MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205227197 · doi:10.5558/tfc2021-029

Economic impacts of short rotation woody crops in Canada

2021· article· en· W4205227197 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Torben Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasHectareCarbon creditAfforestationInvestment (military)WoodchipsCarbon sequestrationCarbon priceEnvironmental scienceNet present valueAgricultural economicsNatural resource economicsBusinessAgroforestryAgricultureEconomicsProduction (economics)Waste managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is seeking cost-effective means to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, particularly CO2. One of the promising means is the short rotation woody crops (SRWC) plantation, a silvicultural approach to establishing and managing fast growing plantations on previously cleared lands. This paper utilizes the data set provided by recent harvesting operations at the Ellerslie SRWC Technical Development Site in Edmonton (Alberta) to assess the ability of SRWC using High Yield Afforestation to mitigate GHG emissions and generate more wood fibre and the investment attractiveness to establish future plantations. Results illustrate that at current trading prices for carbon credits and market prices of woodchips, expected rates of return on investment for SRWC were relatively low, despite a positive net present value ($400/ha for 20 year planting cycle without carbon credits). However, estimates from the Ellerslie site indicate that 330 tons of CO2-eq per hectare are captured above and below ground over the 20 year plantation cycle. However, higher future carbon prices, a well-developed market for buying and selling carbon credits, as well as adapted policy including additional government sponsored programs for carbon credits, could make SRWC more attractive and dramatically change the economics of afforestation in the future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207