MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033559395 · doi:10.14288/1.0390325

An evaluation of mining camp food waste management practices in Canada : an overview

2020· article· en· W3033559395 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mandakh-Erdene Sayannyambuu

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMunicipal Solid Waste Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessFood wasteEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementWaste managementEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mining industry is facing increasing scrutiny to demonstrate that sustainability considerations are taken into account in their operations. This research approaches food waste as an overlooked, yet important issue that can advance not only environmental responsibility but also social and economic concerns within the mining industry. The implications of food waste generation on greenhouse gases, use of energy, groundwater contamination, and landfill space required are also critical concerns for the mining industry in the context of sustainability. This study evaluates the efforts that food service supply companies in mining camps are implementing to limit their food waste and assesses whether the prevention of food waste is a priority for these companies. This study used an online survey as the primary methodology for data collection. The survey resulted in a sample of eight respondents. Survey responses were structured based on the type of food waste, quantity, and causes of the waste. These were then mapped into pre- and post-consumer phases of the food services. Results indicated that proactive action to prevent food waste was not a priority for the respondents. The findings showed that the "vegetable" category had the highest amount of food waste throughout the different phases. Six out of eight companies did not measure the quantity of wasted food. During pre-consumer phase, difficulty in assessing demand, and confusion over dates were the most frequently cited causes for wastage. At the same time, overproduction was the leading cause of wastage in the post-consumer phase. Further complimenting the survey findings, the potential for the re-utilization of food waste through the creation of compost and alternative energy sources, was evaluated. The improvements identified with regard to food handling practices and potential re-utilization, are significant. Suggestions regarding the prevention of food waste highlighted many ways in which foodservice supply companies, as well as the mining industry, could benefit. Within these benefits, there exist great opportunities to contribute to Sustainable Development Goals, especially SDG12.3. Increased efficiencies with respect to food waste would reduce the environmental footprint, lead to potential re-utilization of food waste for electricity and gas generation, and increase profitability.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.235
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 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207