Bungalows and oil tanks: The environmental damages of petroleum refining and the urban politics of heavy industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil refineries are important nodes in the infrastructure of petroleum, transforming crude oil into marketable products. They are often implanted far from dense urban centers because of the nuisances they bring. But sometimes they are found in cities, confronting the cleanliness and the efficiency of the modern infrastructural ideal with the pollution and toxicity that oil refining entails. The eastern end of the island of Montréal used to be Canada’s refining capital, hosting six oil refineries during the 20th century. To understand the torn historical legacy of oil refining, this paper uses both archival documents and oral history interviews with former residents to analyze the social and environmental consequences of fossil energy metabolisms on urban sacrifice zones. While recognizing the health and environmental hazards of living near and working in oil refineries, residents of Montréal’s sacrifice fossil zone were also attached to the industry for reasons going beyond jobs and cash. Living in a sort of fossil company town, they benefited from union jobs, generous municipal services financed by oil revenues, and the positive image of petroleum during the postwar era. By linking environmental history and urban studies, this article reflects on their experiences and on the complex politics of heavy industry in a major North American city. It argues that fossil infrastructure has been anything but concealed and invisible in Montréal’s refining landscapes, where the materiality of petroleum has been a quotidian and multisensorial reality, bringing about industrial pollution and fossil pride.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".