MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194408788 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac1e3b

Provincial nitrogen footprints highlight variability in drivers of reactive nitrogen emissions in Canada

2021· article· en· W3194408788 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sibeal McCourt, Graham K. MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsPer capitaEnvironmental scienceAgricultural economicsFossil fuelCarbon footprintGreenhouse gasFootprintReactive nitrogenProduction (economics)AgricultureNatural resource economicsEnvironmental protectionGeographyNitrogenEconomicsEngineeringEcologyWaste managementChemistryPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nitrogen (N) footprints are one method to quantify consumer driven reactive nitrogen (Nr) emissions. Canada is a highly urbanized yet economically natural resource-dependent country, providing an illustrative case study to examine attribution of Nr emissions to per capita consumption, either domestically or abroad. Yet, considered only at the national scale, N footprints may obscure absolute and relative contributions of local drivers to Nr emissions. We apply a top-down N footprint approach drawing from national N budgets, emissions inventories, and agricultural statistics to estimate sub-national (provincial) drivers of Nr emissions across Canada. We calculate per capita provincial Nr footprints from four primary sectors in 2018: (a) crop production, (b) animal production, (c) wastewater treatment, and (d) fossil fuel burning. We estimate that Canada’s total N footprint is 995.7 Gg Nr yr −1 , which equates to an average per capita footprint nationally of 27.1 kg Nr capita −1 yr −1 . The largest national contributions come from a few key (sub)sectors, including transport, beef consumption, and wastewater treatment. Provincial per capita N footprints vary widely, with the largest (Saskatchewan 50.3 kg Nr cap −1 yr −1 ) more than double the smallest (Ontario 22.0 kg Nr cap −1 yr −1 ). Most variation across provinces is due to the fossil fuels sector, including emissions from energy generation and the oil and gas industry. We therefore compare our top-down approach for the fossil fuels sector with bottom-up N footprints and territorial emissions methodologies. Per capita N emissions vary considerably across these approaches. For example, Alberta’s per-capita fossil fuel Nr emissions are 45.9, 23.0, and 6.3 kg Nr cap −1 yr −1 using territorial, top-down and bottom-up footprint approaches, respectively. This analysis demonstrates the challenges of attributing Nr emission for export-oriented economies. Our study provides novel insights on sub-national drivers of Nr emissions, emphasizing the need to consider how heterogeneous geographic contexts contribute to national N footprints.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207