with an estimate of the landed price of LNG in Japan and works backward, costing every step, to the input-end of the pipeline delivering the natural gas from the field to the liquefaction plant. The value obtained is the opportunity cost of the natural gas used as LNG and can be compared to the opportunity cost in other uses and to the cost of supplying the natural gas. We calculate this value for both society and the private firm - the difference accounted for by the particular tax structure which would apply to an LNG export project. The base case estimates of the social opportunity cost of the natural gas used as LNG range from $3,645 to $4.12 (1981 Canadian dollars) per thousand cubic feet (MCF), depending on the scale of the liquefaction plant. The estimates of the private opportunity cost are very close to the social values - a difference of about 3%. A comparable estimate for the opportunity cost in use as exports to the United States by pipeline is $4.68/MCF although this figure is based on present and not potential contracts. A sensitivity analysis is performed and the capital cost and the landed price are found to be the variables with the largest relative impact on the base case estimates.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".