MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Economic Analysis of Sustainable Transportation Transitions: Case Study of the University of Saskatchewan Ground Services Fleet

2023· preprint· en· W4313646688 on OpenAlexaffabout
George Aniegbunem, Andrea Kraj

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasSustainabilityPayback periodInvestment (military)Environmental economicsInternal rate of returnRenewable energyBusinessNatural resource economicsEngineeringEconomicsProduction (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global transport sector of the world economy contributes about 15% of the Greenhouse Gas (GHGs) emissions in the world today. The University of Saskatchewan has pursued the green energy transition over the years. They have spearheaded diverse sustainability projects and agendas, due to the importance of curbing climate change and advancing sustainability. The transport system in the university campus is one area of focus where the Sustainability Office plans to introduce some innovations, as a way of curbing GHG emissions while also advancing sustainability practice in the university campus. The study carried out an economic benefit analysis on the campus fleet (consisting of 91 ICE vehicles) to determine if it is economically or financially feasible to transition from Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) or PVs (Petrol Vehicles) to Electric Vehicles (EVs). The analysis used RETScreen Expert software for analyzing renewable energy technology projects. The variables of Payback Period (PBP), cash flow projections, savings made from transitioning (fuel cost savings and energy cost savings), Benefit-Cost-ratio, GHG emission reduction potential, etc. were analyzed. The findings revealed that the GHG emission from the campus fleet will be reduced by 100% (this will result in the removal of about 298.1 tCO₂ from the environment). Also, the fleet manager will save approximately $129,049 (88.9%) in fuel costs. Apart from these, the return on investment will be achieved in year 5 (all things being equal), but can be reduced to year 2 if the vehicles are put into constant and active use (eliminating most idle times. Also, the Sustainability Office will be making a GHG reduction revenue of $14,906.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207