MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406853528 · doi:10.1080/03036758.2024.2446746

The role of smart community microgrids in Aotearoa's energy future

2025· article· en· W4406853528 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mark Apperley, Helen Viggers, Michael R.W. Walmsley, Ralph Chapman, Philippa Howden‐Chapman, Guy Penny, Ian Shearer, Phoebe Taptiklis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStrategic Science Fund
KeywordsAotearoaEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementEarth scienceSociologyGeologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a pressing need to expand electricity production in Aotearoa New Zealand to meet sustainability goals and lower energy costs. This new generation needs to be based on renewable sources, chiefly wind and solar, for both sustainability and economic reasons. While there remains a role for the legacy grid, microgrids provide a means of co-locating generation with load, minimising transmission line investment and energy losses. This paper explores the advantages of smart community microgrids in this context, but also examines the challenges in terms of the existing legacy grid approach. Three case studies are given as examples, covering an isolated community with no grid connection, a more conventional residential community of 30 households, and a community with local commercial/industrial loads in addition to housing. These case studies show the benefits in terms of local consumption of locally generated electricity coupled with sharing or local trading within the community. Microgrids can support New Zealand's transition to a more electrified, equitable, economical and low-emissions energy system, but their development does require not just exploitation of new technologies, but also adjustment to the legacy grid model and a fresh approach to electricity infrastructure planning and management.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Society of New ZealandSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207