Talk:Energy in Iceland

message: I don't think it is accurate to state that Iceland leads the world in the production of renewable energy. Even though it probably is the country that proportionally uses more renewable sources, I think the lead would have to go to the absolute producer, or none of them. Brazil hydreletric powerplants produced 335.076 GWh in 2006 (approximately 30 million Tpe), and its total renewable energy produced in 2006 was approximately 100 million tpe. see http://www.mme.gov.br/site/menu/select_main_menu_item.do?channelId=1432&pageId=7523 (sorry it's in portuguese). Iceland, on the other hand, produces a total 2,5 million tpe of renewable energy, as can be seen in http://www.os.is/page/energy_use --Ezadarque 03:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A good dog 

message: One of the strengths of this article is the good coverage of Hydrogen issues.  The historical aspects of Hydropower and Geothermal are also well covered, but I felt that there could have been more discussion of recent trends and installations with hydro and geothermal. Please expand.
 
The {fact} tags in the lead section need to be attended to or, if you can't find an appropriate citation, then the associated sentences should be removed. 
    
English expression was generally good, but I found this sentence to be confusing:
:The Iceland government also believes that there are many more untapped geothermal sources throughout the country. It is estimated that over 20 Twh of unharnessed geothermal energy is available. If both sources were tapped to there full extent Iceland would have 50 Twh of energy, all from renewable sources.[11]
When you say "both sources" what are you referring to?  Hydro and geothermal?  This needs to be made clear. 
 
I'm putting this article on hold as the article is close to GA status, however the issues noted above must be dealt with before GA status can be awarded. I hope that this can be addressed within the seven days allowed by on hold, and wish you all the best with your editing... -- Johnfos 23:31, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have addressed the {fact} tags and rephrased the paragraph in question. I hope this article gets GA! Max Naylor 11:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article nomination on hold

message: Congratulations, this article now meets all of the GA criteria! Johnfos 22:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article

message: I think there is a very serious neutrality issue here, no opponents of the developments are referenced. 1 in 20 Icelanders (circa 15000)took to the streets to protest this last August for instance. Karahnjukar was opposed by the RSPB and FoE Europe 87.74.79.170 14:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is meant to communicate what currently exists in terms of renewable energy in Iceland in terms of technical aspects, not necessarily to address the social, cultural, political or potential implications of such energy. If the power plant or whatever was constructed and operates today, then it is not very relevant to discuss the opposition to something that already physically exists. The article in no way advocates renewable energy as a "good" or a life-saver for the island, only that Islanders have developed renewable energy. I also am against this article talking about "proposed" projects especially when they are not under construction and merely proposed. WP is not a Crystal Ball and what is relevant today for this article should be included. If you want, I suggest going to a more generic article on Iceland and proposing its inclusion there. 75.72.162.175 08:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality? 

message: This would make Iceland the first completely energy-independent country in the world
Really?  I can't see places like Saudi Arabia being particularly dependent on any other country for energy.
61.69.2.133 (talk) 06:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First energy independent country? 

message: I don't see how the article says 89% of energy is from renewable resources and that of the remaining ~10%, most is from geothermal energy. Isn't geothermal energy considered renewable? I mean, it's listed under Wikipedia's renewable energy header. So perhaps it should say ~99% is renewable with ~9% being from geothermal? Please clarify
174.101.224.4 (talk) 16:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've revised the lead to try to eliminate any confusion. See what you think. Johnfos (talk) 18:09, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Quick Question

message: The first two references on the page take me to a password protected site, and a "page not found" respectively. Reference number one is used as the inline citation for the following sentence "Renewable energy provides 100 percent of electricity production, with about 70 percent coming from hydropower and 30 percent from geothermal power". That is a pretty bold assertion and needs a source that can be viewed by people who may not have access to password protected Icelandic documents. Perhaps new references should be found.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.230.25.197 (talk) 10:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: There has been a request for a GA review. This article does need some work.  to see if any interest in fixing it. AIRcorn (talk) 01:19, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  GAR request