MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100929365

Carbon Taxes and Financial Incentives for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions in Alberta’s Oil Sands

2015· article· en· W7100929365 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil sandsGreenhouse gasIncentiveProduction (economics)Carbon taxFossil fuelSteam-assisted gravity drainagePetroleum industry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is widely considered that the continued development and production of Alberta’s oil sands deposits is on track to be the fastest growing source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Canada over the next few decades. As recent developments suggest, failure to address the issue of GHG emissions growth might jeopardize the potential for sustained expansion of oil sands operations in Alberta. With this in mind, a computer simulation model of a steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) oil sands production facility is used to investigate the financial incentives provided by the introduction of a per-unit levy on CO2 emissions – a carbon tax – to SAGD producers to reduce production-related GHG emissions. Results are obtained for a range of carbon tax rates and crude oil prices. Special attention is paid to the interactions between the carbon tax and the provisions of the royalty and tax regime applicable to oil sands development and production activities in Alberta.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHymenoptera taxonomy and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207