MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6903642617 · doi:10.11575/prism/40220

An economic assessment of renewable natural gas (RNG) as a potential low carbon intensity fuel alternative eligible under Canada’s Clean Fuel Regulations

2022· other· en· W6903642617 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Renewable energyRaw materialWork (physics)Carbon creditProfitability indexGreenhouse gasEconomic impact analysisNatural gasManure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this project is to determine whether the production of renewable natural gas (RNG) using corn stover or dairy cow manure in Canada is economically feasible using a discounted cash flow analysis. Further, this work seeks to determine if there is sufficient, reliable feedstock to sustain desired production levels over the lifetime of a production facility. This project also evaluates the effect of Canada’s newly introduced Clean Fuel Regulation (CFR) and CFR credit sales on the profitability of RNG production. This work calculates that the cost to generate a credit under the CFR using manure or stover based RNG production can be as low as $315 or more than $28,000 under unfavourable circumstances. This work provides better understanding of the economic challenges of RNG, showing that feedstock acquisition and transportation costs significantly impact a projects’ ability to be profitable, leading to credit generation costs which are not competitive.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDFrench-language works237,207