MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224258005 · doi:10.3390/pollutants2020011

Characterization of Annual Air Emissions Reported by Pulp and Paper Mills in Atlantic Canada

2022· article· en· W4224258005 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gianina Giacosa, Codey Barnett, Daniel Rainham, Tony R. ‎Walker

Bibliographic record

VenuePollutants · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of EnergyDalhousie University
FundersAgencia Nacional de Investigación e InnovaciónCSA Group
KeywordsParticulatesEnvironmental sciencePollutantPulp (tooth)Air pollutionNova scotiaPulp millEnvironmental protectionGreenhouse gasWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringGeographyChemistryOceanographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pulp and paper industry is a major contributor to water and air pollution globally. Pulp and paper processing is an intensive energy consuming process that produces multiple contaminants that pollute water, air, and affect ecological and human health. In Canada, the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) is used to assess the release of air pollutants into the atmosphere from industrial facilities (including pulp and paper mills) and provides a repository of annual emissions reported by individual facilities. This study compared annual air emissions of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, total particulate matter (TPM), PM2.5, PM10, sulphur dioxide, and volatile organic compounds from nine different pulp and/or paper mills in Atlantic Canada from three provinces (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador) between 2002 and 2019. Results revealed that annual releases were several orders of magnitude higher than federal reporting thresholds suggested by Environment and Climate Change Canada. Pulp mills emit higher pollutant loads than those producing paper. The highest exceedance of a reporting threshold was for particulate matter (PM2.5) at Northern Pulp in Nova Scotia. The emissions of PM2.5 were on average (over a 17-year period) about 100,000% above the reporting threshold of 0.3 tonnes per year.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePollutantsSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207