A thermal power budget approach to evaluate the geothermal potential of a flooded open-pit mine: Case studies from the Carey Canadian and King-Beaver mines (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following mine closure, open-pit mines gradually fill with ground and surface water. Due to its thermal inertia, this water maintains a relatively stable temperature year round, making it suitable for heating and cooling buildings. Previous estimates of the geothermal potential of a flooded open-pit mine primarily focused on the water volume alone, often underestimating the total potential by neglecting heat exchanges with the surrounding rock and incoming water. This paper introduces a novel analytical approach based on an improve thermal power balance concept to better estimate the geothermal potential of a flooded open-pit mine. Over a 25-years analysis, it was shown that the host rock can contribute over 15 % of the thermal energy in the water, while water supply can double this energy. The method developed is both quick and reliable, allowing for early stage evaluation of geothermal resources by accounting not only for the mine's water volume but also energy inputs from precipitation, runoff, groundwater recharge and the host rock. The study focuses on the Carey Canadian and King-Beaver open-pits, two closed asbestos mines in southern Quebec (Canada).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".