This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Cogeneration article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Trigeneration page were merged into Cogeneration on April 11, 2013. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 17:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
In California, cogen plants are subject to permitting, to control their emissions of NOx and CO. There have been recent advances in very low NOX units.-- Billymac00 01:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I've redirected the hatnote to the disambiguation page. It's not doing any harm, but do we really need one? Most users entering "CHP" to find this article would arrive here via the disambiguation page, but not the other way round. -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 07:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Aren't the efficiency numbers given a little misleading? It would be useful to see how the division between electricity and heat is for cogeneration. The amount of electricity that can be produced per input heat unit is reduced when the "waste heat" is used for space heating or anything other than dumping to the lowest temperature possible. Taken to the extreme, it would indicate that we should just burn gas for heating, it gives an efficiency of 98% after all. But, if the gas was instead burned in a combined cycle gas turbin to generate electricty at 60% efficiency, the electricity could be used to drive heat pumps for heating and give a 180% efficiency (if the heat pumps operate with a COP of 3). Is the total efficiency of cogeneration really better than a CCGT driving heat pumps for space heating?( Matthew.homola ( talk) 17:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC))
Agreed, treating electricity (high grade energy) and heat (low grade energy) as equivalent is misleading. I think that the comparison to CCGT/Heat pump arrangement illustrates both why the 'efficiency' is not meaningful and why it is not necessarily the most environmentally friendly or efficient approach. As such, it probably warrants mention in the article.
I really don't understand why CHP qualifies for the sustainable energy portal if it is fossil fuel fired. Wouldn't it be preferable to get heat and electricity from green sources? -- Ionium Dope ( talk) 22:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
It is surely essential in any article to have the costs of the technologies, otherwise it is pretty much meaningless. This information is closely guarded by manufacturers, who only reveal it in private tenders as a rule. Hence the links to cost examples are extremely valuable and are not commercial - a commerical link would be to a vendors site, and in any case vendors do not give out prices, except as part of confidential negotiations. Engineman ( talk) 15:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
What is the unit of energy kWe refernced in the mini and micro CHP sections? I think they should say kWh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.244.246.242 ( talk) 15:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
As this is such a niche space, is it worth linking to any providers like Urban Energy? 125.255.85.74 ( talk) 06:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Can we remove the external links warning message at the bottom of the article? - it seems appropriate to have a list of organizations providing cogen information organized by region.-- Wendydi ( talk) 02:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm proposing to merge Cogeneration and Trigeneration. There little information in Trigeneration that's specific to trigeneration as opposed to cogeneration. In the introduction section, it mentions that trigeneration is a subset of cogeneration that also allows cooling, but that is it. -- Article editor ( talk) 21:47, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
This type of plant is certainly a related but distinct topic (currently a redirect leads to here). Such an article exists on almost ten other Wikipedias, see iwiki links at pl:Elektrociepłownia. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:22, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Tri-generation is over emphasized. Cogeneration is much more common and is widely used in heat using industries. The biggest problem is the tirgeneration diagram in the lede, where a cogeneration diagram should be. Phmoreno ( talk) 20:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
hmm, it seems you are one of the people who created the problem on this page, fix it yourself. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mion ( talk) 00:48, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I mean, it seems to me you might have some sort of bias against trigeneration, which may not be very popular in places like the US, but is gaining more and more popularity throughout Canada and other temperate climates such as Russia. Either giving trigeneration its own page again, or adding more about trigeneration to this article is necessary for someone like me who is trying to learn about both cogeneration and trigeneration using this article as a starting-point to further research. After all, I thought that was the whole point of Wikiepdia - to offer in-depth general knowledge about specific subjects. Maybe I'm wrong, but it does seem like more information is better than less - at least when the information is pertinent. 142.113.214.251 ( talk) 16:11, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Geoff
this sentence: "As a whole, the European Union generates 11% of its electricity using cogeneration, saving Europe an estimated 35 Mtoe per annum a day.[39] "
-lacks time-date reference, which renders it unintelligible.
-the expression "per annum a day" is nonsensical: it probably should be either daily OR yearly.
