Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Energy/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Support needed with an article for Blue Freedom
Hi,
I'm Benedict, co-founder of Blue Freedom. I would like to write a Wikipedia article for Blue Freedom, if it is relevant enough.
Blue Freedom is the world's smallest hydropower plant. The vision behind the creation of Blue Freedom is to give people who have no access to the power grid the freedom to produce energy themselves.
Blue Freedom has raised about 200,000 USD from about 1,000 backers on Kickstarter. (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hydropower/blue-freedom-the-worlds-smallest-hydropower-plant ) We are listed in German Wikipedia under the article of the German Energy Awards (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Awards#Start-up:_Blue_Freedom ) About 400 newspapers and magazines have written about the project so far (overview with links to the original sources of some online articles we have found: http://blue-freedom.net/press/ )
I've tried to find some press articles of Blue Freedom written by relevant magazines or organizations, which are used as sources for other Wikipedia entries: Metro Newspaper (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=metro&fulltext=Search): http://www.metro.us/lifestyle/blue-freedom-portable-generator-uses-water-to-power-smartphone/zsJocE---GAEmIn9BOW9M/ http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/25/this-is-how-we-will-charge-our-phones-in-the-future-5119992/
OZY Media (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=ozy&fulltext=Search): http://www.ozy.com/good-sht/a-hydropower-kit-you-can-carry-in-your-backpack/41794
Gizmag (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=gizmag&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go): http://www.gizmag.com/blue-freedom-mobile-hydropower/36573/
TreeHugger (http://www.treehugger.com/gadgets/mini-sized-hydropower-plant-charges-your-devices-go.html): http://www.treehugger.com/gadgets/mini-sized-hydropower-plant-charges-your-devices-go.html
Autoevolution (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=Autoevolution.com&fulltext=Search): http://www.autoevolution.com/news/worlds-smallest-portable-hydropower-device-is-the-future-video-94508.html
Malay Mail (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=malay+mail&fulltext=Search): http://www.themalaymailonline.com/tech-gadgets/article/first-hydropower-plant-that-fits-a-backpack-meets-crowd-funding-goal
GadgetReview (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=gadgetreview&fulltext=Search): http://www.gadgetreview.com/2015/03/blue-freedom-is-a-handheld-hydropower-plant
Yahoo! Tech (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=yahoo.com%2Ftech&fulltext=Search): https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/first-hydropower-plant-small-enough-backpack-meets-crowd-203346715.html?nf=1
VICE (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=vice.com&fulltext=Search): http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-worlds-smallest-hydropower-iphone-charger
Ubergizmo (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=ubergizmo&fulltext=Search): http://www.ubergizmo.com/2015/03/mini-hydropower-plant-helps-charge-mobile-devices-using-only-water/
Android Community (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=androidcommunity.com&fulltext=Search): http://androidcommunity.com/blue-freedom-charges-gadgets-using-flowing-water-20150325/
Gizmodo (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=Gizmodo&fulltext=Search): http://www.gizmodo.jp/2015/04/ok_20.html
Huffington Post (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=Huffington+Post&fulltext=Search): http://www.huffingtonpost.de/2015/01/25/leerer-smartphone-akku-mini-wasserkraftwerk_n_6541324.html
ARD BR ("the world's largest public broadcaster" (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARD_%28broadcaster%29) | https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=br.de&fulltext=Search): http://www.br.de/mediathek/video/sendungen/abendschau/oekostrom-wasserkraft-energie-100.html and http://www.br.de/mediathek/video/sendungen/abendschau/wasserkraftwerk-blue-freedom-100.html
N24 (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=n24&fulltext=Search&profile=default): http://www.n24.de/n24/Nachrichten/Netzwelt/d/6043244/mini-wasserkraftwerk-sollen-smartphones-aufladen.html
FOCUS (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=focus.de&fulltext=Search): http://www.focus.de/digital/smartphone-iphone-und-co-bald-mit-mini-wasserkraftwerk-aufladen_id_4429530.html
Wirtschaftswoche (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=wirtschaftswoche&fulltext=Search): http://green.wiwo.de/blauer-strom-ueberall-fuerther-startup-revolutioniert-wasserkraft/
Conrad Electronic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conrad_Electronic): http://blog.conrad.de/crowdfunding-projekt-die-wasserturbine-fuer-unterwegs/
CHIP (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=chip.de&fulltext=Search): http://www.chip.de/news/Blue-Freedom-Mobiles-Wasserkraftwerk-fuer-Handy-Akkus_75828095.html
Handelsblatt (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=handelsblatt&fulltext=Search&profile=default): http://energyawards.handelsblatt.com/awards/nominierte-2015/
Official German District Fürth (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=f%C3%BCrth&fulltext=Search): http://www.fuerth.de/Home/wirtschaft/existenzgruendung/Fuerther-Firma-ausgezeichnet.aspx and http://www.fuerth.de/Home/wirtschaft/newsarchiv/Archiv2015-Wirtschaft/Unternehmen-auf-der-Erfolgsspur.aspx
I hope that these articles help you to understand the relevance of Blue Freedom for Wikipedia.
Do you think, that our project is relevant enough for Wikipedia? If yes, would you help me with writing an article about it? My English is not the best and I'm no experienced Wikipedia user. That's why I would be very happy about your support! If you want you can also write it on your own to make sure that it's as neutral as possible.
Thanks a lot in advance!
Best wishes, Benedict
--Know1ledge (talk) 17:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, if the project has received enough independent press (see WP:GNG), and it seems like it has, an article would be appropriate. However, it is not considered good practise if you, as co-founder, would write the article yourself, per Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Gap9551 (talk) 18:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Separating power outage maps from outage management system
Currently, there is a table of links to power outage maps at the bottom of the Outage management system page. Can we move this information to a new page on power outage maps? I know this would probably require additional sources, and am willing to make suggestions. Finchemattina (talk) 21:29, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello
This article is not part of any WikiProject. Do you think it falls within the scope of your wikiproject ? If so, can it be assessed for quality/importance ? Thanks Anthere (talk) 22:13, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Battersea Power Station
I have proposed to split this. Please see Talk:Battersea Power Station#The area. Simply south ...... time, deparment skies for just 9 years 20:08, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi folks. Your input on the above is greatly appreciated. Rehman 23:57, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Infobox pipeline diameter
Sandpiper pipeline has an error in the infobox for the pipeline diameter. That is because the wikitext is trying to say the diameter is 24 inches for one section and 30 inches for another. However, the infobox only allows for a single number (mm or inches) with no description. Any thoughts on how that should be handled? This situation must have arisen before? Johnuniq (talk) 02:40, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
Solar power in Spain: Wikipedia item needs updating please.
