Talk:Energy efficiency

message: Difficult to use any of this data in a research paper since obviously Wikipedia is not a citable source. An entire section of the artile does not referece to any source material.
165.95.24.46 (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of Citations

message: I agree that the content is too narrow.  The article Energy conversion efficiency is more complete, and refers readers to the more specific terms and equations (e.g., Thermal efficiency).  As such, I will 'boldly' redirect to it.  129.237.114.171 19:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If the goal is to broaden the content of this article, then I would argue against redirecting it to energy conversion efficiency.  Although the energy conversion efficiency article is indeed a more information-packed article than this one, its intended focus is limited to the efficiency of energy conversion machines whereas this article has a broader focus intended to cover the efficiency of all sorts of processes, not just those whose end purpose is to convert energy from one form to another.  (As an example, consider the efficiency of a resistor; a resistor does not fall under the category of an energy conversion device, yet it is still appropriate to calculate its efficiency through use of the Work / energy formula.)  I have removed the redirect for this reason, but I will watch for further discussion on this issue. Riick 03:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean-up Redirect

message: I'm making the appropriate changes since work is in units of watts, not joules -- Autumninjersey 16:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Work is measured in joules, power is measured in watts. Richard001 (talk) 01:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Work != Energy

message: I propose that we move this section to Efficient energy use. Sholto Maud 00:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. Cxw 19:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Energy Efficiency and Global Warming

message: "California implemented ... renewable electricity supplies"
What sorts of renewable energy? I've heard tales of biofuel usage, like corn, not being as carbon neutral as one might think. Diversely wild areas supposedly take up more carbon than biofuel is supposed to save.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.229.114 (talk) 09:56, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Renewable energy

message: Article should clarify - eg. Is one technical (about improving device efficiencies, house design ...) and the other about changing human behaviour (drive/consume/use less) ? - Rod57 (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is already clarified in the lead of the 'conservation' article with "Energy conservation differs from efficient energy use, which refers to using less energy for a constant service." That these are different does mean that this page seems to be appropriate for disambiguation as opposed to a broad concept article. Klbrain (talk) 16:22, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is ''Efficient energy use'' different than ''Energy conservation'' ? 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Efficient energy use which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 12:00, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress