Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Problems with the "Criticism" section  
2 comments  













Talk:Eavor Technologies




Page contents not supported in other languages.  









Article
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 


Problems with the "Criticism" section[edit]

Since I'm a brand new Wikipedia editor I decided to discuss the problem I have with the page rather than directly edit it.

The section labeled "Criticism" appears to violate a number of the Wikipedia guidelines described on Help:Introduction_to_policies_and_guidelines/2

  1. The section title is misleading. The criticism is of closed-loop geothermal as a concept, but its presence on the Eavor page implies a criticism of the company.
  2. The term "open loop geothermal systems" is not defined here or in any of the references. It could refer to traditional geothermal systems assuming re-injection, but appears to be comparing Eavor to Enhanced Geothermal Systems(EGS). To be completely accurate, it should point out that EGS has also not yet reached commercial viability.
  3. The statement "...it is highly unlikely that mitigating downsides associated with open-loop convection-based systems will compensate economically for switching to a far less efficient conduction-based heat transfer" is the editor's opinion of a future probability and is not specifically addressed in either of the references ([7],[8]) cited for the section.
  4. Reference [7] does make an economic argument, but does not meet the definition of a reliable source. It is a blog post by a vendor associated with a competing technology. It cites two published papers including [8] but is not itself from a reliable source. The author even acknowledges his bias for EGS and his purpose in discrediting closed-loop geothermal efforts.

I'm not sure how to edit the section to correct these problems. Should I first mark it as disputed?

CustEng (talk) 21:01, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CustEng: Your removal of the criticism section was was fine. It may be appropriate to put that criticism in some other article, like heat exchanger maybe, but doing so might violate the WP:UNDUE policy because closed/open loop exchangers are merely mentioned there. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:12, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eavor_Technologies&oldid=1196344786"

Categories: 
Articles with conflicting quality ratings
Start-Class AfC articles
AfC submissions by date/18 April 2021
Accepted AfC submissions
C-Class science articles
Unknown-importance science articles
C-Class Engineering articles
Unknown-importance Engineering articles
WikiProject Engineering articles
C-Class Environment articles
Unknown-importance Environment articles
C-Class energy articles
Unknown-importance energy articles
C-Class company articles
Unknown-importance company articles
Company articles needing infoboxes
WikiProject Companies articles
 



This page was last edited on 17 January 2024, at 04:48 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



Privacy policy

About Wikipedia

Disclaimers

Contact Wikipedia

Code of Conduct

Developers

Statistics

Cookie statement

Mobile view



Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki