Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article takes the E. L. Smith Solar Farm, a proposed municipal solar energy infrastructure project in Edmonton, Alberta, as a case study of solar imaginaries as they intertwine with material and social realities. Set for installation at the E. L. Smith Water Treatment Plant site on the banks of the North Saskatchewan River in Edmonton’s River Valley, the largest urban greenspace in North America, this solar project has evoked divergent, sometimes unanticipated responses as stakeholders speculate about what futures are possible and preferable. The article examines the possibilities and challenges that the proposed E. L. Smith Solar Farm holds, as a municipal energy project, to positively disrupt oil-loyal provincial and federal power relations, specifically given the City of Edmonton’s August 2019 declaration of a climate emergency, the Wet’suwet’en cause and other solidarity blockades in Alberta and across Canada in early 2020, and Alberta’s subsequent Critical Infrastructure Bill 1, passed in early 2020. Investigating the ways in which the issues are being debated by various constituencies throughout the approval/rejection process, the article extrapolates approaches and strategies that might inform policy and proposes that not all solar powered projects are equal. While some produce solarities (more just energy futures), others operationalize solar energy’s good press towards solarcultural futures that are little more than an extension of the petrocultural status quo.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".