Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Biomass Supply Chains: The Case of the Canadian Wood Pellet Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted global economic activity in all sectors, including forest industries. Changes in demand for forest products in North America over the course of the pandemic have affected both primary processors and downstream industries reliant on residues, including wood pellet producers. Wood pellets have become an internationally traded good, mostly as a substitute for coal in electricity generation, with a significant proportion of the global supply coming from Canadian producers. To determine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Canadian wood pellet industry, economic and market data were evaluated, in parallel with a survey of Canadian manufacturers on their experiences during the first three waves of the pandemic (March 2020 to September 2021). Overall, the impact of the pandemic on the Canadian wood pellet industry was relatively small, as prices, exports, and production remained stable. Survey respondents noted some negative impacts, mostly in the first months of the pandemic, but the quick recovery of lumber production helped to reduce the impact on wood pellet producers and ensured a stable feedstock supply. The pandemic did exacerbate certain pre-existing issues, such as access to transportation services and labour availability, which were still a concern for the industry at the end of the third wave in Canada. These results suggest that the Canadian wood pellet industry was resilient to disruptions caused by the pandemic and was able to manage the negative effects it faced. This is likely because of the integrated nature of the forest sector, the industry’s reliance on long-term supply contracts, and feedstock flexibility, in addition to producers and end-users both being providers of essential services.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".