MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969254642 · doi:10.1080/15435075.2019.1650047

A comprehensive review of geothermal energy evolution and development

2019· review· en· W2969254642 on OpenAlexaff
M. Soltani, Farshad Moradi Kashkooli, Alireza Dehghani-Sanij, Arman Nokhosteen, Atefeh Ahmadi-Joughi, Kobra Gharali, SeyedBijan Mahbaz, Maurice B. Dusseault

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Green Energy · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGeothermal Energy Systems and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenewable energyProduction (economics)Greenhouse gasGeothermal energyFossil fuelEnvironmental economicsSustainable developmentGeothermal gradientSustainabilityEnergy developmentNatural resource economicsEmerging technologiesEnvironmental resource managementBusinessEngineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEconomicsWaste managementEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global energy demand is increasing, driven by population rise, technological development, and a desire for a better lifestyle. However, because environmental issues such as fossil-fuel-sourced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are emerging as constraints on the nature of energy sources, using renewable and sustainable energy sources is the appropriate and applicable response. Geothermal energy is one form of renewable and sustainable energy, which has certain advantages such as consistency, a vast amount of untapped potential, availability, and a wide range of possible applications that make it an interesting and viable solution for helping meet the world’s energy needs while reducing GHG emissions (especially CO2). We provide a comprehensive review on the evolution of geothermal energy production from its obscure beginnings to the present time by reporting production data from individual countries and collective data of worldwide production. In addition, we provide an overview of relevant technologies at the industrial level, such as site identification, power production methods, and direct use. Finally, we discuss the geothermal power production prospects for 2050, the classification of production capacity on the technology side, and existing roadmaps for points of interest concerning technological development. We hope this review helps to identify existing gaps, future challenges, and areas needing further attention and investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations123
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Green EnergySame topicGeothermal Energy Systems and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207