MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6922280670 · doi:10.11575/prism/35823

Community Energy Assessment- Jasper, Alberta

2010· other· en· W6922280670 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2010
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcosystem dynamics and resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy (signal processing)Context (archaeology)Energy consumptionResource (disambiguation)Energy intensityEnergy planningSuiteEnergy policySustainabilityBaseline (sea)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this paper is to quantify the generation and consumption energy patterns in Jasper, Alberta, and to assess the quantity and applicability of alternative energy technologies. A suite of innovations are available to meet present and future demand for energy services, a demand which shows no sign of decline. Municipalities may seek nonconventional methods of energy management; however, they are often faced with broad knowledge gaps and resource constraints, creating uncertainty and delayed action. The intention of this study is to provide municipal planners with a baseline of energy behaviours, and to diminish the gaps which might hinder sustainable energy development. While this study cannot aspire to provide a comprehensive analysis of each technology, it does endeavour to act as a stepping stone to determining their feasibility based on the tenets of sustainability. The paper begins by outlining the local and provincial context which frames the challenge, followed by a discussion on a possible framework for municipal energy planning. The first analysis is an energy mapping study which attempts to graphically represent the distribution of energy intensity across the town. The second analysis is a technical and financial review of eight technologies which could potentially enhance the environmental performance of Jasper’s energy system. If possible, modelling was used to determine the performance of a typical system and estimation of the total available energy (Gigajoules), given the conditions of Jasper. The financial component uses common units for outlining capital costs ($/Watt and in the conclusion $/GJ) and operation and maintenance costs ($/kWh). The costs are normalised to present Canadian dollars to make comparison possible. Finally, the areas of organisational capacity, financing, legal and social factors, and the role of the utility are discussed. Although a host of statistics, trends, academic research and technical expertise is readily available in the area of energy planning, this study is intended to localise this information, present it in a comprehensible format, and provide leverage for energy initiatives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicEcosystem dynamics and resilienceFrench-language works237,207