Talk:Floating solar
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Floating solar: |
Scale of new chart
edit@Reywas92: Thanks for your observation re units on the new File:2009- Floating solar photovoltaic energy production - PV - bar chart.svg. I don't have access to the complete article ($31.50 for access), but looking at the Google search result image (here), the drawing indicates "MWh" units. This new chart is in contrast to the older chart with a common author Marco Rosa-Clotb, File:FPV installed capacity.jpg, which has "MWp" (peak) units. The numbers on the left scale are about the same. Are you suggesting I simply change MWh to MWp? I'm not sure enough of this technology to override what is in the reference. —RCraig09 (talk) 18:33, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- I read the article with sci-hub. That might be correct. Reywas92Talk 01:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- Newly uploaded Version 2 of chart has new units on scale. For other readers: a nice explanation of the units is here. —RCraig09 (talk) 04:25, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- I was able to download the article through the university where I teach, and indeed the units on the graph are MWh per year. MWh and MWp are not the same. MWh is a measure of energy production. MWp is a measure of installed power generation capacity. The difference is analogous to the difference between distance (kilometers) and speed (kilometers per hour). In a reasonably good site, 1 MWp of solar panels will produce around 1,300 MWh of electricity per year. But that suggests an error in the Cazzaniga & Rosa-Clot article. Their estimate for 2019 is 1,656 MWh, which would suggest a bit over 1 MWp installed for that year. That's way too low. Christopher Greacen (talk) 08:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
misquote?
editThe text that reads: "This result depends on climate conditions and on the percentage of the covered surface. In arid climates such as parts of India this is an important advantage since about 30% of the evaporation of the covered surface is saved." doesn't seem to reflect what was written in the cited source: http://tehelka.com/do-floating-solar-panels-work-better/. The source says, "One thing is clear. As water evaporation from water bodies is to the tune of 30 percent, FPVs [floating solar] can reduce that to an extent, thus making water available for other uses.”
I think the text in the article should be changed to "Evaporation from reservoirs can reach 30% of water volume in a year in dry areas. Floating solar is expected to reduce this by absorbing a portion of the energy that would otherwise go into evaporating water.' (and then cite the same source)
Wiki Education assignment: Technology and Culture
editThis article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 August 2024 and 7 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Reeves50, PachinkoPanda222, TheodosiaBarbas, Buells, Rhylee.garcia (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Josephinebradley24.
— Assignment last updated by Josephinebradley24 (talk) 00:05, 12 November 2024 (UTC)