Jump to content

Talk:Solid oxide fuel cell: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
NihlusBOT (talk | contribs)
fixing Lint errors in signatures (Task 2)
→‎Layout: new section
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 63: Line 63:


Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 13:55, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 13:55, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

== Layout ==

I felt the layout was a little off. I think the target section could be in operation. The intro had a lot of different random facts in it. I felt it could be distributed through operation, research, and the intro above and below the picture. I also believe there could be a new section titled Components to take some clutter out of the operation section. Lastly, the power of plant part I felt didn’t need it’s own title. That part also was 1 sentence consisting of broken links. [[User:SRMcGarvey|SRMcGarvey]] ([[User talk:SRMcGarvey|talk]]) 15:40, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:40, 18 December 2020

WikiProject iconEnvironment Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconEnergy Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
A diagram of the balance of plant is requested. Mion (talk) 01:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SOFC or solid oxide fuel cells are made in two distinct designs, tubular and planar. ITSOFC

This should mention BloomEnergy!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.67.248.185 (talk) 08:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

in the anode section it says

The four minerals that make up a SOFC are BSCF (barium, strontium, cobalt, iron).

This was done after just explaining that the anode was Ni with YSZ? I think this must be a mistake.

Jim Mikulak (talk) 01:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Out of the references given, 8/9 were from one individual, by the same username. Consequently, the article is extremely biased. The technology evovles at thousands of labs worldwide, not just one in Europe. Wikipedia is not an advertisement portal for personal gains, or to get higher "referenced by" quotes. Open for discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Am b5538 (talkcontribs) 17:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC) [reply]

In the article 3 similar sources are mentioned, if you are aware of similar or better sources feel free to add them. If there is an update from 2 references [1] to 13 references, situations like this happen, usually references are improved on over time. Thanks for noting it. Cheers Mion (talk) 11:48, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral point of view/Noticeboard

So that editors can better watch over this concern I have placed links at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard to both this talk page and to Talk:Fuel cell. -84user (talk) 18:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How efficient?

To compare this fuel cell with an internal combustion engine or other motive device, one needs efficiency values. How much energy is lost in reformating the fuel? What is the energy conversion efficiency of the fuel cell? What is the overall energy conversion efficiency. This article doesn't say so, but the carbon in natural gas or other fossil fuel must still be converted to CO2 so the reduction in CO2 emissions must come as result of higher relative energy conversion efficiency. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R Stillwater (talkcontribs) 07:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible temperature conversion mistake?

Under the Electrolyte section, it mentions the lower temperature limit of 873K. Wondering if this should be 773K, based on the earlier reports that SOFC's operate between 500°C to 1,000°C. If this is the case, then the 273 degree difference factor between °C and K would produce 773K.

...unless the fact really is 873K. (130.134.235.94 (talk) 17:40, 22 September 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Solid oxide fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Solid oxide fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:55, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Layout

I felt the layout was a little off. I think the target section could be in operation. The intro had a lot of different random facts in it. I felt it could be distributed through operation, research, and the intro above and below the picture. I also believe there could be a new section titled Components to take some clutter out of the operation section. Lastly, the power of plant part I felt didn’t need it’s own title. That part also was 1 sentence consisting of broken links. SRMcGarvey (talk) 15:40, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]