Section: Quarantine and Regulatory Phaseout of methyl bromide as a fumigant – will PQS uses continue?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (MP) seeks to eliminate emissions to the atmosphere of all ozone-depleting gases. This includes emissions of methyl bromide fumigant. Phaseout of production and consumption of methyl bromide, quarantine and pre-shipment (QPS) uses excepted, is now well advanced. This includes phaseout of non-exempt uses on postharvest durable commodities and structures. Annual non-QPS use on structures and postharvest durable foodstuffs is now less than 300 tonnes a year globally. There are potential alternatives for almost all remaining non-QPS uses on post-harvest durables. Their actual adoption is constrained by regulatory/registration issues in a number of countries where there is a great need for rapid treatment to meet transport and harvesting schedules. A few recalcitrant and specialised uses remain without recognised alternatives, notably for disinfestation of some high moisture dates immediately postharvest. QPS uses continue to be exempted from control under the agreed MP control measures for methyl bromide. Production of methyl bromide for QPS uses is now the largest new production on an ozone-depleting substance for an emissive use unregulated under the Montreal Protocol. Regulation of emissions from QPS treatments is under continuing discussion, with a decision whether or not to bring emissions from QPS under some form of MP control possible in late 2010. There are actual or potential alternatives for most of the high volume use of methyl bromide (export grains, export timber and wood packing material (ISPM 15). Both MP and the IPPC already urge adoption of alternatives and other emission reduction measures from QPS use on durables, where feasible. A further and more detailed discussion of alternatives for QPS treatment of grain, timber (logs) and wood
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.094 | 0.052 |
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".