A Pipeline Is a Pipeline Is a Pipeline, or Is It? Product Type, Project Differentiation, and Risk Today
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the past ten years, many pipeline and other linear energy projects have been cancelled in North America for economic, regulatory, or social license reasons. This trend is continuing today for energy transition-related pipelines and other linear projects. While the reasons for project cancellation are complex, key themes have been identified including a changing regulatory environment; political influence; increased opposition from affected and unaffected stakeholders; and market forces. Numerous project examples exist to support the analysis of oil and gas pipeline project execution risk. The paper explores how these examples illustrate future projects integral to enabling the transportation of carbon dioxide, hydrogen, biofuels, power or other products relevant to energy transition in Canada and the US. Traditional pipeline projects are compared to energy transition-related projects, testing the question of whether project differentiation and product type matter. Finally, the analysis identifies opportunities for reducing risk in pipeline project execution during the planning and regulatory phases. Energy transition faces significant new challenges requiring projects to manage an evolving regulatory, stakeholder and political landscape. Understanding these challenges helps proponents better position their projects with stakeholders who are similarly learning how modern technologies and products will be planned within existing pipeline development frameworks.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".