MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405586220 · doi:10.1016/j.indic.2024.100560

A model for institutional phosphorus damage costs: A case study at the University of Virginia

2024· article· en· W4405586220 on OpenAlexaff
Sy Coffey, Selina Cheng, Elizabeth Dukes, Geneviève S. Metson, Graham K. MacDonald, James N. Galloway

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental and Sustainability Indicators · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhosphorus and nutrient management
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersUniversity of Virginia
KeywordsPhosphorusEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calculating environmental “damage costs” associated with resource use can help individuals, communities, and institutions inform and improve their sustainability efforts. Though damage cost estimates have been developed for carbon and nitrogen, there is little precedent for calculating damage costs relating to phosphorus. We demonstrate a method to estimate institutional phosphorus damage costs using a case study of the University of Virginia, a public university in the United States. Our methods determine the source (diffuse agricultural and wastewater point source) and location (coastal and freshwater) of the University’s phosphorus footprint impacts, estimate the relative contribution of nitrogen and phosphorus across existing eutrophication damage costs, and then apply the results to the University’s phosphorus footprint. We found that activities at the University result in approximately $76 000 of annual downstream costs to society due to its phosphorus footprint ($2.08/kg of phosphorus released to the environment). About 48% of those damages are incurred in the Chesapeake Bay, which flows into the Atlantic Ocean and is the largest estuary in the United States, while 7% are incurred in the Gulf of Mexico. The remainder (45%) of costs are incurred in freshwater systems across both watersheds. Our findings are likely an underestimate of true societal impacts, as impacts such as losses of ecosystem services are difficult to value. However, we emphasize that this method is transferable and can be used by other institutions to calculate their phosphorus damage costs, providing a more holistic accounting of downstream environmental impacts. • We expanded methods for C and N damage costs to include novel estimates for P. • Our institution incurs >$75,000 of P damages annually in fresh and coastal waters. • On average, $2.08 of damages are incurred per kilogram of P released.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental and Sustainability IndicatorsSame topicPhosphorus and nutrient managementFrench-language works237,207