My friend asked me about the grammatical correctness of the phrase (written below) as a logo for his enterprise. Which one of it do you think sounds better.

A. 'Renewable energies implementers'

B. 'Renewable energy implementers'

B sounds better

B is correct.

B b b
b b b
b b b

thanks for the replies so far. Thats what I thought. B must be correct

I concur. B.

Implementers of renewable energy is grammatically more correct and less prone to miscomprehension, if a little less snappy, although the whole phrase is a little ... odd. Will/does your friend's business supply "green" energy, or simply use it?

well he intends to provide a wide range of renewable energies.

So he's a supplier, not an implementer? Nitpicking, but ...

well he intends to build a EPC ( engineering, procurement and construction) type company which specialises in green energy solutions spanning across a wide range of technologies.

Renewable Energy Sources, Implementers... or whateva!

Energy is uncountable noun in this expression.

Implementers of renewable energy solutions.



It should at least earn them a mention in Private Eye.

You mean uncountable noun?

Yeah, you would say "kinetic and potential energies", here these are two different types of energies.

However, for different sources of renewable energy, as in the case of OP, you would keep it singular.

Precisely so. I think my brain is unaccountable for what hand is writing with sudden arrival of spring. It could be also those km's by my velo made this morning to work or too much thinking about engineering and different sources of renewable energy which make me rethink to give up my current job to become a well-paid accountant.

Should it be plural?

Renewable Energy Implementor....the firm is singular therefore only one implementor?

There is no strict rule for when a mass noun and can be used as a countable one. People and beer are the two that come to mind, which also provide two different rationales for this breaking of the rule. In the first, it is because we use people to refer to a nation, so when we say "the peoples of the world", we mean the different nations of the world. In the case of beer, when we say 6 beers, we refer to 6 bottles of beers, and the shorter version has gained acceptance. One cannot do this generally. One cannot refer to multiple types of energy as energies. Well, one can, but it's not accepted usage.

In all my life as a physicist, I've never seen it used above as you refer. I would say "kinetic and potential energy" or . It sounds funny otherwise and it is also vague as it is not clear whether the plural refers to the individual types of energies or is as you intended. But maybe it's different in your dialect.

But what I say doesn't apply here, regardless. When using nouns as qualifiers/descriptors ("adjectives") in English, one always uses singular.

Examples:

5 car pileup
5 man team

For me personally, b sounds better.

How about:

Renewable Energy Implementation (if he insists on using these buzzwords).

Failing that:

Energy, Whatever the Weather.

Ok, I was using energies in the same way as you use peoples and beers: to mean different peoples (races) and different beers (either bottles or brands).

Just as I add two masses, I would add two energies. Mass and energy are equivalent, no?

BTW: It is not a 5 man team. It is either a team of five men, or a five-man team. I think. Is DB around?

In this case, your usage is correct as we are now refering to countable terms in a mathematical formula and NOT energy itself. It's all logical. The trick is to see what you're counting.

Hyphen or not, the rule is the same and applies in much more general situations than I gave examples of.