From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Greenland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:38, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Renewable energy sources[edit]

According to the introduction, Greenland is the country with the highest percentage of energy produced from renewable sources: it quotes a 70% figure I've managed to find in a press release, attributed to Palle Christiansen, Greenland's Minister of Finance:

There are several issues regarding this.

First, according to Renewable_energy_in_Iceland, Greenland would at most be second in renewable energy sources, given the 75% figure attributed to Iceland. That quote can be reframed to something like "one of the countries with a higher use of renewable energy sources". Or maybe there are different categories being considered (maybe one takes into account transportation, while the other doesn't?).

Second, the fact that the only quote I managed to find is from a press release makes the figure... questionable. If the search were to be done in Danish, more references might be found, probably even the Minister's quote in a newspaper or some official document. I don't speak Danish, so this is as far as I'll go. There might also be some international organization which tracks this info and release yearly or regular updates, but I don't know where to start looking.

Third, given such a high ranking as a consumer of renewable energy, it is quite strange that the whole article makes no mention of that again. The only instance of "renewable", "energy" or "electricity" beyond the introduction is in the Economy section: "Electricity has traditionally been generated by oil or diesel power plants, even if there is a large surplus of potential hydropower. Because of rising oil prices, there is a programme to build hydro power plants. The first, and still the largest, is Buksefjord hydroelectric power plant." I think this subject should receive some attention in the article: what are these renewable sources? hydropower? wind? thermal? Are these figures expected to improve with planned infrastructure? Maybe not to the extent of creating a completely new article, as was done with Iceland, but at least provide some information. Other interesting information would be how Greenland ranks in per capita greenhouse gas emissions.

P.S.: this The Guardian article might be relevant: According to it, a lot of the energy consumed by the country is still produced by fuel plants, and it might go higher, as plans for new mining plants would raise electricity requirements beyond what they currently produce. The per capita figure is, however, tricky, because of the low population density of the country.

Elideb (talk) 11:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Edit needed[edit]

The seventh paragraph in Greenland#Geography_and_climate starts with: in eastern Greenland, the largest sund/fjord system in the world.

It is pretty clear that something is missing but it is not at all clear what is missing. Perhaps editors more familiar with the subject matter can tell whether something was inadvertently removed in an edit or otherwise no how this paragraph should start.--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:35, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Done, it was an image caption that was out of wack.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:47, 11 November 2016 (UTC)