-reference 39 leads to the news page of cogeneurope.eu but (as expected for a newspage) has long expired and yields error 404: the linked content is lost. 77.234.80.218 ( talk) 16:29, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
While I was editing this article, I noticed that Recycled Energy Development along with its management names are mentioned 3 times in different sections. The text does not substantially contribute to the knowledge of cogen, except to provide wikilinks to the company and founder articles. This appears to be WP:UNDUE. So what we need to do here? Z22 ( talk) 14:07, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Does anyone have any examples of an existing trigeneration/polygeneration power station? Or is this just a concept that is not widely used? I couldn't find any when searched online. Thanks in advance! Reh man 08:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Cogeneration article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Trigeneration page were merged into Cogeneration on April 11, 2013. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 17:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
In California, cogen plants are subject to permitting, to control their emissions of NOx and CO. There have been recent advances in very low NOX units.-- Billymac00 01:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I've redirected the hatnote to the disambiguation page. It's not doing any harm, but do we really need one? Most users entering "CHP" to find this article would arrive here via the disambiguation page, but not the other way round. -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 07:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Aren't the efficiency numbers given a little misleading? It would be useful to see how the division between electricity and heat is for cogeneration. The amount of electricity that can be produced per input heat unit is reduced when the "waste heat" is used for space heating or anything other than dumping to the lowest temperature possible. Taken to the extreme, it would indicate that we should just burn gas for heating, it gives an efficiency of 98% after all. But, if the gas was instead burned in a combined cycle gas turbin to generate electricty at 60% efficiency, the electricity could be used to drive heat pumps for heating and give a 180% efficiency (if the heat pumps operate with a COP of 3). Is the total efficiency of cogeneration really better than a CCGT driving heat pumps for space heating?( Matthew.homola ( talk) 17:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC))
Agreed, treating electricity (high grade energy) and heat (low grade energy) as equivalent is misleading. I think that the comparison to CCGT/Heat pump arrangement illustrates both why the 'efficiency' is not meaningful and why it is not necessarily the most environmentally friendly or efficient approach. As such, it probably warrants mention in the article.
I really don't understand why CHP qualifies for the sustainable energy portal if it is fossil fuel fired. Wouldn't it be preferable to get heat and electricity from green sources? -- Ionium Dope ( talk) 22:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
It is surely essential in any article to have the costs of the technologies, otherwise it is pretty much meaningless. This information is closely guarded by manufacturers, who only reveal it in private tenders as a rule. Hence the links to cost examples are extremely valuable and are not commercial - a commerical link would be to a vendors site, and in any case vendors do not give out prices, except as part of confidential negotiations. Engineman ( talk) 15:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
What is the unit of energy kWe refernced in the mini and micro CHP sections? I think they should say kWh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.244.246.242 ( talk) 15:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
As this is such a niche space, is it worth linking to any providers like Urban Energy? 125.255.85.74 ( talk) 06:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Can we remove the external links warning message at the bottom of the article? - it seems appropriate to have a list of organizations providing cogen information organized by region.-- Wendydi ( talk) 02:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm proposing to merge Cogeneration and Trigeneration. There little information in Trigeneration that's specific to trigeneration as opposed to cogeneration. In the introduction section, it mentions that trigeneration is a subset of cogeneration that also allows cooling, but that is it. -- Article editor ( talk) 21:47, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
This type of plant is certainly a related but distinct topic (currently a redirect leads to here). Such an article exists on almost ten other Wikipedias, see iwiki links at pl:Elektrociepłownia. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:22, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Tri-generation is over emphasized. Cogeneration is much more common and is widely used in heat using industries. The biggest problem is the tirgeneration diagram in the lede, where a cogeneration diagram should be. Phmoreno ( talk) 20:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
hmm, it seems you are one of the people who created the problem on this page, fix it yourself. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mion ( talk) 00:48, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I mean, it seems to me you might have some sort of bias against trigeneration, which may not be very popular in places like the US, but is gaining more and more popularity throughout Canada and other temperate climates such as Russia. Either giving trigeneration its own page again, or adding more about trigeneration to this article is necessary for someone like me who is trying to learn about both cogeneration and trigeneration using this article as a starting-point to further research. After all, I thought that was the whole point of Wikiepdia - to offer in-depth general knowledge about specific subjects. Maybe I'm wrong, but it does seem like more information is better than less - at least when the information is pertinent. 142.113.214.251 ( talk) 16:11, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Geoff
this sentence: "As a whole, the European Union generates 11% of its electricity using cogeneration, saving Europe an estimated 35 Mtoe per annum a day.[39] "
-lacks time-date reference, which renders it unintelligible.
-the expression "per annum a day" is nonsensical: it probably should be either daily OR yearly.
-reference 39 leads to the news page of cogeneurope.eu but (as expected for a newspage) has long expired and yields error 404: the linked content is lost. 77.234.80.218 ( talk) 16:29, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
While I was editing this article, I noticed that Recycled Energy Development along with its management names are mentioned 3 times in different sections. The text does not substantially contribute to the knowledge of cogen, except to provide wikilinks to the company and founder articles. This appears to be WP:UNDUE. So what we need to do here? Z22 ( talk) 14:07, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Does anyone have any examples of an existing trigeneration/polygeneration power station? Or is this just a concept that is not widely used? I couldn't find any when searched online. Thanks in advance! Reh man 08:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC)