Talk:Eavor Technologies

Problems with the "Criticism" section
Since I'm a brand new Wikipedia editor I decided to discuss the problem I have with the page rather than directly edit it.

The section labeled "Criticism" appears to violate a number of the Wikipedia guidelines described on Help:Introduction_to_policies_and_guidelines/2


 * 1) The section title is misleading.  The criticism is of closed-loop geothermal as a concept, but its presence on the Eavor page implies a criticism of the company.
 * 2) The term "open loop geothermal systems" is not defined here or in any of the references.  It could refer to traditional geothermal systems assuming re-injection, but appears to be comparing Eavor to Enhanced Geothermal Systems(EGS). To be completely accurate, it should point out that EGS has also not yet reached commercial viability.
 * 3) The statement "...it is highly unlikely that mitigating downsides associated with open-loop convection-based systems will compensate economically for switching to a far less efficient conduction-based heat transfer" is the editor's opinion of a future probability and is not specifically addressed in either of the references ([7],[8]) cited for the section.
 * 4) Reference [7] does make an economic argument, but does not meet the definition of a reliable source. It is a blog post by a vendor associated with a competing technology. It cites two published papers including [8] but is not itself from a reliable source.  The author even acknowledges his bias for EGS and his purpose in discrediting closed-loop geothermal efforts.

I'm not sure how to edit the section to correct these problems. Should I first mark it as disputed?

CustEng (talk) 21:01, 13 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Your removal of the criticism section was was fine. It may be appropriate to put that criticism in some other article, like heat exchanger maybe, but doing so might violate the WP:UNDUE policy because closed/open loop exchangers are merely mentioned there. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:12, 17 September 2021 (UTC)