p126 Canadian Electric Imports and New England's Renewable Energy Transmission Dilemma: A Case Study of the Northern Pass's Origins and Defeat in New Hampshire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to shift away from carbon-based electricity production, transmission infrastructures must be reconfigured. As the state of Massachusetts drives to access new low-carbon energy, a primary target is Québec hydropower. The complication is that in order for hydropower generation in Québec to reach export destinations in southern New England, transmission lines must be constructed through northern New England. This, in turn, requires permits from authorities along the transmission routes. The Northern Pass transmission project was a proposal to build a high-voltage power line from Québec to Massachusetts through New Hampshire. The line would be co-owned by Eversource, New Englan's largest investor-owned electric utility, and Hydro-Québec. New Hampshire organizations and stakeholders as well as opponents from across the region came together in New Hampshire within the Site Evaluation Committee to shut down the project. The result of public debate was a unanimous rejection in March 2018 by the Site Committee, reaffirmed by a unanimous New Hampshire Supreme Court decision in July 2019. Opposition to the Northern Pass is embedded in local historic relationships; people in northern New Engalnd have grievances towards southern New England history of exploiting and despoiling the North's lands and waters. New Hampshire's institutions gave power to the interests and voices within the state against the regional interests advocating for the Northern Pass. Investigating what led to Eversource's and Hydro-Québec's costly defeat, this paper shows that the fight over the Northern Pass is a critical instance of emerging conflicts in transmission planning.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".