MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404303631 · doi:10.1201/9781003567547-5

Waste-to-Energy in the Americas

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404303631 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Efstratios N. Kalogirou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMunicipal Solid Waste Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fifth chapter presents five waste-to-energy (WtE) case studies with data based on reports from technical visits made by the author to these facilities in the Americas. These case studies present technical data and specifications, such as the capacity and type of input waste, combustion chamber conditions, steam parameters, electrical efficiency, flue-gas cleaning systems, bottom and fly ash treatment processes, stack emissions, etc., and, additionally, basic financial data such as investment costs, the gate/tipping fee(s), and feed-in tariffs on electricity. Many photographs, taken by the author, are included. The relevant WtE Plants are: two in the United States, one in Union County, New Jersey, and the newest one, operating since 2016, in West Palm Beach, Florida; and the newest plant in the Americas, the DYEC WtE Plant near Toronto, Canada (including the impressive online stack emissions in the main plant entrance). Innovation opportunities in Latin America and the Caribbean are considered; especially the site visit at the combustion laboratory in Cienfuegos, Cuba, in addition to the potential for WtE plants in Cuba that was addressed through relevant intensive courses and seminars held in 2016 in Havana and Cienfuegos. In the current chapter, technico-economic data for three waste-to-energy (WTE) plants are presented. The data are based in the reports made by the author after his relevant site visits.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.012

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.219 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207