MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202512885 · doi:10.3390/en14196374

Canadian Oil Sands Extraction and Upgrading: A Synthesis of the Data on Energy Consumption, CO2 Emissions, and Supply Costs

2021· article· en· W3202512885 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rui Xing, Diego V. Chiappori, Evan J. Arbuckle, Matthew Binsted, Evan Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil sandsGreenhouse gasProduction (economics)Fossil fuelEnergy consumptionAsphaltConsumption (sociology)Petroleum industrySynthetic crudeUnconventional oilSteam-assisted gravity drainageEnvironmental scienceEnergy supplyNatural resource economicsEngineeringEnvironmental economicsWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringEnergy (signal processing)EconomicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Canadian crude bitumen production from oil sands has increased in recent decades, the nation’s oil and gas industry has become a significant contributor to national greenhouse gas emissions. Canada has developed carbon emission reduction targets to meet its Nationally Determined Contributions and Mid-Century Strategy goals. A detailed profile of energy consumption pathways in the oil sands industry is necessary to identify potential areas of improvement and to monitor progress toward meeting emissions reduction targets. Much of the existing literature for oil sands modeling provides input assumptions with different technological boundaries. For a set of oil sands extraction and upgrading technologies, this study first reviews the literature and then quantifies energy input requirements, CO2 emissions, and operating costs for a set of consistent technological boundaries and energy units. Summary results refer to requirements and costs at the production facility, excluding transportation and blending costs. An energy system diagram of oil sands production that matches these boundaries is provided, which can be used by integrated assessment models, oil sands companies, and government ministries to evaluate the present and future energy consumption and emissions pathways of the oil sands industry.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0190.047
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207