Hello wikipedia,
Just to say that the item 'Solar power in Spain' is sadly out of date. Sadly, because Spain's govt seems keen to stop self-generation of solar electricity. Regards from CJM 'Fortrosenz' email is christine@fortrose.org.nz EG http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/10/spain-approves-sun-tax-discriminates-against-solar-pv.html
Fortrosenz (talk) 08:22, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Should one of them be deleted? Rehman 07:55, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Rehman's Campaign for a camera and workstation for free quality content
See commons:User_talk:Rehman/Campaign#Help_host_the_campaign and this link. --Alexmar983 (talk) 04:16, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
The Mix - Standard School Broadcasts
I used a four part set of filmstrips with audiotape when I taught fifth graders about the history of American music in 1976. I thought that these programs were distributed to many schools but have been unable to find anything about them. My email is bette@leadership2020.org and I would love to have any information - or a way to buy a set. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.243.41 (talk) 23:00, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Please see the discussion on this page about the correct spelling for "uniflow". (or is it "unaflow"...?) Thanks - theWOLFchild 22:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
"Battery"
The usage and primary topic of "battery" is under discussion, see talk:battery (electricity) -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 06:08, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I created an essay regarding the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement on Meta and I am now looking for ideas regarding the project. I'd love to hear your comments and maybe even have your support! Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 21:41, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Reads like WMF is blowing its own trumpet. We need independent third-party sources in order to take this further.--Aspro (talk) 22:23, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Aspro, what do you mean my "blowing its own trumpet"? --Gnom (talk) 22:30, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Whoops, thought you were writing and article where we have to go by Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. Got my reading glasses on now, so carry on.--Aspro (talk) 01:06, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Aspro, I still have difficulties trying to understand your point. Can you elaborate? Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 19:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Whoops, thought you were writing and article where we have to go by Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. Got my reading glasses on now, so carry on.--Aspro (talk) 01:06, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, Gnom. Be pleased to expand. Why I said whoops was because I skim a lot drafts etc. (quickly) (and there is a lot of stuff added to WP hourly) that want become articles. I thought (on first reading) your essay was a draft to such an article. Just because the WMF may want to lower its energy bills like every one else, is not notable in itself -in a WP sense ( as you know, some organisation use any reduction of energy cost (to themselves) as a trumpet that they are saving the planet – regardless as to whether their savings have any kick-on-effects which has other ecologic detrimental effects). Now I see, where your coming from, I will watch the development of your essay with interest and will comment and add to anything that I think is applicable. So, relax. No!... On second thoughts, don't relax - just get on with your essay.--Aspro (talk) 11:50, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Is this an incident, accident or a disaster, for the renaming discussion, see talk:Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster -- 70.51.45.100 (talk) 06:26, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
New video
Last year, I noticed that someone had created an article about Wind power in Kentucky. I know very little about wind power, but I do live in Kentucky, and I found some wind turbines on the campus of Madisonville Community College, so on a lark, I took a video of them in operation. It is embedded to the right. I'm wondering if someone can provide a more specific description of what kind of turbines these are, etc. and tell me if this video actually has any practical value on Wikipedia or Commons. If not, please just nominate it for deletion. If so, please feel free to link it in any appropriate articles. Thanks.
- Posted. TGCP (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Merge discussion notice
The article List of Tesla superchargers has been proposed for merging with the article Tesla station. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 13:58, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Category:Energy Globe Award winners has been nominated for discussion
Category:Energy Globe Award winners, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
 Hello, |
Francis turbine reaction formula
Hello all,
While editing the article on Francis turbines, I came accross an erroneous formula - probably so badly formatted I can't understand the original author's intent. What tipped me off is that it isn't homogenous: R is dimensionless while e is of dimension V2. Any idea of the correct formula?
Regards, Hayazin (talk) 14:23, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Auto-assessment of article classes
Following a recent discussion at WP:VPR, there is consensus for an opt-in bot task that automatically assesses the class of articles based on classes listed for other project templates on the same page. In other words, if WikiProject A has evaluated an article to be C-class and WikiProject B hasn't evaluated the article at all, such a bot task would automatically evaluate the article as C-class for WikiProject B.
If you think auto-assessment might benefit this project, consider discussing it with other members here. For more information or to request an auto-assessment run, please visit User:BU RoBOT/autoassess. This is a one-time message to alert projects with over 1,000 unassessed articles to this possibility. ~ RobTalk 22:28, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Please see Draft:Power-to-X
Is this draft an acceptable article? AFC is currently in backlog, assistance from topic specialists would be appreciated. Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Infobox power station discussion about color
There is a talk about the box color. There appears to be a consensus about unifying it with the color of {{infobox dam}}. But there is a suggestion to change to a lighter color. Being the template rated of top importance in the project, I feel more participation is needed. --Robertiki (talk) 20:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to shade Gabon on the map Commons:File:OPEC.svg ?
I recently brought OPEC successfully to Good Article status, and have been working steadily to maintain it – but I'm completely stumped about how to edit the infobox map Commons:File:OPEC.svg to add blue shading for Gabon, which rejoins OPEC on 1 July 2016. Can someone familiar with SVG please shade Gabon on the map, and review any of the lingering errors that apparently need correcting in the SVG source code?
By 1 July 2016, if nobody has come forward to update this SVG file (unmaintained since 2013), then it should be replaced with Commons:File:OPEC 2016-07.png, a less desirable but easily shadeable format.
Many thanks. —Patrug (talk) 11:15, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- I managed to update the SVG map for Gabon rejoining OPEC, but wasn't able to avoid errors in the source code, which is unfortunate for a map with millions of viewers per year in dozens of Wikipedia languages.
- It's disappointing to see that over several months, the last dozen edits to this Talk page have consisted entirely of unanswered posts followed by automatic archiving. This really doesn't reflect well on WikiProject Energy. —Patrug (talk) 00:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- The map file was completely fixed by User:Offnfopt at Commons:Graphics village pump – thanks!
