MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010348888 · doi:10.3390/su12051787

Assessment of the Impact of Climate Change Policies on the Market for Forest Industrial Residues

2020· article· en· W3010348888 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Emily S. Hope, Bruno Gagnon, Vanja Avdić

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsGreenhouse gasNatural resource economicsRevenueBiomass (ecology)BioenergyExternalityFossil fuelRaw materialBusinessBiofuelEnvironmental scienceEconomicsAgricultural economicsEnvironmental economicsWaste managementEngineeringEcologyMicroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of the Pan-Canadian Framework (PCF) on Clean Growth and Climate Change, the Government of Canada (GoC) introduced carbon pricing and is in the process of developing a Clean Fuel (CF) Standard. Both policies are key elements of the PCF and aim to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through the use of lower carbon fuels, including bioenergy. Carbon pricing and the CF Standard are expected to increase the demand for biomass feedstocks, possibly threatening feedstock availability for existing forest industrial residues users, including composite panel manufacturers. To assess the potential impact of carbon pricing and the CF Standard on Canadian composite panel producers, a Monte Carlo-based model was developed to estimate possible increases in feedstock price-points that composite panel manufacturers may face as a result of increases in bioenergy consumption. Results suggest that the composite panel industry may be negatively impacted in the long-term (2030) by the relative price increase of fossil fuels covered by carbon pricing and additional revenues for biofuel suppliers from CF Standard credits, assuming no other adjustments to the market. Although these results are preliminary in that the analysis excludes external market factors that could influence the outcome, there is evidence that such policies have the potential to generate supply risks for the Canadian composite panel industry without careful consideration of the associated externalities.

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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207