MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Integrated Waste Management: More than Just Landfills

2000· book-chapter· en· W3106224094 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hans Tammemagi

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2000
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReuseIncinerationWaste managementEngineeringBattlePer capitaEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Just as a general fights a battle with tanks, infantry, artillery, and air support, the campaign against waste also requires an arsenal of many weapons. Instead of relying solely on landfills, as has been done since time immemorial, the industry is developing an integrated waste management strategy. The objective is to minimize impact on the environment by employing all possible waste management technologies—especially reduction/reuse/recycling and incineration—in addition to landfills. An integrated waste management strategy is required by law in many jurisdictions and is now being used in most North American communities. Most U.S. states, for example, have made recycling mandatory and have established goals for reducing waste per capita by 25% to 50% over a period of four to ten years. In Canada, a comprehensive waste reduction plan established in the province of Ontario in 1991 has the goal of reducing the amount of waste going to disposal by at least 50% per capita by the year 2000, compared to the base year of 1987. The goal is to be achieved through implementing the “three Rs”: reduction (10%), reuse (15%), and recycling (25%). Some jurisdictions have set even higher goals; for example, Seattle is aiming to reduce waste going to landfill by 60% by the year 2000. An integrated waste management plan follows the life cycle of consumer products from cradle to grave, seeking to maximize the useful life of the resources that are involved. A complete suite of elements that might be used in an integrated waste management system is illustrated in Figure 4.1, although any municipality may utilize only some of these. 1. Source reduction: The objective is to reduce the amount of waste that is created in the first place. This can be accomplished in a number of ways: purchasing products with minimal packaging; developing products that are more durable and easily repaired; substituting reusable products for disposable single-use products; or implementing tax and other economic measures to encourage producers to generate less waste and use fewer resources. For source reduction to have a significant impact, society needs to turn away from the current consumer preference for once-through, disposable, and limited-life products.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.163 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooks→Same topicNuclear and radioactivity studies→French-language works237,207→