- Since almost no posts on this Talk page get replies within 30 days, I just reset the automatic archiving to 90 days instead. We'll see if this improves the abysmal response rate. —Patrug (talk) 04:35, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Thorium as an alternative to Uranium
I have just moved a section on the above topic to the talk page of Nuclear Power, as the standard of English and writing needed work. Would a member of this project please take a look at it and assess its value to the article? Britmax (talk) 08:23, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Help improving the references for NASA wind turbines
I'm currently engaged in carrying out a reference cleanup for this article. One news item cited is proving hard to track down it is entitled "Hawaiians get Boeing's Last Wind Machine Makani Ho'Olapa will Bring Power to 1,140 Residences" (Or at least that is how the article title was written down by the editor who linked to it.) The link no longer goes to the article. A check of the internet archive has the link archived as far back as 2012 but they all point to the same message that the article is no longer at that link. I've also tried searching for variations of the title, but all I get is Wikipedia mirrors. If anyone can find the original article please let me know or add it yourself.
Graham1973 (talk) 01:09, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Graham1973: If you search for somee key words (wind machine boeing) at either SeattlePI.com or NewsLibrary.com, you'll see a pay link for the article:
- HAWAIIANS GET BOEING'S LAST WIND MACHINE
- MAKANI HO'OLAPA WILL BRING POWER TO 1,140 RESIDENCES
- Author: Les Gapay
- Seattle Post-Intelligencer
- August 27, 1987
- Page B7
- Hope this helps. —Patrug (talk) 21:16, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the details. I tried your suggestion regarding Seattle PI.com and it still didn't bring up the article. I've updated the last bare url reference remaining on that page with your details. Graham1973 (talk) 01:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Request for comments in the article “Diesel engine”
Hello. I have opened a request for comments in the article Diesel engine regarding the contribution of George Brayton to the development of this type of engines. I am posting this to invite editors who are knowledgeable on the history of internal combustion engines to contribute to the discussion. Mario Castelán Castro (talk) 19:30, 29 August 2016 (UTC).
Carbon Costs of Condensing Boilers and Economic Behavioural Factors
Speaking as a scientist, medical lecturer, university lecturer/professor, and would you have it, commercial property developer, I do not speak without some forethought, unless I am inebriated at a party (sadly too rare).
I have been following the condensing boiler efficiency arguments and find the exercise mired in economic interests rather than science and engineering.
Firstly, few studies of value have been done to check the carbon footprint of the most efficient conventional cast iron heat exchanger boilers vs. condensing boilers.
My own carbon footprint calculations show that condensing boilers are FOUR times, yes FOUR TIMES more polluting than the old conventional boilers, the main attribute here is the lifespan of condensing boilers is only 5-10 years, on average, yet the old boilers is 20-30 years. I have several conventional boilers that are 30-40 years old and still going strong.
I have also interviewed 200-300 gas fitters (some like to call them gas engineers, sorry, but few are engineers in the classic sense, indeed they are not allowed to call themselves engineers with a capital E as this is semi protected title in Europe, but that is another subject), the majority admit that they do not and would not install modern condensers in their own homes!!! They also get very depressed with return visits when the condensers break down and they have to face the ire of the end user. A percentage (c.20%) have left the industry because of this alone.
When you add the breakdown rates, service costs, manufacturing costs, complexity of construction, the extra electricity consumption (circuitry and extra pumps and fans), the increased changeover costs, the high end level carbon footprint disparity emerges 'in technicolour'.
But most gas fitters are there to make profit, and do not care about social order technical matters (I use their own words).
Government GDP turnover increase from this poorly researched industry is approximately twenty-fold greater using this unreliable and short-life condensing technology. They (Govt) need the cash, not the detailed social studies. The public consultation that got condensers first approved was an industry whitewash (see below). Fuel poverty is still creating over 30,000 early deaths a year, I estimate 5,000 of these are from condensing boilers and their costs alone.
Complexity as a way forward in most technologies is still lauded and sells well, conversely, simplicity is derided. (In health - my own field- complex drugs destroy more lives than they save, but pharma profits come first. Simple solutions are there, but cost little or nothing. That is unacceptable. The same with the heating industry and indeed across many other industries.)
I spoke to a major worldwide boiler manufacturer, they largely agree with my figures presented here but say they are into profits and not social welfare.
I spoke to an energy under minister in DEFRA, he told me they are NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE RUNNING COSTS, MANUFACTURING COSTS, and REDUCED LONGEVITY COSTS IN THE SEDBUK RATING, which therefore becomes a totally unrealistic figure derived from just mere minutes of laboratory testing only. It therefore has nothing to do with real world sustainability, appliance lifespan, social cost, or affordability, and consumer pattens of use.
The condensing heat exchangers are prone to fail due to many issues, particulate matter getting trapped in them (even with filters) and causing heat hot spots is a major problem.
The condensate is highly acidic and causes cement in drains to crumble. No worry, call the drain man, GDP will increase.
The turbo fans can fail causing carbon monoxide to leak into room space. No worry, fit CO detectors, GDP will increase.
But it is totally not advisable to use condensers with cast iron radiators or cast iron pipes as iron particles can lodge in the heat exchanger and cause explosions, again even with filters. No worry, more GDP.
Condensers do save about 10-15% in gas usage in SOME cases. Many people report no change in their gas bill, in many cases any savings will be mopped up by gas price hikes as turnover of gas companies MUST remain level high. Praise be to GDP.
There are those household users who see these condensers as a panacea, they may well be experiencing cognitive dissonance after the huge money they have spent.
Conventional technology boilers could have been improved (eg radiating the heat from the pilot inwards), use of balanced flues are EXTREMELY SAFE, as the boiler is totally room sealed. A heat recovery unit can be added on the flue side, or as I have done, the flue gases can power an air source heat pump external unit making the latter even more energy efficient down to -15C, currently heat pumps slow at -1C. However, these sustainable solutions do not butter government's or gas fitters parsnips. So we will continue to fail when we try to succeed as we have got this and many other sums wrong since the benefit of the few easily trumps the benefit of the majority.
So there will be NO PROGRESS in this area (no structured empirical studies raised to clarify or challenge and test these arguments effectively), economic interests will dominate and GDP will prevail.
I (we) advise homeowners to record the recommendations of gas fitters , sorry engineers, in writing, and hopefully when the arguments have been proven one fine day (which they will), then seek COMPENSATION from the government, its AGENTS, and the FITTER for poor advice.
Super efficient conventional cast iron heat exchanger boilers can reach efficiencies of 85% and more. If the boiler (balanced flue) is mounted in an airing cupboard, a free drying room for laundry is available. And, lord be praised, if this type of joined up thinking is promoted, efficiencies exceeding 90% are easily achievable for conventional boilers with boiler lifespans of 25 years +. How disgusting.
