Talk:Heating consumption of buildings: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
{{defend|1: |Unit kWh/m2/year would be better when comparing the energy needs of different types of buildings. It is also more handy when building models, because then you don't need to define the number and size of the buildings separately|--[[User:Virpi Kollanus|Virpi Kollanus]] 14:15, 7 April 2009 (EEST)}} | {{defend|1: |Unit kWh/m2/year would be better when comparing the energy needs of different types of buildings. It is also more handy when building models, because then you don't need to define the number and size of the buildings separately|--[[User:Virpi Kollanus|Virpi Kollanus]] 14:15, 7 April 2009 (EEST)}} | ||
{{defend|#: |I agree. Unit should be kWh/m2/year. (We are focusing on that right now..)|--[[User:Pauliina|Pauliina]] 15:57, 7 April 2009 (EEST)}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 12:57, 7 April 2009
| Fact discussion: . |
|---|
| Opening statement: Unit should be kWh/m2/year
Closing statement: Under discussion (to be changed when a conclusion is found) (A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.) |
| Argumentation:
Add argumentation using attack-, defend- and comment buttons ←--1:: . Unit kWh/m2/year would be better when comparing the energy needs of different types of buildings. It is also more handy when building models, because then you don't need to define the number and size of the buildings separately --Virpi Kollanus 14:15, 7 April 2009 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence) ←--#:: . I agree. Unit should be kWh/m2/year. (We are focusing on that right now..) --Pauliina 15:57, 7 April 2009 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence) |