MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046539803 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v12n9p1

Renewable Energy Challenges and Opportunities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

2020· article· en· W3046539803 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Al Yousif

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy Security and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenewable energyDiversification (marketing strategy)Investment (military)Gross domestic productEconomicsBusinessNatural resource economicsFeed-in tariffAgricultural economicsEnvironmental economicsEconomic growthEnergy policyEngineeringMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper seeks to introduce the advantages of investing in renewable energy in Saudi Arabia. It concludes that investment in renewable energy is a promising strategy for creating more sustainable jobs for Saudi citizens and promoting the domestic economic diversification. The Saudi renewable energy sector shall increase the Saudi non-oil private sector’s contribution to the total Saudi economic activities. This research paper uses Leontief’s method to estimate the impact of investment in renewable energy through three main scenarios (investment of 25, 50, and 85 billion Saudi Riyal) over 5 years (2020-2025). The total value added, an additional expected growth in the gross domestic product (GDP) during the period from 2020 to 2025, is estimated to be around 2.7, 4.7, and 6.0 percent of the investment of 25, 50, and 80 billion Saudi Riyal in renewable energy respectively. The expected number of new jobs that would be generated in all three scenarios are 44,000, 90,000, and 150,000 thousand jobs. Moreover, further development of the Saudi renewable energy sector should encourage domestic energy consumption to be more efficient and less polluted. However, challenges typically thwart progress in the renewable energy sector. These challenges include technical problems, cost issues, and lack of financial sources. This paper proposes some solutions that should help circumvent these particular challenges.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicGlobal Energy Security and PolicyFrench-language works237,207