Talk:Koeberg Nuclear Power Station

Suspected sabotage
Hi, I see the article has been rehashed and the content relating to suspected sabotage has been deleted. I am pleased the local Police Station has been removed as an indication of the location of Koeberg.

Under recent developments we must go back to the list of developments that brought us to where we are now.. Regards Gregorydavid 11:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I have replaced the original introduction to recent developments, as they were before I re-wrote the article. The location of the local police station is of no relative importance to the location of the power station, since anyone who knows where the police stations is, already knows where the power station is. The question of sabotage has yet to be answered to the point that it becomes an undeniable fact.

Regards User:freddie10538 15:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the location is OK.. Recent developments occur on a daily basis at the moment.. I feel we should list developments clearly for the record for the time being.. Alec Erwin did say, the day before the 1st March 2006 Municipal elections, on SABC that persons suspected of sabotage had been identified.. This past weekend The Sunday Times reported that Thabo Mbeki had intervened and arranged for a rotor to be supplied by France. Reports on SABC went on to say that a plan had been agreed as how to best operate the power station while repairs and refuling was being done. This involves running one of the units at 60% capacity to preserve the fuel rods, replace the rotor, commmission the dead plant and then refuel the live one, all by end May 2006.

The most recent of these developments is that on Friday 3 March 2006, Public Enterprises Minister, Alec Erwin said that he never used the word "sabotage," but rather he said that the damage was caused by an object (a bolt) that had been placed there by human hands. The difference then, between the press reported statement, and the corrected statement must be that the fault was apparently caused by unintentional human error. The investigation as to wether the error was intentional or not intentional is presently underway; the political value of these statements, correct or not, nothwithstanding.

Regards User:freddie10538 15:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Melkbos tree and urbanisation
Re the translation "Melkbos" refers to a kind of tree, usually "Milkwood" in English, so I would have translated Melkbosstrand as "Milkwood beach".

Also the google satalite image doesn't show total urbanisation. Cape Town has come a lot closer, and the "Atlantis" industrial area is nearby, but is it really "surrouned by suburban housing"? I would not have said so.

Regards Anthony 9 March 2006


 * I have *never* heard of the area being referred to as Milkwood anything; I guess the Afrikaans is thoroughly entrenched for this name.
 * As for urbanisation, I agree; parts of the new developments like Parklands are already visible in the image, but (according to Google Earth's ruler) they're still about 15 kilometers away.  Melkbos itself is to the south (less than 2km), but that seems to be about it -- the rest seems to be farms. dewet|&trade; 14:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The article states that the power plant resided outside the metropolitan area when it was buit in 1984. I took this as a relative term, as in 1984, 20km's of urban development was considered to be significant and certainly not forseen to the urban planners of the time.


 * The 2 km distance to Melkbos' is no distance at all, and the 15km's to Parklands is still ver close compared to the location of other nuclear power plants which are built in significantly rural areas in other countries. freddie10538


 * re DeWet's comments


 * The areas is not called milkwood, the Afrikaans name is entrenched, like Hout Bay is never called Wood Bay in South African English. But the coastal tree that gives the area it's name is a Milkwood in English. Search google.co.za for pages from South Africa containing "milkwood melkbos" for corroboration. "milk bush beach" is the most literal translation, but "Milkwood beach" would be the most meaningful.


 * When I updated the article, I wanted it to be accessible to non-South African's and for this reason, provided a literal translation of the word. Milkwood and the trees from which it is derived is a very different species than is found on the West Coast, North of Cape Town. So, I would not call it Milkwood beach, as there are no indigenous trees there to speak of! The word "melkbos" is indeed a South African historical colloquialism, which simply denotes an area marked by an easily distinguishable feature, as does Vaal River for example. freddie10538


 * Also, regarding the troubling recent developments at Koeberg, I'm supprised that there is not more mention of the "loose bolt" (google koeberg "loose bolt") (Now fixed - Anthony) and of the confusing variety of different reasons given for the power cuts, which points to lots still being unknown or unrevealed about the situation.


 * A friend in CT put this summary in her blog, but I can't guarantee the accuracy:


 * Reactor number 1 has been down since December, when a loose bolt mysteriously damaged a rotor. Progress report: a replacement rotor is reportedly on its way from France. not a simple matter as it weighs 200 tons. but hey it's only March.


 * Reactor number 2 has been acting funny for the last couple of weeks. it seems to have broken down for a variety of incomprehensible reasons. and it's running out of uranium and is overdue for refuelling. all of which are worrying things. refuelling should be done by the end of May.