I challenge the government to do the research and stop the 'complexity is good' falsehoods across this industry. Benefits will include 6- 10,000 early deaths saved from fuel poverty, carbon footprints reduced by 75 % for this technology, and gas usage reduced when integrated spaces utilised (drying rooms/radiated heat facility/etc, etc).
Yours sincerely, Diogenes Loquitur
ps. I would be more than happy to produce the formal studies and so put this matter behind us if the UK government would like to take me up on DOING THE STUDIES IN A CONTROLLED MANNER and collecting the real world experiences and data to nail all of this topic down. I have several universities waiting to take these studies on. But that would cost GDP, and then reduce GDP when the studies are verified. SO NO DEAL. People must Suffer for Global GDP Needs.
Diogenes Loquitur (talk) 20:49, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
, --Diogenes Loquitur (talk) 20:21, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Geothermal not renewable as stated in Geothermal energy
In the article Geothermal energy[1] it is stated that existing geothermal plants release greenhouse gasses, far less than conventional fossil systems, but still more than nuclear power plants. Seeing as both nuclear power plants and geothermal plants use partly the same fuel (thorium and uranium) in different ways (nuclear mines the materials and performance fission where geothermal leaves the materials to decay inside the earth), how is nuclear considered to be a non renewable source where as geothermal is considered to be renewable? If a nuclear reactor works like a LFTR[2], the supply of thorium is as vast as the thermal energy is for geothermal, they both wil never run out. Not before the sun destroys live on earth. Also, thorium can be mined from the moon, other planets and from asteroids. This can't be done with geothermal.
So why are there so many articles stating that geothermal is a non intermittent, greenhouse gas free and renewable source of energy? Where nuclear is said to have intermittency issues [3] and be non-sustainable because we use up the uranium and thorium in the earth's crust (a point I will admit being true if we are talking about the current way of using only a small part of the fissile uranium 235 in the fuel we make for nuclear reactors)?
M60Beowulf M60Beowulf (talk) 12:28, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Wireless power, Nikola Tesla's experiments, paragraph six, sentence one revision
There is a discussion about Nikola Tesla's wireless system for the transmission and reception of electrical energy at Talk:Wireless_power_transfer#Proposal_to_revise_paragraph_six_of_Tesla.27s_experiments that could benefit from more community input. The original sentence reads, "In the 110 years since Tesla's experiments, efforts using similar equipment have failed to achieve long distance power transmission, and the scientific consensus is his World Wireless system would not have worked." GLPeterson (talk) 22:52, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
RFCs on citations templates and the flagging free-to-read sources
See
- Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Access locks: Visual Design RFC
- Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Access Locks: Citation Template Behaviour RFC
Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:57, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
- I'll mention in particular, that under debate is the option of having articles freely-available through OSTI flagged as free, and with the possibility of automatically-linking the title of such articles in those cases. AKA instead of something like
- we could have (with autolinking), something like
- Wicks, G. G. (1999). "Surface Studies of Nuclear Waste Glasses". Glass Researcher. OSTI 10456.
- without having to manually set the url to be "http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/10456". Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 10:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Notice to participants at this page about adminship
Many participants here create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.
So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:
You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:39, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings WikiProject Energy/Archive 4 Members!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.
Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 17:59, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Renewable Energy in Costa Rica feedback
Hello everyone! I have been updating during the last weeks the article Renewable Energy in Costa Rica. How can I get more feedback about the main topics that I should continue including? Costa Ricans are currently in intense discussions in the Legislative Assembly of Costa Rica about the limits and scope of action of the national regulations related to solar (implementation of POASEN law for distributed generation) and geothermal energy (polemic related to access to protected areas of the country for research, exploration and potential exploit of geothermal resources). Should I continue updating the evolution of this topics? Do you think the community would find them useful? Thank you very much for your feedback! Ceab.ico (talk) 22:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Missing topics list
My list of missing topics about resources is updated - Skysmith (talk) 19:18, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
WikiJournal of Science promotion
 |
The WikiJournal of Science is a start-up academic journal which aims to provide a new mechanism for ensuring the accuracy of Wikipedia's scientific content. It is part of a WikiJournal User Group that includes the flagship WikiJournal of Medicine.[1][2]. Like Wiki.J.Med, it intends to bridge the academia-Wikipedia gap by encouraging contributions by non-Wikipedians, and by putting content through peer review before integrating it into Wikipedia. Since it is just starting out, it is looking for contributors in two main areas: Editors
Authors
If you're interested, please come and discuss the project on the journal's talk page, or the general discussion page for the WikiJournal User group.
|
T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 10:38, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
I just finished this article (at least the basic beginning), and I'd appreciate eyes on it to assess it. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:15, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Merge concepts of "air conditioning" and "refrigeration"? Comments requested
Please see
I think that descriptions of "air cooling" are all the same concept but somehow started to be described in multiples places. I am seeking advice on what can be merged together and where. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:25, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
About the construction start date of power plants. Comments requested.
Discussion about defining the construction start date at Talk:Hinkley Point C nuclear power station. --Robertiki (talk) 14:34, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
Death of an employee in 2010
Are you familiar with the death of Marvin W. Elison whom was a production engineer with Perenco UK ?
2604:6000:7CC1:2800:411:D689:D020:EA9F (talk) 16:50, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Dead links in references
Looks like several Energy articles provide references to IEA data which are dead links. For example:
Are replacements for these references readily available? -- Mikeblas (talk) 07:38, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Converter stations
Many of the articles in Category:Converter_stations are substantially or entirely unsourced. For example Madawaska HVDC and GKK Etzenricht. These stations don't really appear to be Notable. I figured I'd post here seeking topic-specialist comment before opening any AFDs. Alsee (talk) 11:41, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
- Someone made an effort in these articles. Is there a stable Wiki where the content can be dumped for future preservation? TGCP (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy/Archive 4/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Energy.
