MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7079711522 · doi:10.26108/cp6c-gx23

Cost-benefit analysis of a natural gas lateral pipeline to the Annapolis Valley

2011· article· en· W7079711522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAcadiaU-DEV · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural gasNet present valuePipeline (software)Internal rate of returnPresent valuePipeline transportFuel gasEconomic analysisExternality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This a study of the economic benefit of bringing natural gas to the Annapolis Valley, Nova Scotia. Large volume potential customers are profiled and found to be primarily using Bunker C residual fuel oil, which then is contrasted with natural gas in terms of use, efficiency, price and environmental effects. Based on the customers‟ energy needs, the construction cost of a 105km 6 inch lateral pipeline connecting to the provincial pipeline network north of Halifax is calculated. With 2010 average prices for Bunker C and natural gas a Net Present Value of $51.8 million is established for the project with a 31% Internal Rate of return and break even of four years. As the economic value of this project depends greatly on the price differential between the fuels a sensitivity analysis is conducted. The environmental costs of emissions are quantified to incorporate externalities into the analysis. Limitations of the study examine why a favourable economic analysis does not necessarily mean a viable project. Based on the IRR the project does appear financially viable from a commercial standpoint.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcadiaU-DEVSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207