MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984299792 · doi:10.1088/2516-1083/ab56af

Natural gas fuel and greenhouse gas emissions in trucks and ships

2019· article· en· W2984299792 on OpenAlexaff
Jamie Speirs, Paul Balcombe, Paul Blomerus, Marc Stettler, Pablo Achurra-Gonzalez, Mino Woo, Daniel Ainalis, Jasmin Cooper, Amir Sharafian, Walter Mérida, D. J. G. Crow, Sara Giarola, Nimil Shah, Nigel P. Brandon, Adam Hawkes

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Energy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMaritime Transport Emissions and Efficiency
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersShell
KeywordsTruckGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceNatural gasGlobal warmingEnvironmental engineeringWaste managementClimate changeEngineeringAutomotive engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Natural gas is a transport fuel which may help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in shipping and trucks. However, there is some disagreement regarding the potential for natural gas to provide significant improvements relative to current ships and trucks. In 2015, road freight represented ~7% of global energy related CO 2 emissions, with international shipping representing ~2.6% of global emissions. These emissions are also expected to grow, with some estimates suggesting road freight emission growing by a third, and shipping emissions growing by between 50% and 250% from 2012 to 2050, making absolute emissions reductions challenging. In addition, reducing emissions in ships and trucks has proved technically difficult given the relatively long distances that ships and trucks travel. This paper documents a systematic review of literature detailing well-to-wheel/wake greenhouse gas emissions and economic costs in moving from diesel and heavy fuel oil to natural gas as a fuel for trucks and ships. The review found a number of important issues for greenhouse gas reduction. First, moderate greenhouse gas reductions of 10% were found when switching to natural gas from heavy fuel oil in shipping when comparing the lowest estimates. Comparing lowest well-to-wheel greenhouse gas emissions estimates for trucks, the benefit of switching to natural gas fuel is approximately a 16% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. However, these emissions are highly variable, driven particularly by methane emissions in exhaust gas. Given this, in the worst cases natural gas ships and trucks emit more greenhouse gasses than the diesel trucks and heavy fuel oil ships that they would replace. It appears relatively cost effective to switch to natural gas as a transport fuel in ships and trucks. However, the limited emissions reduction potential raises questions for the ongoing role of natural gas to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with the challenging greenhouse gas reduction targets emerging in the transport sector.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress in EnergySame topicMaritime Transport Emissions and EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207