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
- The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
- The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
- The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Energy, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Updates
Hey there! It doesn't seem like this WikiProject is very active, but I thought I'd give it a shot. I've put together some detailed edits to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory article, which you can read about on the NREL talk page. But I have a conflict of interest (I'm an employee), so I'm not going to make the edits myself--instead, I'm looking for someone knowledgeable who can look through the suggested changes and decide which ones should be moved to the live article. Unfortunately, my draft goes through pretty much the entire article, so it's a lot of content to review. Could anyone help with this? I'm glad to answer any questions. Es2017 (talk) 13:35, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Help with proposed expansion of Kosmos Energy
Hello! I'm reaching out here to see if WikiProject Energy members would be able to look at a suggested expansion to Kosmos Energy—the company that discovered the Jubilee Oil Field. In this edit request I've proposed a new section for the currently very short article, describing the company's operations in Ghana, Senegal, Mauritania, Suriname, Sao Tome and Principe, Morocco and Western Sahara. I understand this draft might be a lot to review in one go, but I thought it might be helpful to see my entire proposal up front. If it is indeed too big to handle at once, I'm more than willing to discuss it piece by piece. As I do have a conflict of interest (I am working on behalf of Kosmos via Ogilvy), I'm seeking uninvolved editors to review the proposed draft. Would anyone here be able to help? Thanks in advance. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Some eyes on translated page Growian
I have just made live an article on the 1980s experimental wind turbine Growian, based on my translation of the de-wiki article of the same name. I think the translation is fairly good (I'm a German native speaker) but some of the technical terms may be a bit dodgy. E.g., I don't know whether there is a specific English term for what I've called a "lee runner" (German "Leelaeufer" - rotor is placed on the leeward side of the tower); and some things in that vein. Some expert eyes would be welcome. Also, not sure where to link this article from; I've placed a link at "See also" at History of wind power so far. Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:40, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Solaroptics
The idea of concentrating sunlight and directing it into a fiber optic cable occurred to me decades ago, at first for lighting and later for heating applications. Lighting applications are in use now but I've seen no significant examples of "light to heat" transfer, such as terminating the optical cable inside a water heater. The light would ultimately convert to heat. Heating a working fluid and pumping it thru a heat exchanger is quite common, transferring only concentrated light in a cable requires no insulation or pumps and may prove to be very efficient.
I am considering the construction of a simple prototype using a large convex lens and later parabolic reflector and optical concentrator. (as a hobby project.) I am somewhat familiar with refractive indices but have no formal engineering training. I would appreciate any advice or information, thank you.
Conley BoydConleyboyd (talk) 13:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject
Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.
A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Energy
Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 15:25, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Score assessment
2.2 Assessment has a table of article numbers ranked by importance and quality. Numbers in the table link to lists of articles and their scores. How are these scores assessed? Rwbest (talk) 11:03, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
WikiProject Energy at Wikidata
Hello! We now have WikiProject Energy at Wikidata. The main goal is to standardise structure of information saved to Wikidata, coordinate inter-wiki projects to enable cross-site usage of data (i.e. in infoboxes), in addition to other tasks. Please do sign-up if you are interested. And feel free to make changes and expand as necessary. Happy editing! Rehman 04:40, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Petroleum refining processes - redirect of half leftover merge proposed...
FYI: Talk:Petroleum refining processes#Duplicate. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:09, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Renewable energy in Iceland
Renewable energy in Iceland, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 23:48, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Your opinion at the above RFC is deeply valued. The RFC decides if Wikipedia would support data from Wikidata for use in infoboxes (Example - notice the infobox in edit mode). Thank you, Rehman 17:29, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
Background
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you. — The Transhumanist 07:36, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Oil well?
Is the oil well icon really appropriate for this WikiProject? Wouldn't it be nicer to have some other symbol to convey the fact that this project is also (if not mainly, in terms of number of articles) about renewable energy? --Ita140188 (talk) 17:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Ita140188: Yes, it seems odd that this WikiProject has a symbol of the fossil fuel industry as its icon. Is there a more relevant icon that could replace it? Jarble (talk) 22:33, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
I also agree. How about one of these 2 (see right)
Therandomarticle (talk) 00:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- Good idea. Other alternatives:
- The only problem I see with this is that these icons generally represent electricity only, while the project is about all forms of energy. Still much better than the current icon though. --Ita140188 (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
I think this page is overdue for a reassessment. Would a project member care to look at it please? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 00:01, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Draft Enka İnşaat ve Sanayi A.Ş. article
Hello! Over the past few months, I've been working with the Istanbul-based engineering and construction company Enka İnşaat ve Sanayi A.Ş. to draft a new Wikipedia article. You'll notice the existing article is unsourced in its entirety and there are two tags at the top of the page.
I don't edit the main space because of my conflict of interest, so I'm looking for an editor to review my proposed draft and update the article appropriately. I've disclosed my COI at Talk:Enka İnşaat ve Sanayi A.Ş., and submitted an initial request to add the proposed company overview.
Is someone from WikiProject Energy willing to take a look? Thanks in advance for any help. Inkian Jason (talk) 19:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Energy kite
Would redirect Energy kite go to Crosswind kite power or Airborne wind turbine or Makani Power or elsewhere? Watch this to help you decide. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna Frodesiak (talk • contribs) 08:26, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion regarding the overlap between List of nuclear power stations and List of nuclear reactors. Your feedback is appreciated. Rehman 10:44, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
For Commons contributors here not watching the CFD on Commons, please take a few moments to review the above proposal to standardise category names on Commons. Thank you. Rehman 15:55, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
WP 1.0 Bot Beta
Hello! Your WikiProject has been selected to participate in the WP 1.0 Bot rewrite beta. This means that, starting in the next few days or weeks, your assessment tables will be updated using code in the new bot, codenamed Lucky. You can read more about this change on the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team page. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Thermal energy question
Hi. A quick question about thermal energy (MWth). I was looking at this article:
- Thermal capacity: 300 MWt
- CHP heating capacity: 150 MWt
- Nameplate capacity: 120 MWe
Since this is a thermal power station (i.e. energy source is based on heat), does this mean 30MWt constitutes to thermal conversion losses and/or internal use ((300 - (150 + 120)) = 30)? Am I right to assume such? Thanks! Rehman 12:40, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
- Likely, but I don't think we can make assumptions; particularly with the low input temperature of 190deg which reduces thermodynamic efficiency. A detailed description could be available in technical papers. The 120 MWe electrical may not be feasible at the same time as the 150 MWt district heating. Usually some flexibility as available to gradually adjust between heat and power; the station could flex to anything between 120 MWe with 100 MWt, to perhaps 100 MWe with 150 MWt. TGCP (talk) 13:02, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
- This paper gives more detail, but be aware that it is 18 years old and the plant has been expanded. Figure 1 indicates that the station draws up to 350 kg/s of thermal fluid with 1500 kJ/kg, so a crude value of the input (measured at well head) was (2000) 525 MWt. Figure 1 also indicates that the thermal output to Reykjavik was between 128 MWt and 227 MWt. Section 2 indicates that the input power is controlled at the well head, less thermal fluid is drawn in if there is less demand for heating/hot water. The same section indicates that the condenser temperature is varied so that the electrical ouput can be maintained even as the CHP is varied. HTH, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:28, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
- Many thanks TGCP and Martin. That's very helpful. Cheers, Rehman 13:33, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Documentation update for Template:Infobox power station
Hello. Your opinion on how to streamline documentation of the above infobox is very much welcome. Please see Template_talk:Infobox_power_station#Documentation_update to participate. Thank you. Rehman 08:18, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Portal:Windmills for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Windmills is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Windmills until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 10:34, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Portal:Electricity for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Electricity is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Electricity until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 11:55, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Discussion on notability of Aluminum internal combustion engine on the reliable sources noticeboard
There is a discussion on the notability of the Aluminum internal combustion engine on the reliable sources noticeboard. The discussion involves the reliability of Russian news sources, including TASS. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Reliability of (mostly) Russian news sources for an engineering breakthrough in Russia. — Newslinger talk 06:02, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Proposal to change categories of power station to combustion and non-combustion as many combustion based stations can burn both fossil and non-fossil fuels.
