MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4256555916 · doi:10.31219/osf.io/94mkg

Methane Single Cell Protein: securing protein supply during global food catastrophes

2020· preprint· en· W4256555916 on OpenAlexaff
Juan B. García Martínez, Joshua M. Pearce, Jacob Cates, David Denkenberger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood securityProduction (economics)Natural resource economicsFood processingBusinessPreparednessEnvironmental scienceInvestment (military)Food safetyEnvironmental economicsNatural disasterRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental resource managementAgricultureEconomicsFood scienceEcologyBiologyGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A catastrophe such as supervolcanic eruption, asteroid impact or nuclear winter could reduce global food production by 10% or more. Human civilization’s food production system is unprepared to respond to such an event, and current preparedness centers around food stockpiles, an excessively expensive solution given that a global catastrophic risk (GCR) scenario could hamper conventional agriculture for 5 to 10 years. Instead, it is more cost-effective to consider alternative food production techniques requiring little to no sunlight.This study analyses the potential of single-cell protein (SCP) produced from methane (natural gas) as an alternative food source in the case of a catastrophe that considerably blocked sunlight, the most severe food shock scenario. To determine its viability, the following are quantified: global production potential of methane SCP, capital costs, material and energy requirements, ramp-up rates and retail prices. In addition, potential bottlenecks to fast deployment are considered.While providing a higher quality of protein than other alternatives, the production capacity would be slower to ramp up. Based on 24/7 construction of facilities, 7-11% of global protein requirements could be fulfilled at the end of the first year. Results suggest that investment in production ramp up should aim to meet no more than humanity’s minimum protein requirements. Uncertainty remains around the transferability of labor and equipment production, among other key areas. Research on these questions could help reduce the negative impact of potential food-related GCRs.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207