MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6992925197

A New and Improved Energy Reality—It's No Pipedream: Streamlining Permitting Procedures for Certain Classes of Natural Resource Projects: The Canada-United States Keystone XL Pipeline

2013· article· en· W6992925197 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResource (disambiguation)Natural resourceProcess (computing)Government (linguistics)Scope (computer science)Pipeline (software)Compromise
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper I propose an original policy solution to the complicated issue of permitting and regulatory review for cross-border natural resource projects to allow for a smoother quicker approval process for certain types of projects. I have specifically designed this new procedure so as to focus on political compromise and minimize political partisanship, while instead concentrating on achieving results. By modi ing the current regulatory standard to a more streamlined model, deserving cross-border natural resource projects can swiftly gain approval, yet environmental, economic, foreign policy, national securit), and other significant concerns will still receive the attention and thorough evaluation they require.\nThe paper suggests two main changes to the current cross-border natural resource project permitting system. First, my modified standard would use a hybrid permitting scheme, incorporating elements from the Department of State's cross-border oil pipeline permitting process and the Department of Energy less complex cross-border power transmission line model. Second, three valid methods would be available for gaining approval for a permit: (1) permit issued based on a favorable decision of Executive or Secretary of State; (2) permit issued after earning a minimum two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and Senate; or (3) permit issued on a state-by-state basis, unless the federal government department responsible for permitting can prove that the project, as a whole, is against the national interest. However the scope of this modified standard would be limited in that it would only be available for natural resource projects coming from a country with equivalent or superior (stricter) environmental and natural resource laws. The paper concludes with a short case study that applies the new and improved permitting scheme to the Keystone XL Pipeline project.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.014
Scholarly communication0.0150.010
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)→Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→