MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modeling Oil Sands Production in an Integrated Assessment Model: Energy Consumption and CO2 Emissions

2020· preprint· en· W4285702015 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rui Xing, Christopher Roney, Diego V. Chiappori, Matthew Binsted, Evan J. Arbuckle, Evan Davies

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsProduction (economics)Oil consumptionEnvironmental scienceOil sandsConsumption (sociology)Energy consumptionOil productionNatural resource economicsPetroleum engineeringGeologyEconomicsEngineeringGeographyAutomotive engineeringArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past four decades, oil sands production in Canada has increased dramatically.More recently, Canada has developed carbon emission reduction targets to meet its Nationally Determined Contributions and Mid-Century Strategy to reduce GHG emissions.Quantification and assessment of GHG emissions from the oil sands industry -a high emitter -is necessary to track progress toward meeting emissions reduction and technology development.This study uses GCAM, an integrated assessment model, to examine the energy consumption of oil sands extraction and upgrading.Five traditional and cogeneration extraction technologies are compared in model simulations for energy cost and nonenergy (operating) cost.Results show that energy consumed by oil sands production will triple by 2050 because of the expected increase in oil sands production.Cogeneration technologies result in reduced CO2 emissions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207