MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414864264 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-01044-9

Assessment of critical mineral extraction from brines at Mount Meager, Southwestern BC, Canada

2025· article· en· W4414864264 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fateme Hormozzade Ghalati, Dariush Motazedian, James A. Craven, Stephen E. Grasby, V Tschirhart

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeothermal gradientGeothermal energyExtraction (chemistry)MineralSustainabilityMineral resource classification

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

intensive mining methods. This paper evaluates the potential of geothermal brines as a sustainable alternative for mineral extraction after geothermal energy production. A detailed case study of a Canadian geothermal field provides insight into the potential economic advantages of mineral extraction from brines. Water chemistry data from the Mount Meager geothermal field, which has one of the highest geothermal potentials in Canada, demonstrates that the fluids are rich in dissolved minerals and metals. Using reservoir physical information, Monte Carlo simulations, and appropriate probability distributions, our study addresses uncertainties in volumetric resource calculations. Taking into consideration flow pathways through the rock matrix, and available technologies with rates of mineral recovery up to 90%, results show promising reserves for minerals such as lithium, magnesium, and silica. The findings highlight the dual benefits of geothermal energy in Canada providing both a green energy source and facilitating critical mineral production. This dual utility can generate additional revenue fostering the development of geothermal fields, even those that are not viable for energy generation on their own, supporting Canada's transition to a low-carbon economy.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207