Shallow subsurface heat recycling is a sustainable global space heating alternative
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the global interest in green energy alternatives, little attention has focused on the large-scale viability of recycling the ground heat accumulated due to urbanization, industrialization and climate change. Here we show this theoretical heat potential at a multi-continental scale by first leveraging datasets of groundwater temperature and lithology to assess the distribution of subsurface thermal pollution. We then evaluate subsurface heat recycling for three scenarios: a status quo scenario representing present-day accumulated heat, a recycled scenario with ground temperatures returned to background values, and a climate change scenario representing projected warming impacts. Our analyses reveal that over 50% of sites show recyclable underground heat pollution in the status quo, 25% of locations would be feasible for long-term heat recycling for the recycled scenario, and at least 83% for the climate change scenario. Results highlight that subsurface heat recycling warrants consideration in the move to a low-carbon economy in a warmer world.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it