MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6929307914 · doi:10.48308/set.2024.235335.1046

Green Commute: Reducing Carbon Footprint in Commuting Scenarios in Karaj

2024· article· en· W6929307914 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle emissions and performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasCarbon footprintMegacityDiesel fuelFootprintCarbon fibersFuel efficiencyEmission inventory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study addresses the substantial contribution of mobile sources in commuting to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in megacities and underscores strategies for carbon footprint emission reduction. Field interviews and questionnaires facilitate data collection, enabling the classification of the studied vehicle fleet based on various parameters. The scenarios aim to minimize GHGs from the commute, utilizing the International Vehicle Emission (IVE) model to establish a primary carbon footprint emission inventory for commuting in Karaj. The base scenario reveals that commuting in Karaj produces 1579423 grams of CO2e, with CO2, N2O, and CH4 emissions at 1389039 grams, 43.74 grams, and 6385.38 grams, respectively. Three carbon footprint reduction scenarios, involving removing diesel vehicles, adopting natural gas-fueled vehicles, and replacing Euro 4 and 5 with older vehicles, demonstrate that the removal of diesel vehicles (S1) and adopting natural gas-fueled vehicles, and replacing Euro 4 and 5 with older vehicles (S3) are the most effective strategies, achieving a 99% efficiency rate in reducing CO2e. This study highlights the substantial impact of curbing carbon emissions from GHGs. S1 and S3 show significant reductions in carbon footprint emissions, emphasizing the crucial role of strategic planning and greenhouse gas minimization in controlling emissions from commuting. These findings underscore the critical importance of reducing carbon footprints and commuting to effectively mitigate GHGs in congested urban areas.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicVehicle emissions and performanceFrench-language works237,207