Recent Developments in Renewable Energy in Remote Aboriginal Communities, British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydroelectricity has a long tradition in British Columbia, provides approximately 95% of the province’s electricity supply, and powers the electrical systems of several remote aboriginal communities. However, diesel generators remain in 23 remote aboriginal communities and a transition from fossil fuels to renewables is desired. This transition has been promoted through a series of Energy Plans from 2002 and the 2010 Clean Energy Act. One of the goals of the Act is to encourage economic development of First Nation and rural areas through the development of clean and renewable energy projects. The stage of development of these clean energy projects varies among communities and insights can be gained by reviewing progress to date. This paper reviews current community electricity systems, past renewable electricity projects, as well as available renewable resources, generation alternatives, and supportive targets and policies in British Columbia. The results show that two communities recently connected to the newly constructed Northwestern transmission line, and that 15 out of the 23 remote aboriginal communities participate, or plan to participate, in renewable electricity generation to reduce diesel dependence and greenhouse gas emissions, and to increase self-sufficiency. Keywords: British Columbia, remote aboriginal communities, indigenous communities, diesel, renewable electricity, energy transition, climate action policies
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".