 * Anthony 11 March


 * I see no reason for providing a translation of Melkbosstrand. The place is only known by this name, whether one is speaking English or Afrikaans. It is not a name like Cape Town/Kaapstad that is different in English and Afrikaans. Besides, the article is about the power station, not Melkbosstrand. Booshank 01:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is like Bird Street in Stellenbosch, it has nothing to do with female students either.. Gregorydavid 08:32, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Recent problems
In the "Recent developments" section it says "resulting in a controlled shutdown of the reactor" - Which one? there are two reactors. Which chemical and where's the reference for this incident. There apparently may be issues in rector 2 also, but I don't have details. Is this it? I hope that my edit has adressed some of my previous comments. If it's not to your liking, well, edit on.


 * Anthony 11 March

ANC refs
 I see nothing wrong with this reference - are you saying it didn't happen ? Wizzy&hellip; &#9742;   11:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikiwizzy, the details are wrong. The attack did not involve SAM missiles.

The construction programme was delayed by 6 months due to damage caused to the nearly complete reactor by explosive charges. These had been secretly placed by an ANC sympathiser who was part of the team of French experts contracted to build the station.

Is Koeberg the only nuclear power station in SA as stated at the beginning of this article?
What about SAFARI-1? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.134.166.10 (talk) 09:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * SAFARI-1 isn't a power station, it's just a research reactor. 146.232.50.216 (talk) 20:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Protests
That fact that "current anti-nuclear campaigns against Koeberg are being run by Earthlife Africa and Koeberg Alert" is not sufficiently noteworthy to be mentioned in the introduction. The antinuclear lobby in SA is very small.Royalcourtier (talk) 07:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Rename?
Should Koeberg Nuclear Power Station be renamed as Koeberg nuclear power plant?

Power plants in the US are called "power plants", but power stations in the UK and elsewhere are called "power stations". Per WP:ENGVAR, WP does not pursue "consistency" across naming issue like this and it does favour use of the locally-appropriate name.

My interpretation in South African convention is that Koeberg is a power station which has two power plants. Each power plant includes a reactor. Eskom the owner and operator refers to Koeberg Power Station. The South African government also refers to Koeberg as a power station.

This has two now been renamed as "power plant", despite lack of prior discussion and also after being reverted, contrary to WP:BRD. I invite to make some case for the renaming to "power plant". Andynct (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Nuclear power plant and List of nuclear reactors, the number of occurrences for this appellation is very clear. Trackteur (talk) 11:58, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The discussion and decision on Nuclear power plant page was relevant only to that page and is irrelevant to this page as it takes no account of regional English language variations and usage where this power station is sited. Koeberg in all documentation in South Africa is referred to as a "power station" Andynct (talk) 12:27, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You have checked the number of occurrences of this page List of nuclear reactors, it's a generic term that applies not only to South Africa. Trackteur (talk) 13:09, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Irrelevant. What's relevant to this page is what it is called officially on signs, documents and in the press in South Africa.  It is called the "Koeberg Nuclear Power Station"  Its name should not have been changed without prior discussion and should be changed back to its official name Koeberg Nuclear Power Station.       Andynct (talk) 18:54, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Andy. Observe the contents of Category:Nuclear power stations in the United Kingdom and its subcategories. They all use "power station", except for Chapelcross nuclear power plant - and that's only where it is because Trackteur has performed a similar undiscussed move. Note also the article List of nuclear power stations and the category hierarchy rooted at Category:Nuclear power stations. But more significant even than all of this is the fact that "power station" is how it is referred to in South African English. Per WP:RMUM I am reverting this move. - htonl (talk) 20:06, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * In light of what happened on the Chapelcross article I would also like to specifically point out this instruction from WP:RMUM: Move wars are disruptive, so if you make a bold move and it is reverted, do not make the move again. Instead, follow the procedures laid out in § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. - htonl (talk) 20:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * It's referred to as Koeberg Nuclear Power Station, so that's its name. Pointing to other power stations with alternative naming conventions is not persuasive. Greenman (talk) 20:40, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Koeberg Nuclear Power Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071023045318/http://www.eskom.co.za/content/GFS%200034%20Nuclear%20Energy%20Basic%20Cycle%20Rev%203~1.doc to http://www.eskom.co.za/content/GFS%200034%20Nuclear%20Energy%20Basic%20Cycle%20Rev%203~1.doc
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/mk/mk-history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:44, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Koeberg Nuclear Power Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20070706050919/http://www.iol.za.org/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=ct20020825220912872G651975 to http://www.iol.za.org/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=ct20020825220912872G651975
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061005215153/http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=173 to http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=173
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051016124540/http://inro.ca/en/pres_pap/asian/asi00/EMME2Asian.pdf to http://www.inro.ca/en/pres_pap/asian/asi00/EMME2Asian.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061005211549/http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=441 to http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=441

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:42, 11 December 2017 (UTC)