MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411236958 · doi:10.3390/en18123102

Sustainable Crop Irrigation with Renewable Energy: A Case Study of Lethbridge County, Alberta

2025· article· en· W4411236958 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mohammad Adnan Aftab, James Byrne, Paul Hazendonk, Dan Johnson, Locke D. Spencer

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersMitacs
KeywordsRenewable energyIrrigationSustainable energyEnvironmental scienceWater resource managementCropAgroforestryGeographyEngineeringForestryAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The agriculture sector is a major contributor to the economy of Alberta, Canada, accounting for almost 2.8% of the total GDP. Considering its importance, implementing efficient and cost-effective irrigation systems is vital for promoting sustainable agriculture in semi-arid regions like Lethbridge County, Alberta, Canada. Although irrigation is primarily carried out using the Oldman River and its allied reservoirs, groundwater pumping becomes a supplementary necessity during periods of limited surface water availability or droughts. This research investigates the potential of renewable energy resources, such as wind and solar energy, to meet the energy requirements for crop irrigation. The study begins by identifying and calculating the water requirements for major crops in Lethbridge County, such as wheat and barley, using the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization’s CROPWAT 8.0 software. Subsequently, energy calculations were conducted to meet the specific crop water demand through the design of a hybrid energy system using Homer Pro 3.16.2. A technoeconomic analysis of the renewable hybrid system has been carried out to demonstrate the efficiency and novelty of the proposed work. Outcomes revealed that the proposed system is both efficient and economical in fulfilling the crop water requirement through groundwater pumping, promoting sustainable agriculture, and helping to ensure food security in the region.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesFrench-language works237,207