Analysis of heavy fuel oil use by ships operating in Canadian Arctic waters from 2010 to 2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2018, The International Maritime Organization, officially proposed consideration of a ban on heavy fuel oil (HFO) use by ships in the Arctic, because of the widely accepted understanding that HFO presents a threat to the marine environment. There is currently a lack of understanding of the scale and scope of HFO use by ships operating in Canadian Arctic waters, thus it is difficult to comprehensively evaluate the effect that such a ban may have in mitigating risk from HFO use. In this study, we conducted a spatial analysis of HFO use among ships operating in Canadian Arctic waters between 2010 and 2018. Our findings show that approximately 37% of the total number of ships that have travelled through the Canadian Arctic between 2010 and 2018 use HFO, and nearly all of these ships fall within three vessel categories: general cargo, bulk carriers, and tanker ships. In addition, HFO-fueled ships made up approximately 45% of the total distance (kilometres) travelled by all vessels between 2010 and 2018. The data also show that the majority of HFO use occurs in certain geographic areas, such as Baffin Bay near Pond Inlet and the Hudson Strait.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".