Curtailment, Sustainability, and Governance: The Strategic Role of Renewable Energy Sources within the ESG Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The global expansion of renewable energy sources in the electricity matrix has intensified the challenges related to curtailment, which refers to the restriction of energy production due to technical, regulatory, or economic factors. Although rarely addressed explicitly, this phenomenon has direct consequences for the sustainability and efficiency of power systems, requiring new governance strategies aligned with Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles. In this context, the study investigates the strategic role of renewable energy in promoting more sustainable and resilient curtailment management, emphasizing its relevance to the energy transition and the development of management models suited to current climate challenges. Materials and Methods: This research employed a qualitative methodology based on epistemological principles that value the analysis of social phenomena within their specific historical and institutional contexts. It is classified as a theoretical-analytical study, grounded in a review of international scientific and technical literature, and focused on the intersection of curtailment, energy sustainability, and governance within the ESG framework. Results: The main objective of the study was to analyze the relationship between renewable energy curtailment and ESG principles, while proposing scientifically grounded and strategic guidelines for sustainable curtailment
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 | 0.001 | 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".