The proposal is at Talk:List_of_power_stations_in_England > here. GregKaye 08:51, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Reassessment of "Peak Oil"
Peak oil, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
This article is in serious need of attention and would benefit from being edited by someone more familiar with the topic. —mikemoral (talk) 11:26, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
World oil market chronology from 2003
I don't know whether I added too much, but I check the sources every week or sometimes every couple of weeks and add what they say, and so far no one has complained about my work. Sometimes I forget and go an entire month and can't find the sources that might have said something important. And it's just me. I don't even remember when the last substantial edit, other than some sort of correction, was made by someone else.
If I'm not adding too much I want to propose the article is getting too long and should be split.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:13, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
- Discussion here. I warn everyone that is ignoring this that the results may not be to your liking, but I'm making an effort.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm discovering a huge mess in this article. I thought I was the only one making major contributions. Others have added information that is either prediction or speculation and did not keep the information in chronological order so I removed it. It has a place somewhere, but when there is too much about current developments, I hardly see where there is room for predictions. Some of the information is probably good at showing the big picture since I was told that was needed, but I'm not the one to ask.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:48, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Dana Gas draft for review
Hello, I'm Fatima! I am the External Affairs Manager & Investor Relations Officer for Dana Gas, and as I've noted at Talk:Dana Gas and on my profile page, I've made a Wikipedia account to represent the company and propose improvements on the company article's discussion page.
I've saved a draft article here for editors to consider. I've outlined issues with the live article and explained my work at Talk:Dana Gas, but so far no editors have updated the page. Thanks in advance to any WikiProject Energy members who are willing to help review my request and draft. Fatima at Dana Gas (talk) 03:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Infobox for nuclear ower plants: "(Permanently) shut down" vs. decommissioned
At Template talk:Infobox power station#Missing "(permanently) shut down" field for nuclear power stations", I argue that (only) for nuclear plants, "decommissioned" is fundamentally different from "shut down", i.e., these two states have to be distinguished; and hence a new field is necessary in the infobox for power stations. Maybe someone here can also argue for this? (or maybe has a good reason against?). --User:Haraldmmueller 09:37, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Call for portal maintainers
Are there any editors from this WikiProject willing to maintain Portal:Energy and/or Portal:Renewable energy? The Portals guideline requires that portals be maintained, and as a result numerous portals have been recently been deleted via MfD largely because of lack of maintenance. Let me know either way, and thanks, UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:21, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- @UnitedStatesian: I would be glad to be an editor for Portal:Renewable energy and other pages in that area, although I have to admit I still have a bit to learn on how to well structure Wiki pages. For my background on this, please see the Net Zero Foundation twitter page I run[1] -- it is all about the Renewable Energy revolution now underway with particular focus on Solar PV, Geothermal, and some Wind. Portal:Renewable energy right now seems to be highly Hydro and Nuclear based, and the format seems very ineffective (long paragraph instead of outline and section or dot point list). But I would have to ask why is the page "inactive" if Wiki wants to keep it current. Clemenzi (talk) 15:24, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
References
Renewable energy commercialization
Renewable energy commercialization, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 11:19, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
EIA.gov data for U.S. power plants
I've been thinking a bit about how data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) is used in various power stations articles. There are good reasons and less than good reasons to include this data in an article. Below are positive reasons:
- The EIA data in the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project article shows that the site has not been producing energy since April 2019, when it was shutdown.
- EIA data illustrate actual production values vs. Nameplate capacity.
- EIA data illustrate the changes in production during different months of the year, which is of interest for solar and hydro plants.
- EIA data from year-to-year show if a plant is generating more or less energy.
- When a solar plant also uses a non-solar source of fuel to help get started, then it is notable to see how much fuel is used, see Ivanpah Solar Power Facility.
Negative reasons include:
- Tables of numeric monthly data are not easy for humans to interpret. Providing charts would be more readable than the table.
- The EIA data in Wikipedia tends to lag the data on the EIA website.
- Different pages have tables with slightly different formats.
The EIA provides an API to access the data. I hacked up some proof of concept Python at https://github.com/cxbrooks/wiki-power-plant-production-table that generates wikitables from EIA data. (To use this code, it is necessary to register with the EIA to get a key).
Perhaps we should consider moving away from the monthly tabular data and use charts instead? I could take a shot at generating a chart and removing some of the tables in an article. I would update a page by hand, but perhaps some day if all went well, a bot could be created that would run periodically and update the pages with EIA data.
Does anyone have opinions about any of this? Cxbrx (talk) 02:09, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Fully agree with everything here. The monthly level of detail in the article you mentioned and Nellis_Solar_Power_Plant#Production Nevada_Solar_One#Production etc. isn't really necessary and is a significant burden to update. Either just an annual table or even a simple "Silver State North Solar Project produced X GWh in 2018[EIA cite]" is enough since it's relatively consistent from year to year. The three sentences about generation at Hoover_Dam#Power_plant_and_water_demands and a mention in the infobox is very good: readers can follow the EIA source if they happen to need detailed data. Not even a chart is generally needed; a representative graph may be useful for solar/wind/hydro/whenever desired, but with the shear number of power stations, I don't think an attempt to keep this complete and up to date is a good use of editors' time. This isn't generally what readers are looking for, and the full data is just one click away. Reywas92Talk 07:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- I have also been looking for a better way to present and visualize the data (preferably in an automatic way), but with a global perspective, not just EIA (USA). Monthly data are certainly valuable, solar being the prime example of statistical seasonality. Some hydro also vary, but we don't know much about it because the data is not yet shown. A series of annual data is also valuable to show variation between years - even the stable hydro in Norway can see 30% annual variation, and that is from a source that makes 95% of that country's electricity. The EIA data is nice, but the EIA site does not show the data in the reader-friendly way that these diagrams do here on Wikipedia - and EIA is US only, not global.
