Talk:Sizewell nuclear power stations

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sizewell nuclear power stations article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

England High‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment Mid‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sizewell B

A lot of background in Sizewell B talks about other reactors in too much detail. Would it not be sufficient to just say something more along the lines of 'based on the so and so reactor...' and link to them, rather than clogging up this article with lots of details on the history and tech specs of these entirely separate reactors elsehwere? A boardley (talk) 11:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How much did it cost to build Sizewell B in the first place? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.42.40 (talk) 13:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you ask? It says in the article £2,030M Fsbr1908 (talk) 11:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the infobox it correctly says that the turbine-generators at Sizewell B are GEC-Alsthom, although it was just GEC at the time they were made. But the main text WRONGLY says that they are similar to Drax and Heysham 2. Those stations are not GEC, but NEI Parsons (now part of Siemens). The GEC machines are similar to the generators that were at Hinkley Point B, Hartlepool, Heysham 1, Grain, Littlebrook and Peterhead ( and many in South Africa) although some of those power stations have since closed down and been demolished. Can someone please edit out this error. DMWard (talk) I have made that edit myself - I hope I have done it right.DMWard (talk)

Closure of visitor centre

The article ued to say "The visitor's centre was closed on cost-grounds before the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks." I've deleted this sentence as I can find no reliable cite on the web that gives a reason for the closure. The most commonly-quoted reason is security fears after 9/11; however, if the reason was, in fact, cost, it is spurious to mention 9/11 in the article. (It would be no more accurate than saying, for example, "... before the July 7th 2005 London Underground bombings" or any other irrelevant event that happened after the closure.) Dricherby (talk) 22:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was in Sizewell last Sunday and asked a UKAEA Constable about the closure. He said it was definitely on security grounds and that there were no plans to reopen it. --Asterion^talk 23:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That might be why they're not planning to reopen it, but it might not be why it was closed down in the first place though. --RFBailey (talk) 04:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The visitor centre is currently open, I do not know when it re-opened.Yevad (talk) 09:32, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I worked at Magnox, and we "temporarily" closed our visitor centres and stopped all visitor tours after 9/11, because we were firmly advised to do so. Some of our visitor centres never re-opened. So, saying that Sizewell B closed its visitor centre (and I am sure stopped all visitor tours) because of 9/11 is accurate. DMWard (talk)

Move and merger

I decided to be bold and rename this article, in order to describe both Sizewell A and B in a single article. This seemed more sensible than the previous arrangement, whereby Sizewell B had its own article, while Sizewell A was described in the article about the village of Sizewell (in fact, it rather dominated it). --RFBailey (talk) 04:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a good improvement. Well done. Rwendland (talk) 08:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, good work

. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 01:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sizewell C

The information on Sizewell C may not be accurate. There is no firm committment to build an EPR at Sizewell C. Both the AP1000 and EPR are still being assessed by BE and the NII. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.149.117.69 (talk) 13:53, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both the AP1000 and EPR are being assessed as part of the Generic Design Assessment performed by the UK HSE Nuclear Installations Inspectorate. British Energy have not yet decided which reactor to build at any sites. Despite the buyout of BE by EdF, they are still evaluating both plants. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cannonac (talk • contribs) 23:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This comment is way out of date (2008). If EDF are to build Sizewell C (and it isa big if) then it can only be an EPR, as similar to Hinkley C as possible, to use the same supply chain and the same safety arguments and minimise redesign costs. This comment September 2021 DMWard (talk)

Incorrect Grid Ref

The grid ref given actually corresponds to Bradwell PS rather than sizewell. RobWB (talk) 11:44, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinates

What does the lead coords depict? Sizewell A, B, C? Perhaps add inline-coords for all three? Regards. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 01:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 October 2020

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Berkeley Nuclear Power Station which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Rosbif73 (talk) 15:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]