Talk:Power station

message: Generators found in power stations don't have cranks. Cooling towers give off waste heat due to the inefficiency of heat engines - "steam" is ambiguous in this context because the water vapor emitted by a cooling tower has nothing to do with the working fluid in the plant.  Some plants use river water for the condensors.  This article needs more work! --Wtshymanski 23:20, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixes 

message: If, as the article states, they are most commonly known as "power plants", why is the article located at "power station"?  I think WP policy is to use the most common name, is it not?  - Bantman 23:51, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
:It's a U.S. / British usage thing. Policy is to leave articles about non-country specific topics in the version of English chosen by the original author. Merchbow 02:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As if US/British usage were the only distinction within the anglosphere.  But what to do when the original author ignores the country-specific usage?  Shouldn't that country's specific usage prevail?  "Policy" can be changed, it's not ironclad, and too often a guideline is used as if it were LAW, i.e. strict policy.  In the case of the Canadian categories "power station" was imposed by category creators without considering what the titles of the articles themselves were; at the time of a CfD long ago the US usages "power plant" and "powerhouse" were deemed acceptable on US categories, but not on Canadian ones (because I was the only Canadian speaking was the reason used to exclude my input..... see wiktionary "parochial"); but now I see all the US categories and various list articles have all also now been changed to "power station".  "Chosen by the original author" is just not good enough a reason nor should it ever have been made a "policy".Skookum1 (talk) 06:10, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name question 

message: Is there anything in this article that can be merged into this? Or should they be kept seperated? --Dangherous 18:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merged. Wongm (talk) 13:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Power plant operator]] 

message: I just revised the "Cooling tower and waste heat section so as to make it known that all large and small cooling towers are not necessarily huge hyperbolic chimney-like structures.  The hyperbolic cooling towers are natural draft/draught towers mostly used at nuclear power plants and some large thermal power plants.  However, many large thermal power plants, petroleum refineries, petrochemical plants, other industrial plants, waste-to-power plants, geothermal plants, etc. use fan induced-draft or fan forced-draft towers which are not at all hyperbolic or chimney-like.  When I made my revision, I neglected to use the revision summary for which I apologise. - mbeychok 23:32, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Excuse me

message: Appearance point of view would be the same. But power plant is very limited to what generate power(boiler house,turbine hall,cooling tower,esp,stack,coal bunker & storage)where power station include everything in that area , further with substation, workshop,admin.office,resident & etc.This is what I really feel when one say "station" or "plant".user :SKW 26:07:06
:To the best of my knowledge, there isn't. --Smack 22:42, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  'Station' to me implies buildings on land - 'plant' could be mobile in ship or other vehicle. (UK viewpoint) - Rod57 (talk) 15:56, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Is there some difference in meaning between [[power plant]] and [[power station]]?

message: Please don't remove the apparently duplicate mentions of solar energy from this article.  Electricity can be generated from sunlight using the photoelectric effect (solar panels), or by just focusing a bunch of light at a central point to create heat. Smack 22:42, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Solar electric farms (fields of PV panels) aren't normally called Power stations ? - So this article can ignore solar energy, at least from PV panels ? - Rod57 (talk) 17:51, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Duplicate mentions of solar energy

message: I think it would be helpful to discuss the relative efficiencies of different power plants.--Tobyw 13:56, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relative Efficiencies 

message: I have created a Power Station Infobox Template for use with individual power station articles, most of which have links into this main article. Example uses are Hazelwood Power Station, Victoria and Tumut 2 Power Station, New South Wales. There are almost certainly other fields to add but this is a reasonable start. amitch 13:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Power Station Infobox

