MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mapping the penetration and retention potential of two weathered diluted bitumen crude oils for the shorelines of Northern British Columbia, Canada

2017· article· en· W2753278405 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lennie Boutet, Sonia Laforest, Patrick Lambert, John R. Harper, Gary A. Sergy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShoreIntertidal zoneAsphaltEnvironmental scienceOil sandsSedimentSubmarine pipelineChannel (broadcasting)OceanographyHydrology (agriculture)Oil spillGeologyArchaeologyGeographyEnvironmental protectionGeotechnical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increase in bitumen production from Alberta's oil sands, there is a related increase in the transport of non-conventional crude oil throughout Canada including proposed pipeline projects to move diluted bitumen (dilbit) to facilities on the East and West coast of Canada. While the behaviour of conventional oil is well known, little information is available about the fate of any potential dilbit spills on marine shorelines. As a part of Enhancing Marine Safety Strategy launched in 2013 by the Government of Canada, a R&D program has been developed by the Emergencies Sciences and Technology Section (ESTS) from Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) to study the behaviour of non-conventional oil. More precisely, one of the objectives is to develop tools to help oil spill responders to predict the fate of dilbit on shorelines of Northern British Columbia (BC). To address this objective, we collected data from three sources; BC segmentation of the upper intertidal zone for the Douglas Channel and Haida Gwaii Island, particle size analysis results of sediment samples collected directly from Northern BC shoreline and meso-scale laboratory research results on the penetration and retention of dilbit in different type of sediment. This last experiment was conducted in laboratory by the contractor Coastal and Ocean Resources Inc. to estimate penetration (cm) and retention (% of the loading) of different weather dilbit (AWB [18% loss by weights] and CLB [15% loss by weight]) in different types of sediments (from coarse sand to very large pebble). These previous data were combined to associate each shoreline type with dilbit penetration and retention data. For each shoreline type, we did a quantitative (penetration) and qualitative (retention) estimation of dilbit properties. The estimations were also visually represented on ArcMap 9.1. In Northern British Columbia, most of the shoreline is associated with low penetration and low retention corresponding to bedrock substrate. Conversely, high penetration and retention is mainly associated with coarse sediments like pebble/cobble beaches. These shoreline types represent an indicator of difficulty of cleanup operations. Likewise, high retention can be found in coarse sediments but also in sensitive shorelines like marshes. So these maps can be used as an operational tool to establish the priorities and to determine the best strategy for the shoreline cleanup methods (penetration maps), but also as an indicator of shoreline sensitivity (retention maps).

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Oil Spill Conference ProceedingsSame topicOil Spill Detection and MitigationFrench-language works237,207