- I suggest these points :
- 1) agreeing on a specific format (both table and diagram) so data can be compared across articles, and easily combined in article lists. That happened for the daughter articles in Lists of offshore wind farms by country, where entries can be easily ported. Exceptions should be allowed, as it did for List of offshore wind farms in the United States.
- 2) a diagram with one data point for each year, to show development or long-term stability. Another diagram with one data point for each month in a notable year, to show seasonality. (several years of monthly data is usually not meaningful)
- 3) longer term; scripts for sending series of data to Wikidata for automatic integration into Wikipedia articles. Examples for data-driven diagram, not image: iced sun, China, Solar power in California#Generation. TGCP (talk) 10:31, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- This EIA chart is quite user friendly showing the same data, but yes US-only. Reywas92Talk 19:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, I meant the diagrams, not just the tables. The EIA diagram just shows a bunch of dots, and the Beta page is no better. Wikipedia can illustrate better - there are many different ways to choose from as long as we can easily access the data. TGCP (talk) 20:34, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- This EIA chart is quite user friendly showing the same data, but yes US-only. Reywas92Talk 19:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Advancing electric vehicle technology and applications
Is this the WikiProject for discussing improving Wikipedia coverage of advancing electric vehicle technology and applications? I'm not seeing a more suitable wikiproject, but it seems that it might be just a little out of scope for this project. N2e (talk) 13:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Power station list standardization
Hi all, I noticed that our many lists of power stations (by type and by location) had wildly varying table formats, so I've gone ahead and changed a number of them to be more consistent using the column ordering that seemed most prevalent. From left to right:
- Name always first
- Place and coordinates (these were often split up for no clear reason)
- Energy data like capacity, generation, and units/types
- Operation info like year built and owner/operator
- Notes and references
These of course may vary depending on what information is actually included, but standardization is good and this presents the power station information in a way from most to least important while keeping related data together. This could go in the project guidelines if you want but input is welcome. Thanks, Reywas92Talk 18:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Reywas92. Thanks for doing this. I disagree with removing content as was done in this edit. That article is a Featured List, and changing "Status" to "Notes" and leaving most of the cells blank, looks as if the article is incomplete. Would you mind reverting that and discussing?
- I think it is better to standardise the minimum content, but should not remove if there are additional information. I do plan on adding regional specific columns in the future (Sri Lankan energy license, etc). And I'm sure other countries (like the UK) would have their own power station key facts. Those should not be removed IMO. Rehman 04:23, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
- I have not removed any content, just the repeated word “operational.” It would be presumed that any power station not explicitly listed as being under construction, proposed, or decommissioned would be operational, and it’s superfluous to state that so many times. While this list does combine stations of varying statuses, other lists have non-operating stations in separate tables. In either case, denotation that a plant is running is excessive. This is particularly true when there is a “Year” or “Commissioned” column, as of course anything with a starting date and no stated closure date would still be in commission! The Sri Lanka list has this information for the hydro dams, and it may be a useful addition to the others. (The dams marked as under construction do have commissionings listed as a few years ago - appears out of date maybe and the whole column is unneeded, unclear about other types without dates.) Perhaps the former and future plants should be listed separately, but this just isn’t something that needs to be explicitly stated. Reywas92Talk 06:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Reywas92. Makes sense, thank you for taking the time to explain. I'm personally unhappy with the way the blank cells look (and perhaps the FL folks would also not like it), but that's just me. Cheers, Rehman 15:54, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- Rehman, what do you think about the notes being combined with the references? Refs don't necessarily need their own columns. Reywas92Talk 18:55, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- I personally think they should not be combined. Combining would make it look less neat IMO. Rehman 12:59, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
- Rehman, what do you think about the notes being combined with the references? Refs don't necessarily need their own columns. Reywas92Talk 18:55, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Reywas92. Makes sense, thank you for taking the time to explain. I'm personally unhappy with the way the blank cells look (and perhaps the FL folks would also not like it), but that's just me. Cheers, Rehman 15:54, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
Primary Energy Factor (PEF)
Hi!
I'm new. I work with district heating and was googling "Primary Energy Factor (PEF)" in English and noticed that Wikipedia doesn't cover the issue. I would like to write/create a page about it in Wikipedia. How do I do that?
¨¨¨¨¨Ekzel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ekzel (talk • contribs) 10:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Looking to help out
Hello! I'd like to learn more about contributing to Wikipedia by getting my hands dirty and helping out. I have an interest in energy and energy systems so I thought I would start here. Are there some smaller tasks (on the scale of taking a half day or less) that I could get started with to get my feet wet here? Please do let me know. Ambrosia0 (talk) 22:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
2020 oil war
The 2020 Russia–Saudi Arabia oil price war is currently rated low-importance, but with oil prices falling below zero (producers paying people to take their oil), this seems to be of more import? Especially since it is an oil industry crash for regions with hard access oil (oil shale, oil sand, etc). And regional economic crashes for producers of higher priced production oil. -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 08:05, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Merger discussion for Portal:Energy, Portal:Renewable energy, and Portal:Wind power
Articles that you have been involved in editing—Portal:Energy, Portal:Renewable energy, and Portal:Wind power—have been proposed for merging with Portal:Energy industry. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Guilherme Burn (talk) 14:02, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Home energy upgrades from public utilities
I've started a Wikipedia article that can become a useful reference for people who work in or around the Public utility industry world wide. The article, Home energy upgrades from public utilities, has initially been placed in the scope of the Energy WikiProject. I've developed the article to its present form, which provides information on some key utility assistance programs in the United States and several other countries.
In its current state, the article just scratches the surface of the utility-homeowner assistance story and could be further developed to cover many more assistance programs. This is one of so many matters where Wikipedia's objectivity can help hold the climate change needle to +1.5 degrees C in 2100.
I'm looking for Wikipedia editors that find this topic compelling. Does this subject interest you? Can you suggest others who may be motivated by this theme?
Thanks, in advance, for your thoughts!
