Talk:Energy demand management

Untitled

Page created by transferring material from non-capitalised: Energy demand management 02:00, 2005 Mar 12 MGTom (new - or has it been deleted meanwhile??)MGTom 01:20, 2005 Mar 12 (UTC)

Should have been done using the "move this page" link, to preserve article history. Also, the non-capitalized version is what's preferred by the manual of style. So I've moved it back and merged the histories of the two articles together. Bryan 01:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Operations, Types and Examples

This page is about policy, mostly market mechanisms, and not about technologies - how to technically address demand. For this I've just started Demand-side technology. -- eiland (talk) 21:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The introduction to DSM was still very focused on peak management. I added in a mention of using DSM to help with integration of renewables.

The “operations” section was very theoretical, confusing, and not really related to DSM. I edited this section for clarity, and tried to build up better justification for the use of DSM

The types of DSM section was somewhat limited in its explanations. I added in more content into this section, and linked to other examples

In the “examples” section, I added a paragraph describing generally the DSM activities in California, as the existing examples were focused on Australia and Canada. The last edits to this section seemed old, and therefore did not include more modern examples of DSM. -- bear double (talk) 15:38, 29 April 2015 (PST)

Train wreck

How can you are? This article needs an overhaul from some one who knows what they're talkin' about.

• How is this a "train wreck"? It is written in a very intellectual style and it is written more from the large producer/consumer standpoint, so it could use more information from an individual standpoint (i.e. "utilities encourage people not to use appliances during the dinner hour"), but that doesn't invalidate the information already here. What do you think the article needs? Better yet, be bold and add it yourself! DeMatt (talk) 06:03, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Gostaria de fazer 2 observações: Custo x benefício também tem que ser avaliado para a implementação de linhas de transmissão, pois traz impacto na tarifa. Considerando que o ideal, de fato, seria que a demanda fosse contida e creio que há como fazer isso via smart grid e por meio de uma ampla campanha de conscientização, pois o exemplo dado pela população brasileira em 2001 foi extraordinário, ocasião em que houve o apagão de energia elétrica, os consumidores reduziram 20% de seu consumo rapidamente, mostrando que havia consumo perdulário e inconsciente. A outra coisa, também tem que ver com o consumo perdulário, somente as perdas por furto de energia, são 19 TWh ano. Claro que se fossem legalizadas, seria demanda regular, contudo, com o montante bem reduzido, daí o círculo se fecha com o smart grid, na medida em que vc a combate e impulsiona um consumo consciente. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reginacg (talk • contribs) 18:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

External Links

First link in the external links section is broken 209.145.84.222 (talk)

• Good to know. Couldn't figure out what the original link should point to now, so I just erased it. Next time, be bold and do it yourself! The worst thing that'll happen is we'll mercilessly edit your edit out of existence. DeMatt (talk) 06:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

School project edits

In the next few days this page will soon get a significant revision and subsequent editing from students participating in the Public Policy Initiative. This article was chosen because it is missing content or sourcing and has been relatively innactive. Their draft articles are being formed in their user space and will be transfered here. Links to the drafts can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Courses/Political Economy of Technology and Science fall 2010. I will not be allowing students to that first initial transfer unless their article has been significantly improved in references and content. Please provide comments on the significant revisions and help the students improve the Wikipedia formatting. However, I would greatly appreciate that any major content changes be suggested to the students on the talk page so that they get the experience editing collaboratively and through consensus and feedback. The final date for the project is Friday December 10, expect significant editing from now until then. Thank you.

If you have any questions feel free to raise them here or on my talk page, Myself and other WP:Online Ambassadors will be monitoring their edits, so we will also be able to help fix issues on the pages, Sadads (talk) 01:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Energy demand management/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article clearly explains Demand Side Management, it contains the relevant material which i have been searching in many sites but couldn't get this information. It would be great if additional information is provided on the various Demand Side Management techniques.

Last edited at 18:53, 13 September 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 14:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Energy demand management. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110219030422/http://www.climatechange.qld.gov.au/pdf/factsheets/1energy-b1.pdf to http://www.climatechange.qld.gov.au/pdf/factsheets/1energy-b1.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161229195628/https://eaei.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/Providing_Reliability_Services_through_Demand_Response__A_Preliminary_Evaluation_of_the_Demand_Response_Capabilities_of_Alcoa_Inc..pdf to https://eaei.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/Providing_Reliability_Services_through_Demand_Response__A_Preliminary_Evaluation_of_the_Demand_Response_Capabilities_of_Alcoa_Inc..pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101214162214/http://www.ccee.org.br/StaticFile/Arquivo/biblioteca_virtual/Relatorios_Publico/Anual/relatorio_anual_2008.pdf to http://www.ccee.org.br/StaticFile/Arquivo/biblioteca_virtual/Relatorios_Publico/Anual/relatorio_anual_2008.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050126094530/http://dsm.iea.org/ to http://dsm.iea.org/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050207200432/http://reports.eea.eu.int/technical_report_2004_1/en to http://reports.eea.eu.int/technical_report_2004_1/en

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:25, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

merge with "demand response" article

merge with "demand response" article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.125.229.38 (talk) 09:12, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

yes please do so Chidgk1 (talk) 17:34, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to not merge. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

---

I propose merging Demand response into Energy demand management. I think the content in Demand response can easily be explained in the context of Energy demand management, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Energy demand management.Chidgk1 (talk) 13:03, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Hmm I agree with the premise that they could be covered together, but this may be a rare instance of me not supporting a merge. Demand reponse is getting a lot more attention with better technologies and policies that can enable and promote it, while energy demand management is is broader concept that isn't covered as much in particular. Energy demand management is more looking at the big picture of how to reduce or plan for both total and peak demand, while demand response is more specifically using signals and requests for power usage to change in repsonse to actual demand. There's definitely some overlap in the articles and a need for some restructuring or rewriting, but I'd hate to lose demand response as a primary article topic. A lot of places are instituting more programs (e.g.) that could be written about to expand the article. Reywas92^Talk 17:00, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I oppose a merge. I don't accept that this would not cause UNDUE problems. According to the pagesize tool Energy demand management has 12kB of readable prose whereas Demand response has 30kB. These figures are slightly inaccurate because the tool does not include bulleted text on the grounds that that is just going to be a list. Even so, that would entirely swamp the current article. Furthermore, the "Types" section in Energy demand management lists four topics, all of which have their own articles, mostly fairly lengthy. The logic of this proposal would demand all of them be merged in making a quite unwieldly article. It is better left as an overview article. SpinningSpark 22:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose. I agree with the contrary points raised above. Demand response is a significant topic on its own, and there is no benefit of merging it here. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 23:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP23 - Sect 201 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 77xsy (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by 77xsy (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)