MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412198943 · doi:10.3390/su17146307

Supporting Sustainable Development Goals with Second-Life Electric Vehicle Battery: A Case Study

2025· article· en· W4412198943 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Muhammad Nadeem Akram, Walid Abdul‐Kader

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Sustainable developmentElectric vehicleDevelopment (topology)EngineeringAutomotive engineeringBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To alleviate the impact of economic and environmental detriments caused by the increased demands of electric vehicle battery production and disposal, the use of spent batteries in second-life stationary applications such as energy storage for renewable sources or backup power systems, offers many benefits. This paper focuses on reducing the energy consumption cost and greenhouse gas emissions of Internet-of-Things-enabled campus microgrids by installing solar photovoltaic panels on rooftops alongside energy storage systems that leverage second-life batteries, a gas-fired campus power plant, and a wind turbine while considering the potential loads of a prosumer microgrid. A linear optimization problem is derived from the system by scheduling energy exchanges with the Ontario grid through net metering and solved by using Python 3.11. The aim of this work is to support Sustainable Development Goals, namely 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and 13 (Climate Action). A comparison between a base case scenario and the results achieved with the proposed scenarios shows a significant reduction in electricity cost and greenhouse gas emissions and an increase in self-consumption rate and renewable fraction. This research work provides valuable insights and guidelines to policymakers.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.294
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207