MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7127200443 · doi:10.18357/wg25202318

Solar energy considerations in urban planning

2023· article· W7127200443 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ashling M. Redmond, Eliot Tretter

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Geography · 2023
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolar energyRenewable energyUrban planningPhotovoltaic systemSustainabilityLand-use planningUrban densityEnergy planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we explore the relationship between solar potential and the built urban environment. Solar potential across the urban landscape is uneven, in part, because it is affected by the surrounding texture of the urban form. Increasingly, the integration of solar energy considerations into urban planning and design is considered a crucial step in the transition from fossil fuels toward more renewable energy sources. Given the impact of the urban form, a key challenge may be the tension between solar potential and policies that promote densification. Other studies have noted how the built environment may significantly decrease solar potential. We suggest in this paper that solar potential should be more adequately considered in pre- planning phases with emphasis on the effects of building design on solar potential. The urgency may be heightened because increasing density with taller buildings has been embraced and widely implemented as part of many cities’ urban sustainability agendas. Using the City of Calgary as a case-study, we explore its solar potential. A spatial modelling tool in a GIS environment was used to assess the solar potential of the central business district and surrounding neighborhoods. The results show that Calgary's central business district has significantly lower solar potential than the surrounding neighborhoods. Importantly, current land-use regulations do not cover the potential impact of taller buildings on the area's solar potential. We suggest that there should at least be acknowledgement of this issue in urban planning practices and that solar potential should be incorporated as one variable in the urban planning process.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern GeographySame topicSolar Radiation and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207