Talk:Spark spread

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Text reformulated - tag to be removed

I have substantially reformulated the article. I hope that Wiki standard quality can be achieved from this point by further incremental improvemnets. MGTom 00:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Transwiki tag removed. MGTom 08:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UK standard spark spread 49.13% efficiency

I have previously deleted a mention of a standard efficiency used for spark spread calcularion: 49.13% . Now I have found confirmation of the figure as used by Argus consultants. The origin of this odd figure remains to be documented. The Dutch standard efficiency is 50%, which seems reasonable - why use odd numbers if they do not bring any real content? (Occams razor) MGTom 08:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if it is due to the fact the Dutch use the LCV for gas, whereas the Brits use HCV = there is a 10 % difference...Engineman 22:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] edit

I've taken the below sentence out since I don;t see the point being made, or if I do, I think it is erroneous.

Whether transmission and distribution costs are higher or lower depends on the location to which backup power has to be delivered.

The above is surely not true, or misses the point. The point trying to be made is, what does the National Grid itself cost - answer - unequivocally about 0.2p p / kWh on all units, so if you are forced to double it for whatever reason, you might expect to incur costs of about 0.2p p / kWh on all units.

Wind farms always have to quote and allow for their costs of connecting to the grid so the sentence seems to me to be irrelleavnt or missing the point....

I think without the explicit calculation of the cost the whole point is lost.

Happy to be proved wrong.....Engineman 14:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)