Offshore wave and wind energy development in the Southern Hemisphere will remain optimal between 20°E and 180°E by 2100
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wave and offshore-wind energies offer promising alternatives to fossil fuels, yet their combined potential under climate change remains poorly understood. Here we assess how climate change may affect this potential over the coming century, using outputs from fifteen global climate models included in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 and an empirical method to refine model projections. We identify two oceanic bands between 40°S and 60°S with high combined energy potential. Notably, the region between 20°E and 180°E is projected to remain favorable for both energy sources. We also conduct a multi-level analysis to show how improved climate modeling enhances predictions of renewable energy resources. These findings provide valuable insights for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers seeking to enhance the resilience and sustainability of renewable energy systems. The high wave energy potential may decrease in the future, while that of offshore wind energy could increase, particularly under the high carbon dioxide emission scenarios, but the region between 40°S and 60°S and 20°E and 180°E will remain optimal, according to a multi-model analysis of climate projections.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".