Can the Arab’s natural gas secure the Europeans’ gas requirements? the case of liquified natural gas (LNG)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the possibility of answering the question” can the Arab’s natural gas secure the gas requirements in Europe? “To answer the question, an economic analysis of natural gas was conducted to examine reserve, supply, demand, and international trade first. Second, an economic model to examine distances and transportation costs, for transferring goods from various points of supply to various points of demand, was adopted. The North-West Corner model approach, a QM for Windows-based economic strategy to solve the transportation model problem structure in linear programming, has been used in this regard. Our findings demonstrate that the model is suitable for application since it provides the least distances and the least transportation costs compared to other alternatives. The model estimated that a cost of $309.41 is required to transfer one MMBtu of LNG from origins to final destinations. A decrease of $34.304/MMBtu, 10%, compared to $343.714 /MMBtu. It is concluded that the Arab’s gas could fulfil gas requirements in Europe, and mutual benefit can be accomplished for both parties. European countries will benefit from acquiring new places with less distances and lower delivery costs, and Arab countries would have the chance to get new consumers and play a role in the market given their collective gas reserves and their advantageous strategic locations.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".