Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Process of Landfill Disposal in China
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
Quantitative accounting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has become an important global focus. GHG emissions from the waste sector have high potential in GHG emissions reduction. We analyzed the GHG emissions inventory in the waste sector of the European Union, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and Canada from 1990 to 2019. Landfill disposal was the main category of GHGs from the waste sector, with a contribution rate between 69% and 95%. Landfill disposal also played a prominent role in emission reduction, with a contribution rate higher than 86%. GHG emissions from landfill sites in China were calculated using the inventory analysis method recommended by the IPCC and combined with actual situations. The results showed that the highest GHG emissions from landfill disposal in China occurred in 2020, with an estimated 165 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent. In 2019, the per capita GHG emissions from landfill sites in China was 117 kg CO2 equivalent/person, which was higher than Germany (87 kg CO2 equivalent/person) but lower than the European Union (189 kg CO2 equivalent/person).
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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