Highlights of the Northeast BC Carbon Capture and Storage Atlas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) provides an opportunity to help British Columbia reach “net zero” carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions by 2050 (CleanBC, 2018, 2021). This project was commissioned to address a lack of coordinated public information about geological formations suitable for long-term CO 2 storage in BC's portion of the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (WCSB). Its goals included the identification of favorable geology for CO 2 storage in Northeastern British Columbia (NE BC) (Figure 21.1) and developing an understanding of ultimate CO 2 volumes that may be stored geologically. This information is needed to improve decision-making for policy, regulation, and industry. There are many recent technical studies in the public domain characterizing reservoirs within the WCSB. This project follows seminal work by Bachu (2006). The atlas has collated available public information and studies, while CDL provided geological support to fill in any gaps between previously existing datasets. The atlas is a compilation of maps and a comprehensive report identifying the formations and areas that may be most favorable for carbon sequestration. Identifying areas with sufficient storage potential, in conjunction with the locations of stationary CO 2 emitters and existing infrastructure, will assist in the evaluation and informed decision making for potential carbon storage and hydrogen projects. The atlas identifies 4.3 Gt of CO 2 storage potential in formations in NE BC. Storage potential was calculated in depleted gas pools and saline aquifers for 12 formations (or groups of formations) that met some basic screening criteria and had sufficient information available for a high-level quantification of storage potential. The atlas also provides an overview of CO 2 capture, separate formation chapter summaries, and storage calculations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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".