message: Wikipedia now has these 4 articles, all on the same subject:
*Fossil fuel power plant
*Power station
*Thermal power station
*Steam-electric power plant
Do we really need all of these? In my opinion, this sort of thing reflects badly on Wikipedia. What can we do to get these four articles merged?? - mbeychok 17:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some old discussion at Talk:Thermal_power_station#Do_we_really_need_4_articles_on_the_same_subject.3F.3F - Rod57 (talk) 15:53, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Years later...agree, there is overlap, and refactoring required.  Power station is the most general (not all power stations use fuel). Thermal and steam-electric probably should be one article. Not all fossil fuel power plants raise steam (gas turbines, reciprocating engines, oh, and are there any MHD plants left?), fossil fuel plant should talk about the peculiarities of using coal, oil, and natural gas.  Not all steam power plants use fossil fuel (biomass and geothermal). And cogeneration sticks its nose in, too. Don't worry about it reflecting badly on Wikipedia...Wikipedia is like the neighbor with pick-up trucks on blocks in his front yard, but you can always borrow tools off him... --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:34, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we really need 4 articles on the same subject? 

message: I'd be interested to know how popular each type of power plant is, i.e. 50% Coal, 10% Nuclear.  Russau 08:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Percentages of power plant types 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Power station's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "PV":
From Photovoltaics: Denis Lenardic. Large-scale photovoltaic power plants ranking 1 - 50 PVresources.com, 2010.
From Solar power: PV Resources.com (2009). World's largest photovoltaic power plants
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not clear to me that either of these references were intended by the original contributor. I've changed the dangling PV ref tag to a CN.  --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:21, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Power station]] 

message: First power station was in Germany?? Sorry, no, it was Cragside e in 1863, I'll update. Twobells (talk) 09:50, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cragside 

message: For the section on energy from renewable sources, could a paragraph about geothermal power plants be included? MezzoMezzo (talk) 11:08, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geothermal? 

message: The article currently says: although some DC systems persisted to the end of the 20th century. DC systems with a service radius of a mile (kilometer) or so were necessarily smaller
Now this is a widespread misconception. In fact DC is actually better than AC for transmission, and in applications where higher voltages are desirable, like in tramways and underground trains (and even long distance trains) fairly large DC grids have been around since the very beginnings and are still widely used in our present time. For private households on the other hand the challenge was to deliver the power at a voltage sufficiently low to be manageable with only moderate safety regulations. The real advantage of AC is, that it can be easily transformed up to thousands of Volts for low losses on long distance lines, and equally easily transformed down to 110 V for household use.
I don't want to make an edit myself, as I'm not sure about the correct terminology, but I would suggest replacing "DC systems" with something along the lines of "DC grids for public subscribers" or "DC grids for household power".
--BjKa (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: But there's no commercial central station DC generation any more.  This article is about power stations, not about transmission nor distribution. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Wars 

message: I guess we don't want to rename this to electric power station (or even  generating station) so how can we provide links to (historical) pneumatic and hydraulic power stations (or were they not called power stations ?) ? - Rod57 (talk) 15:49, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There were hydraulic power stations and steam power stations in the past. Perhaps we should rename this article to electrical power station and link to the older types ? Power station and power plant should perhaps be disambiguation pages. - Rod57 (talk) 17:57, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-electric power stations 

message: Substituted at 03:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment - from 2007

message: Trying to keep the list of largest power stations up to date seems a fool's errand. We should instead list a few examples, and update it only when something major changes, like if solar plants keep getting bigger and today's typical station becomes small by tomorrow's standards. Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typical power output 

message: how about adding something related to Buildings As Power Stations? B.A.P.S ??? 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/06/180620193729.htm
cheers and serenity. Michael Ten (talk) 17:16, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  BAPS... B.A.P.S ???  

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. It's snowing (closed by non-admin page mover) The Night Watch (talk) 03:37, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Power station →  – A more specific term, power station is most used in British English. Sasquatchcito (talk) 01:48, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move to power plant 17 April 2023 - rejected 

message: Power plant operator for 23 years here.  Worked at 8 power plants in 3 states so far.  Never heard “power station” in my life before this weird wikipedia page.  Who writes this stuff, Australians or something? 2600:1005:B19E:647C:4B9:E8DE:EE03:8525 (talk) 13:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I stopped looking at Google Books after the first 19 pages of things with "Power station" in the title...perhaps you've slipped into an alternative time line? ---Wtshymanski (talk) 02:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Power plant not power station