Omygoshogolly (talk) 21:37, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
- Very nice topic! As you mention is just scratches the surface, and I don't think it's appropriate for Wikipedia to attempt to a catalogue these: they should be discussed holistically, perhaps from the viewpoint of how state/federal legislature requires utilities to offer some of these programs. I added a link to DSIRE which is where residents should really go if they want a comprehensive list of what might be available to them. Not to mention this being US-centric. Thanks for your work on this, and perhaps there are more articles than can link to it so it might get more traffic. Reywas92Talk 22:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Was wondering is some members of this WikiProject would mind taking a look at this article? I came across it via WP:THQ#posting a picture. There quite a bit of formatting cleanup that’s probably needed, but it’s the overall promotional tone and a bit iffy WP:NORG that might need a looking at by multiple errors. There may have been some WP:COI/WP:UPE editing over the years, including the most recent burst, but that can be cleaned up or trimmed out if the organization is notable. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:09, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Wikidata in lists
Hello,
At Talk:List_of_active_coal-fired_power_stations_in_Turkey#Keeping_this_list_in_step_with_other_articles_and_lists I propose that if a list exists in a non-English Wikipedia the corresponding English list should be allowed to use Wikidata for its tables.
Your comments there would be welcome.
Regards
Chidgk1 (talk) 06:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
MfD notice
Do you guys use or need Portal:Energy/Energy news/Archive for anything? There is a currect deletion discussion here regarding it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:34, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
What should the fossil fuel phase-out article look like?
If you have a view please comment at Talk:Fossil_fuel_phase-out#Scope_and_structure_of_the_article?
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chidgk1 (talk • contribs) 05:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
FAR renewable energy in Scotland
I have nominated Renewable energy in Scotland for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Femke Nijsse (talk) 18:52, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Renewable energy in Russia
Renewable energy in Russia, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:38, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
- I have listed what needs doing and some sources - I guess most of you are not in Russia so I guess it should be easier for you to write about the fossil fuel lobby, corruption etc than people in the Russia project. If nobody comes forward soon I will demote it, which would be a pity as it is an important subject. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
|
Sandbox Organiser A place to help you organise your work |
Hi all
I've been working on a tool for the past few months that you may find useful. Wikipedia:Sandbox organiser is a set of tools to help you better organise your draft articles and other pages in your userspace. It also includes areas to keep your to do lists, bookmarks, list of tools. You can customise your sandbox organiser to add new features and sections. Once created you can access it simply by clicking the sandbox link at the top of the page. You can create and then customise your own sandbox organiser just by clicking the button on the page. All ideas for improvements and other versions would be really appreciated.
Huge thanks to PrimeHunter and NavinoEvans for their work on the technical parts, without them it wouldn't have happened.
Hope its helpful
John Cummings (talk) 11:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Merger discussion for 100% renewable energy
An article that you have been involved in editing—100% renewable energy—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
GAR of solar energy
Solar energy, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. FemkeMilene (talk) 19:48, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Worldwide energy supply
Can somebody take a look at Worldwide energy supply? I doubt if the present content is reflecting the sources correctly. Beside that, the main editor was removing the maintenance template about synthesis of material. As that editor has a severe dislike of me and my critical approach, I like a few more eyes on this article from others. Thanks in advance. The Banner talk 17:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Most viewed start article in this Wikiproject
Gautam Adani 103,423 3,447 Start--Coin945 (talk) 14:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Edit to CFETR article
Hi I'm a student at sydney university , making an edit to China Fusion Engineering Test Reactor article as part of a unit assignment. I would really appreciate if you could offer some feedback regarding the edit made . Thank you.TechnicolourKaleidoscope (talk) 08:21, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
GAR notice
Ethanol fuel in Brazil, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 19:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Indirect land use change impacts of biofuels
Indirect land use change impacts of biofuels has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:28, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Sean Adams
I recently created an article for historian Sean Adams. Much of his work focuses on the history of American energy. Any help with the article would be appreciated. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Solar power
Solar power has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- I hope one of you will have a go at fixing this article. If no one replies in a few days I am going to remove its "good" status. It would be a pity to delist an article which is so important for your project. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
The AP1000 Units "which are currently on schedule to go into service in 2020."
WECTEC Post Bankruptcy personnel have rumored the current schedule now indicates completion in 2023 with a cost to complete estimated at 10.8 Billion Dollars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.248.224.1 (talk) 18:44, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Article years out of date
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkmenistan%E2%80%93Afghanistan%E2%80%93Pakistan%E2%80%93India_Pipeline 2600:6C50:547F:5710:4489:818A:4821:8D2F (talk) 05:01, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Wind power
Wind power has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Wiki Science Competition 2021
Hi, I remind you all that Wiki Science Competition 2021 has started in many territories last week. It will last until November 30th or December 15th, depending on the areas.
WSC is organized every two years, and it is formally open to files from all countries (the goal are the international prizes, paid by Wikimedia Estonia and Wikimedia Switzerland) but specific national page are set up for example for USA or Ireland. These national competitions, when they exist, act as an additional incentive to participate.
We expect a sitenotice to show up for all readers here on Wikipedia as well, but probably during the second half of the month when all countries with national competitions are open for submission. In the meantime, if you are planing to upload some nice images to Commons, please consider to submit them to WSC, you might win a prize.--Alexmar983 (talk) 23:17, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Collaboration on improving an article
There is an invitation to collaborate on improving an article you might be interested in at Carbon bubble. The relevant discussion thread is at Work on the article. Thank you. I'm trying out this template I just made, if something's wrong please ping me! A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 17:56, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Hybrid power
I propose merging Hybrid renewable energy system, Solar hybrid power systems and Wind hybrid power systems into Hybrid power as there is a fair amount of duplication. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hybrid_power Chidgk1 (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Geothermal energy
Geothermal energy has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:23, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Photovoltaic power station
I have started an individual good article reassessment of Photovoltaic power station which was rated "good" in 2013 and I think it needs modernizing. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:30, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- Last chance to keep this article good - if not improved a lot in next few days I will delist Chidgk1 (talk) 10:30, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster#Requested move 2 December 2021
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster#Requested move 2 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 16:17, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
History of ethanol fuel in Brazil
History of ethanol fuel in Brazil has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Barnstar
There is now a barnstar available for this WikiProject, see Template:The Energy Barnstar. Jerm (talk) 02:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Featured article review for Oil Shale
I have nominated Oil shale for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 17:20, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Energy in the European Union stub
I am changing a "redirect" to Energy policy of the European Union in a Energy in the European Union page, a talk about that is open. --Robertiki (talk) 12:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Russia in the European energy sector nominated for "in the news" - needs update
I had no idea this article existed until very recently. It could do with some update if you have time: