Talk:Micro combined heat and power

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

hi, on the market status: I'm not so sure about it, but I think theres a lot bigger market for CHP existing in germany. Regards, daniel. i added the DE link. Mion 21:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed paragraph

I removed this paragraph:

Additionally, in the U.S., federal and now many state regulations require utility operators to compensate anyone adding power to the grid. From the standpoint of grid operator, these points present operational and technical as well as administrative burdens. As a consequence, most grid operators compensate non-utility power-contributors at less-than or equal-to the rate they charge their customers. While this compensation scheme may seem almost fair at first glance, it only represents the consumer’s cost-savings of not purchasing utility power versus the true cost of generation and operation to the micro-CHP operator. Thus from the standpoint of micro-CHP operators, net-metering is not ideal.

It's hard to follow. The fact that an operator would pay its suppliers less than it charges its customers seems self evident. I can't follow the next sentence at all. I think it means that the rate paid is only that paid to existing generators, which doesn't cover the costs of CHP. Is that right? And if so, doesn't seem that reasonable? - Crosbiesmith 21:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The fact that it is evident is no reason to delete the part, it is only showing that operators will charge costs, a normal thing but it sheds some light how the price is build up.Mion 16:39, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I take your point about the first part. Regarding the second part, the statement, "this compensation scheme may seem almost fair at first glance" seems to imply the compensation scheme is not fair, which doesn't seem a neutral point of view. Perhaps that could be omitted, or re-worded? - Crosbiesmith 17:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, i agree on your point, now i can rewrite it, but i guess that the one having a problem with it, (which i support its not NPOV) , so please make it a neutral statement. (more because i am not native english) reg . Mion 17:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Technologies

I removed the reciprocating engine, as a stirling and a steam motor use pistons, too. So, the expression internal combustion engine, burning heating oil (diesel) or natural gas (otto) is more appropriate. I erased the "rankine cycle" too, as the only rankine cycle engine in microCHP is the steam engine (see [1] which is already mentioned. ORC-cycles [2] are usually to big for the label microCHP. --Gunnar.Kaestle 09:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to remove from a category? 86 "Hydrogen technologies"

This page, according to the information in the article, has nothing at all to do with hydrogen technologies. So would someone remove it from that category? Thanks Beanluc 19:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)