Talk:Watt

WP:RS Petawatt information from 2 sources deleted by Kendall-K1

Kendall-K1 deleted the following:

The Gravelines nuclear power plant in France became in 2010 the first power plant to ever deliver a cumulative petawatt-hour of electricity.

The ostensible reason is was «Petawatt: this has nothing to do with petawatts of power; please discuss». I hasten to add that deletion of WP:RS goes against WP:PRESERVE. Cheers to all, XavierItzm (talk) 20:14, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

This is not a violation of WP:PRESERVE, which refers to information that belongs in the article but has been poorly presented. This information does not belong here, because it has nothing to do with petawatts. Kendall-K1 (talk) 02:18, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

The first-ever delivery of a full petawatt-hr by a single human-built machine has nothing to do with petawatts. Interesting times we live in.XavierItzm (talk) 05:14, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

It would make more sense to put this on an article about energy units, such as kilowatt hour or joule. Dicklyon (talk) 05:18, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

There is no mention of the petawatt as a unit of power at either source. They do describe a power station with an average output of about 1400 megawatts (.0000014 PW). The station has a nameplate capacity of .0000055 PW. None of this belongs in the "Petawatt" section of this article. Kendall-K1 (talk) 05:24, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree it would be confusing to include those milestones in the petawatt article, because a petawatt hour is a unit of energy, not power. Why not include them instead in the kilowatt hour article. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 05:45, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Oh wait, I see Dicklyon has already made this suggestion. I agree with hinm. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 05:47, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Dondervogel 2 & Dicklyon's recommendation is sound and appreciated. Will do. With regard to the comment that Gravelines puts out .0000014 PW, this is not very useful; the fact that it was the first to cumulatively put out a full petawatt is more interesting. Thanks to all, XavierItzm (talk) 06:47, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

It never did put out anywhere near a petawatt, an amount of power. It cumulatively put out a petawatt hour, an amount of energy. Dicklyon (talk) 19:58, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

References

I further want to thank Dondervogel 2 for his suggestion of the kilowatt hour section. Right below that, what do you see? Confusion of kilowatt hours (energy) and kilowatts (power). I knew that but was confused, so this was a perfect antidote! XavierItzm (talk) 07:03, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Does anyone have a cite for the meaning of "megawatt mechanical"? And an explanation of why it is listed for Turkish power plants?

I am listing some Turkish power plants and the official database lists MWm as well as MWe. After a long search I found out that MWm means "megawatt mechanical" so I have now added and cited that and made a redirect MWm.

I guess it means the maximum kinetic energy of the spinning turbine. Is that right and if so where can I find a cite?

But I am confused why MWm is listed for solar PV farms on the official database http://lisans.epdk.org.tr/epvys-web/faces/pages/lisans/elektrikUretim/elektrikUretimOzetSorgula.xhtml (as you can see by selecting Tesis Türü : Güneş - meaning plant type solar)

Any idea what is the point of listing this for a power plant? Maybe previously mechanical energy was needed for spinning reserve https://www.erawa.com.au/electricity/wholesale-electricity-market/ancillary-services-parameters/spinning-reserve-margin-peak-and-off-peak-load-rejection-reserve-and-system-restart-cost_lr ? If so is "MWm" a useless measurement now big batteries can provide Ancillary Services?

Chidgk1 (talk) 08:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

It is easy to be a purist ...

It is easy to be a purist, but more difficult to write for the reader. My guess is that many or most readers are not physicists (surprise!!!), but they looking to understand domestic power bills. --Smokefoot (talk) 15:16, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Quoting from the article "The average electric power consumption of a household in the United States is about 1 kilowatt." What?--Smokefoot (talk) 15:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Sanity check: My power bills usually show around 500 kW·h. In a 30 day month there are 720 hours. 500 divided by 720 is 0.69 kilowatts. Seems about right. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:56, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Good check. Now how difficult is it for a normal earthling get that info from this article? And you really think that an encyclopedia article should have an "overview", especially one that is not an overview?

--Smokefoot (talk) 16:24, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Overview? OK, it isn't really an overview. But it also isn't strictly about classical physics. I don't recall much discussion of power when I took introductory courses about relativity and quantum mechanics at university, but I don't see anything in the section that jumps out at me as false when using non-classic physics. Ideally, the lead section of a Wikipedia article is supposed to be the overview, but it's also supposed to be short. Probably the title of that section should be changed, but I'm not sure to what.

The watt is used in a wide variety of situations. I don't think it should be a goal of the editors of this article to explain residential utility bills, especially since some utility companies have a vested interest in confusing their customers. Jc3s5h (talk) 18:40, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Indeed. Electricity companies charge for energy, not power, so one might reasonably expect to find such an explanation in Units of energy. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 22:44, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Gigawatt and typical city

Until yesterday, our description of the gigawatt began

A gigawatt is typical average annual power consumption for a city of 1.8 million habitants, and is the output of a large power station.

@Indefatigable and @Dondervogel 2 have tried to improve that, quite rightly, but I fear it's the source that's multiply problematic:

For context, a data center campus with peak demand of one gigawatt is roughly equivalent to the average annual consumption of about 700,000 homes, or a city of around 1.8 million people, according to a CNBC analysis using data from the Department of Energy and Census Bureau.

Not only is that confusing power and energy, and mixing peak and average, but it's also for a city in the country which is, for various reasons, #12 in the world for per capita electricity consumption, according to List of countries by electricity consumption - and when I use List of countries by electricity consumption's 12.44 MWh per annum per capita in the US, I get 0.994 GW for 700,000 people, not for 1.8 million in 700,000 homes. Should we work out what's reliable and applicable, and fix this example? Or find a different one? NebY (talk) 23:53, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

I confess I did not consult the source (I implied that in my edit summary but perhaps did not make it explicit). Instead I guessed from the original wording what the original editor likely intended. If the source itself is problematic, let's find a better source and use that. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 13:37, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Multiples

"A gigawatt is typical the annually averaged power consumption for a city of 1.8 million inhabitants," Isn't this mixing power and energy? Theking2 (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

"To keep the discussion about energy infrastructure expansion objective, it is important to distinguish between installed capacity (e.g., in gigawatts, GW) and the amount of energy actually produced (e.g., in gigawatt-hours, GWh)." (Source axpo) Theking2 (talk) 16:49, 29 May 2026 (UTC)