MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805951817 · doi:10.1002/wene.298

Salvage harvesting for bioenergy in Canada: From sustainable and integrated supply chain to climate change mitigation

2018· article· en· W2805951817 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Energy and Environment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaQueen's UniversityCanadian Forest Service
FundersNatural Resources CanadaBioFuelNet Canada
KeywordsBioenergyBiomass (ecology)Supply chainGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceNatural resource economicsRaw materialRenewable energyClimate change mitigationSustainabilityBusinessBiofuelWaste managementEngineeringEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Driven by the policy imperatives of mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and improving energy security, an increasing proportion of global energy demand is being met by nonfossil energy sources. The socioeconomic and environmental benefits of replacing fossil fuels with bioenergy are complex; however, debate continues about issues such as best practices for biomass removal, stable supply chains, and GHG mitigation. With the greatest biomass per capita in the world, Canada could play an increasing role in the future of global bioenergy and the emerging bioeconomy. This paper reviews the utilization of feedstock salvaged after natural disturbances (fire and insect outbreaks) to supply wood‐based bioenergy, by addressing the following multidisciplinary questions: (1) How much salvaged feedstock is available, and what are the uncertainties around these estimates? (2) How can sustainable practices to support increased removal of biomass be implemented? (3) What are the constraints on development of an integrated supply chain and cost‐effective mobilization of the biomass? (4) Is the quality of biomass from salvaged trees suitable for conversion to bioenergy? (5) What is the potential for climate change mitigation? In average, salvaged feedstock from fire and insects could theoretically provide about 100 × 10 6 oven Dry ton (ODT) biomass per year, with high variability over time and space. Existing policies and guidelines for harvesting of woody biomass in Canadian jurisdictions could support sustainable biomass removal. However, uncertainties remain as to the development of competitive and profitable supply chains, because of the large distances between the locations of this feedstock and available processing sites. Another uncertainty lies in the time needed for a benefit in climate change mitigation to occur. A flexible supply chain, integrated with other sources of biomass residues, is needed to develop a cost‐efficient bioenergy sector. This article is categorized under: Bioenergy > Climate and Environment

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · 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