MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366772322 · doi:10.3390/en16083601

Actualization and Adoption of Renewable Energy Usage in Remote Communities in Canada by 2050: A Review

2023· review· en· W4366772322 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Obiora S. Agu, Lope G. Tabil, Edmund Mupondwa

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicHybrid Renewable Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSugar Research and Development Corporation
KeywordsRenewable energyBusinessEnvironmental economicsSoftware deploymentFeed-in tariffNatural resource economicsRenewable energy creditIndigenousSubsidyGreenhouse gasEnergy developmentWind powerSustainable developmentEnvironmental resource managementEnergy policyEnvironmental scienceEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remote community initiatives for renewable energy are rapidly emerging across Canada but with varying numbers, success rates, and strategies. To meet low-carbon transition goals, the need to coordinate technology deployment and long-term policy to guide the adoption is critical. Renewable resources such as wind, solar, hydro, and biomass can provide energy at a subsidized cost, create sustainable infrastructure, and provide new economic viability in social value integration. The renewable energy transition is crucial to Canada in sustaining remote and indigenous communities by providing local, clean, and low-carbon-emission energy for heat, power, and possibly transportation. This paper identified 635 renewable resources projects deployed to improve and increase electricity supply. To an extent, balancing demand within the remote and indigenous communities of Canada and highlighting sustainable renewable energy development through ownership participation within the communities is achievable before 2050 and beyond through energy efficiency and the social value of energy. The article identifies clean energy targets as mandated by the different provinces in Canada to reach net-zero GHG 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.652

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations27
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicHybrid Renewable Energy SystemsFrench-language works237,207