MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158532901 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.9450

22. Environmental Degradation in the Pursuit of Profit: Evaluation of Solar Panel Installation at the Queen’s University Biological Station and its Impact on Wildlife and Research

2018· article· en· W3158532901 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark A. Szenteczki, Megan Rueckwald, Anna Serdetchnaia, Sarah Trick, Diana Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueProfit (economics)Photovoltaic systemScheduleSustainabilityBusinessWildlifeEngineeringEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental resource managementFinanceEnvironmental scienceEconomicsEcologyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Queen’s University intends to install a 10 megawatt ground-mounted solar photovoltaic array on 80-110 acres of Queen’s University Biological Station (QUBS) land. The installation is proposed for Bracken Tract, a QUBS property that is an important habitat and breeding area to several threatened populations. For instance, certain bird populations inhabiting Bracken Tract have been the focus of numerous long-term studies, some of which are ongoing. The QUBS portion of the proposed solar project will account for ~90% of the solar energy Queen’s University anticipates producing. The project is expected to generate 2.5-4.7 million dollars in annual revenue under a Feed-In-Tariff pricing schedule. This not only provides a long-term financial profit, but also reaffirms Queen’s University as a national leader with a commitment to sustainability. Despite the additional revenue and contribution to the Queen’s Carbon Management Strategy, the proposed project will require the disruption of natural habitats and associated research. Combined with a lack of financial benefit to QUBS, this project has the potential to depreciate QUBS’ unique presence in the research community. This analysis will use environmental assessment tools, consult with stakeholders, and perform a comprehensive literature review, in order to identify and resolve potential issues with the proposed solar project. Mitigation strategies and possible solutions will be explored – such as bird relocation plans or alternate solar farm layouts – to abate anticipated problems as well as ensure the proposed solar farm is environmentally sustainable and financially responsible.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicSocial Acceptance of Renewable EnergyFrench-language works237,207