MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174132502 · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128014

Net zero energy barns for industrial egg production: An effective sustainable intensification strategy?

2021· article· en· W3174132502 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Karen Allacker, Haibo Feng, Mohammad Davoud Heidari, Nathan Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cleaner Production · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsZero-energy buildingRenewable energyLife-cycle assessmentSustainabilityEfficient energy useEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental scienceProduction (economics)EngineeringEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Net zero energy buildings (NZEBs) are energy efficient buildings that incorporate renewable energy generation systems so as to produce sufficient renewable energy to at least offset the total amount of non-renewable energy used by the building on an annual basis. NZEB technologies have widespread commercial and residential application, but their feasibility and efficacy in the livestock sector in support of sustainable intensification have received little attention. This study quantifies the potential for such technologies to improve sustainability outcomes in the livestock sector based on an ISO 14044-compliant life cycle assessment of a pilot net zero energy laying hen facility in Alberta, Canada compared to a conventional facility. It was found that direct energy inputs account for 6.47% and 31.64% of the life cycle cumulative energy use of egg production in NZE and non-NZE hen housing, respectively. Average infrastructure-related contributions to the life cycle impacts of egg production are only 4.34% and 1.94% for the NZE and non-NZE barns, but NZE technologies reduce the net impacts of egg production by 0.89–64.82%. The environmental impact payback time for the NZE barn (30-year lifespan) ranges from 1.38 to 20.66 years, considering the largely fossil fuel-based electricity grid in Alberta, which indicates that non-trivial environmental benefits would accrue across impact categories considered. However, this could vary considerably elsewhere depending on the types and amounts of green energy utilized in regional grid mixes. The type and availability of renewable energy resources that are integrated into NZE barns will similarly be important in determining the potential of such technologies to support sustainable intensification in this sector.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cleaner ProductionSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207