Warning! You are not logged in. Log in or create an account to have your edits attributed to your username rather than your IP, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
The units for EPT don't make sense. First, in the numerator, MW (megawatts) is a unit of power (energy per unit time), not energy. Second, in the denominator, the units are energy MWh (megawatt-hours). The overall unit is thus 1/h; it should be a unit of time, not reciprocal time (which could be a unit of frequency). Confusion of units is common in the press; I hope someone who knows an accepted or "received" definition of EPT will correct this.--[[User:Egnatoff|Egnatoff]] 13:02, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The units for EPT don't make sense. First, in the numerator, MW (megawatts) is a unit of power (energy per unit time), not energy. Second, in the denominator, the units are energy MWh (megawatt-hours). The overall unit is thus 1/h; it should be a unit of time, not reciprocal time (which could be a unit of frequency). Confusion of units is common in the press; I hope someone who knows an accepted or "received" definition of EPT will correct this.--[[User:Egnatoff|Egnatoff]] 13:02, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


Β 
Thank you for pointing out the typo. Based on my own experience reading LCAs and the convention used in the Alsema and Fthenakis paper cited in this article, I am confident units of energy (MWh) is the more appropriate unit of measurement. To use units of power (MW), you would need to first find the energy required to construct and maintain the technology (in MWh), and then average this out over the lifetime of the technology. This seems to be a very convoluted way of communicating energy payback. Anyway, to summarize the units should be in MWh.
Thank you for pointing out the typo. Based on my own experience reading LCAs and the convention used in the Alsema and Fthenakis paper cited in this article, I am confident units of energy (MWh) is the more appropriate unit of measurement. To use units of power (MW), you would need to first find the energy required to construct and maintain the technology (in MWh), and then average this out over the lifetime of the technology. This seems to be a very convoluted way of communicating energy payback. Anyway, to summarize the units should be in MWh.[[User:Nate Preston|Nate Preston]] 03:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Warning! All contributions to Appropedia are released under the CC-BY-SA-4.0 license unless otherwise noted (see Appropedia:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here! You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted material without permission!
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.