MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404872961 · doi:10.1016/j.esr.2024.101597

Renewable energy in the mining industry: Status, opportunities and challenges

2024· article· en· W4404872961 on OpenAlexaff
Xuexian Li, Qinghua Gu, Qian Wang, Jiale Luo, Di Liu, Yu Sheng Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Strategy Reviews · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining Techniques and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRenewable energyBusinessNatural resource economicsEnvironmental economicsRisk analysis (engineering)Industrial organizationEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, the mining sector is confronted with declining ore grades, volatile energy prices, and environmental pollution from massive carbon emissions. Due to the advantages of RE in terms of emission reduction and cost, some mining companies are actively exploring integrating RE in production to alleviate these challenges. At the same time, the integration of RE in mining sites also faces many obstacles. This paper highlights the importance of incorporating RE into mining projects through a comprehensive review of existing research and analyzes the opportunities and challenges from multiple perspectives. Finally, the conclusions summarize the gaps in existing work and provide appropriate recommendations. The paper aims to inform and provide implications for the transition to RE practices in the mining industry. • This paper highlights the importance of integrating renewable energy (RE) into mining projects by a comprehensive review. • The feasibility and application potential of integrating RE in the mining industry are analyzed from multiple perspectives. • The current techno-economic analysis and MCDM for the deployment of RE projects in the mining industry are reviewed. • The advantages and opportunities of RE in mining are summarized in four areas: economic, environmental, social and policy. • The barriers are analyzed from five perspectives: technology, expertise, financing, legislation and related interests.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.121 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations19
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy Strategy ReviewsSame topicMining Techniques and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207