MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200748933 · doi:10.4236/jsbs.2021.113011

Ancillary Impacts of Harvest Residue Pelletization

2021· article· en· W3200748933 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Jacobson, Shahab Sokhansanj, Dominik Röeser, Jason Hansen, R. Bhushan Gopaluni, Xiaotao Bi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Bioenergy Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTonneLiberian dollarBusinessPelletizingEnvironmental scienceAgricultural economicsNatural resource economicsPelletsWaste managementEnvironmental economicsEconomicsFinanceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper analyzes the implications on employment, taxation, and wildfire fuel reduction costs when using mobile pellet mills to remove biomass and reduce wildfire fuels. Wildfire suppression costs in British Columbia have exceeded the set budget in 9 of the last 10 years and the province has only reduced the fuel load on a fraction of the high-risk hectares. Using a novel high-moisture mobile pellet mill allows the production of 89,000 tonnes of wood pellets each year for a price of $293 . Each tonne produced also provides $546 in additional benefits from employment, taxation, and reductions in the cost to perform fuel treatments. The presented research found that 11 employees are needed to operate a mobile pellet mill, with total employment of 242 for 22 systems across BC. The assessed system can also avoid $5.5 million in employment insurance payments. The 22 systems also provide $323,000 in taxable profits and $524,000 from income taxes from employees. Fuel treatment with the researched systems costs $1112 . A cost-benefit analysis shows that the system provides $2.97 in benefits for every dollar invested.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable Bioenergy SystemsSame topicForest Biomass Utilization and ManagementFrench-language works237,207