MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7017749710

Closing The Planning Gap: Towards 100% Renewable Energy Communities

2018· other· en· W7017749710 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenewable energyEnergy planningClosing (real estate)Energy policyClimate changeClimate change adaptationLocal communityLocal governmentEfficient energy use
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As municipalities in Canada seek out ways in which to address the issues related to climate change, urbanization, and increase in population, energy is an ever-increasing concern. It's connection to land use, urban forms and infrastructure highlights the importance of local governments role in addressing these related issues. Many local governments are considering community energy plans as a solution to address issues related to the energy sector at the community level. The purpose of this paper is to understand and create a draft manual on how to close the planning gap that exists in community energy plans through understanding the development of proper policy frameworks primarily for planners and other municipal staff interested in renewable communities. It further seeks the methods a municipality should consider in planning to achieve 100% renewable community. \n Given the interdisciplinary nature of planning towards RE communities, a mixedmethods approach was followed. Municipalities in British Columbia have been studied, successful cases have been reviewed, interviews with municipal staff have been taken place, and literature review and non-academic papers have been read to yield important practical lessons regarding required steps to develop policy frameworks that would result in the increase in energy efficiency targets and increase in RE implementations at the local level. \n The predominant challenge for local governments in addressing climate change issues is that the adopted community energy plans, as mitigation and adaptation strategies, have targets in regards to the energy efficiency and RE that are not being fully implemented. Lack of internal alignment, capacity, funding, and policy frameworks have been identified as main barriers. In this paper steps required in developing policy frameworks have been studied to better guide communities that aim to achieve RE communities. Planning for 100% RE communities can build the leadership and commitment that is necessary to move towards implementation of energy targets in the absence of national regulatory support. \n There is a substantial opportunity to close the gap between energy planning and the implementation of energy targets at the local level. However, as there is no one size fits all, each municipality has to develop their own policy actions using local policy tools. The policy frameworks provide the general information on how to best develop a successful policy. However, using incentives and political buy-in have been identified to play a key role in the implementation of energy targets to achieve 100% RE communities.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0210.010
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0050.022
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.158 · 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
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→French-language works237,207→