MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999512567 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c469

Operation of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam: Potential Risks and Mitigation Measures

2020· article· en· W2999512567 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nourhan Abdelazim, Hesham M. Bekhit, Mohamed Allam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe RenaissanceEnvironmental scienceHistoryArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have simulated the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam filling and operation but the optimum operation policy of the dam has not been fully investigated. This study presents a nonlinear optimization model for the operation of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam using natural historical inflow time series data with an objective function that maximizes firm energy. The model results show that the mean hydropower production of the dam is about 14 650 GWh/y. The firm energy is found to be in the order of 12 900 GWh/y, which represents about 24.5% of dam installed hydropower capacity. It was found that the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam operation, if used only for power production, will permanently reduce the Blue Nile flow to downstream countries by an average of 3.2%. It will also extend the downstream drought periods by 200%-300% compared to the time before dam construction. In order to ensure better downstream conditions, smaller dam active storage capacities were modeled and the results were analyzed. As a substantial mitigation measure, decreasing GERD live storage by 40% to reach 35 km 3 yields 90% of the mean annual hydropower production of the announced design while better preserving the downstream water rights and conditions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207