MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409048300 · doi:10.1002/gch2.202400356

Energy Generation and Carbon Footprint under Future Projections (2022–2100) of Central Asian Temperature Extremes

2025· article· en· W4409048300 on OpenAlexaff
Parya Broomandi, Mehdi Bagheri, Ali Fard, Aram Fathian, Mohammad Abdoli, Adib Roshani, Sadjad Shafiei, Michael Leuchner, Jong Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Challenges · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRenewable energyClimate changeCarbon footprintGlobal warmingLimitingGreenhouse gasMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesNatural resource economicsGeographyEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Limiting the global temperature rise to 1.5 °C is becoming increasingly difficult. The study analyzed data from 700 locations (1962–2100) to assess climate change impacts on heating‐cooling energy and carbon footprint in under‐researched Central Asia (CA). Under SSP2‐4.5, icing and frost days reduce, while summer days and tropical nights increase. Central Asian countries will see an increase in cooling needs despite the projected decline in heating demands, with Kyrgyzstan experiencing the highest rise in cooling degree days, projected to increase by 132% and 165% in the near‐future under SSP2‐4.5 and SSP5‐8.5, respectively. As a result, cooling energy generation is expected to rise by 39% and 92% under SSP2‐4.5 and SSP5‐8.5, respectively. However, CO2 emissions for cooling are much lower in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan due to their reliance on renewable energy. CO2 emissions in these countries are projected to be ≈10 times lower than in other parts of CA. From 2022 to 2100, cooling‐related emissions are estimated to increase by 41% and 80% under SSP2‐4.5 and SSP5‐8.5, respectively across CA. Urgent adaptation is needed for resilient cities and stable power by expanding renewables, modernizing infrastructure, boosting efficiency, adopting policies, and fostering cooperation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal ChallengesSame topicWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesFrench-language works237,207