Assessing Biomass Energy Resource Potential Near Pelican Narrows, Northern Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many northern and remote communities across Canada continue to experience energy insecurity owing to high energy prices, energy disruptions, or inadequate energy supplies. Local, community renewable energy has been identified as a potential solution to energy security challenges in the northern and remote communities, including Pelican Narrow in northern Saskatchewan. However, there has been limited assessment of renewable energy potential through the application of geospatial techniques in northern communities due to limited data availability. Also, many existing efforts to advance renewable energy in northern communities are often driven by external interests and continue to face community resistance due to the limited or absence of considering community contexts and values. As a result, there is a possibility that many remote and northern communities may be left behind in the global energy transition. Community energy planning has been described as a relevant tool to help a community identify and address its energy needs, and community energy planning is slowly gaining traction in many northern communities. Therefore, the overall purpose of this research is to identify key renewable energy resource potentials and opportunities for local renewable energy development near Pelican Narrows in northern Saskatchewan, informed by community values and contexts. The research design consisted of two main phases: (i) a geospatial design to support the technical assessment of biomass resource potential and (ii) the implementation of a participatory mapping framework to integrate community values and constraints to biomass resource use near Pelican Narrows. Findings from this research indicate that there is considerable potential for bioenergy development near Pelican Narrow, in consideration of community values and contexts. Also, the research revealed that incorporating meaningful community engagement, involvement, and participation in exploring local renewable energy options can positively influence community interest and acceptance and support the notion of community energy and Indigenous community energy planning. The relevance of this research strengthens the integration and incorporation of community values and contexts in community energy planning for many remote, rural, Indigenous, and northern communities in the global north. Future scholarship could adopt and apply the participatory mapping processes and approaches implemented in this research to other northern communities to advance Indigenous community energy planning and the transition of localized renewable energy projects and development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".