[Tagging] Power Storage Proposal (RFC)

[Lukas Richert]

In this case, I mean primary energy 
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_energy) as "an energy found in 
nature that has not been subjected to any human engineered conversion 
process". This would include fossil fuels, nuclear, solar, wind, 
goethermal, etc. but does not include electrochemical cells in any form.

    IEC  151-13-35 = "energy transducer that transforms non-electric
    energy into electric energy"
    OSM = "A device which converts one form of energy to another, for
    example, an electrical generator."


Precisely, OSM defines a generator as a device that can also output 
thermal energy (and explicitly allows tagging of such) which runs 
counter to the IEC definition.
- Lukas

On 30/12/2020 14:19, François Lacombe wrote:
> Hi Lukas, hi Christian,
>
> Le mer. 30 déc. 2020 à 11:05, Lukas Richert <lrichert at posteo.de 
> <mailto:lrichert at posteo.de>> a écrit :
>
>     I would be strongly in favor of power=energy_storage for
>     individual modules instead of tagging them as power=generator as
>     proposed.  I think it is useful to separate generation from storage.
>
> Then you're in favour of separating primary (not storage) from 
> secondary (storage) battery cells?
>
>     While both transform energy from one from into another, generators
>     convert from primary energy sources such as fossil fuels or solar,
>     while storage devices convert from intermediate media, such as
>     electrochemical cells.
>
> Primary battery cells runs on electrochemical substances which 
> precisely act as a fuel here.
> I'm sure we'll find somewhere where primary cells are refilled in place.
>
>     I'd also like to note that OSM does not, in fact, use the IEC
>     definition of a generator.
>
> IEC  151-13-35 = "energy transducer that transforms non-electric 
> energy into electric energy"
> OSM = "A device which converts one form of energy to another, for 
> example, an electrical generator."
>
> Do you consider a difference in the output form of energy?
>
> Le mer. 30 déc. 2020 à 13:29, Christian Pietzsch 
> <christian.pietzsch at piespace.de 
> <mailto:christian.pietzsch at piespace.de>> a écrit :
>
>     I updated my proposal and tried to include your idea mentioning
>     the difference between primary power generators and storage.
>
> It's better, thank you.
>
> Note that if power-to-gas is considered as storage, petroleum tanks 
> should be as well.
> Don't we confuse storage and vector production?
>
> Le mer. 30 déc. 2020 à 13:34, Christian Pietzsch 
> <christian.pietzsch at piespace.de 
> <mailto:christian.pietzsch at piespace.de>> a écrit :
>
>     I think type as I use it in the proposal fits quite well. After
>     all it groups up devices with similar properties.
>
> Then "type" isn't useful. It often (not to mention always) doesn't 
> bring additional information as anything is a type or category of 
> something in OSM.
> storage=battery is as meaningful as storage:type=battery
>
> All the best
>
> François
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201230/88dddb7f/attachment.htm>