Wind Energy Investment in Greece: Case study of an Aegean Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considering that traditional energy sources such as fossil fuel are about to deplete during the following decades, governments try to turn to renewable energy. It is commonly known that Greece has a natural advantage of abundant solar energy and wind power due to its geographical location and characteristics.The main focus of this study is to examine how wind energy potential across the Aegean Sea and continental Greece can provide a promising field for investments in Greece, considering the economic crisis, current trends and future perspectives.We firstly focus on current legislation framework considering that laws associated with such types of investment in Greece are very complex and rapidly changing. Furthermore, a case study for a hypothetical investment plan concerning a wind park located in an Aegean island will be presented. RetScreen which is a software made by the Canadian government, will be used as a decision support tool for analyzing the potential investment scenario and a financial report will follow with estimation of the overall cost, depreciation, upcoming benefits, and payback period of the investment.Data analysis concludes that wind parks still prove to be an economically viable investment, although incentives considering the guaranteed price per kwh and faster investment times must be provided by the government.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".