Talk:CANDU reactor

message: I dont know if this is really an error, but I was confused when I got to this part.. 
:"The heavy water is unpressurized, and a cooling system is required to keep it from boiling.
:At the time of its design, Canada lacked the heavy industry to cast and machine the large, heavy steel pressure vessel used in most light water reactors.[citation needed] Instead, the pressure is contained in much smaller tubes, "
It seems rather contradictory. 24.141.10.136 (talk) 06:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The moderator is heavy water in a large tank (calandria) at atmospheric pressure which must be kept cool by the moderator heat exchangers.
The primary fuel coolant (also heavy water) is pressurised but flows through tubes containing the fuel which run horizontally through the calandria. These tubes are a lot easier to fabricate than the thick walled pressure vessels used in Pressurised water Reactors which contain both the fuel and light water which acts as a moderator and coolant. Dabbler (talk) 14:35, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pressurized or not? 

message: In this sentence: "The deal for the reactor had not been opened to competition, and it was later relieved that a $20 million payment had been made to an "agent" to sell the system. Construction started in 1977 and commercial operation began in April 1983."
"relieved" is not the appropriate word.  Even if there is a meaning of relieved that applies here, I have not found it, so it must be a rather obscure meaning.  Better would be a word like "believed" or "discovered".  As I don't know which is the case, I'm thinking of waiting until someone else comes forward who knows the facts.  
Quite possibly, next time I think of it, I'll come back and, if no one has resolved the problem,  I'll choose a new word, possibly at random lacking knowledge. ;-) Or maybe I'll try to indicate ambiguity today, with something like "[ believed | discovered (uncertain of the facts) ]" 
Hmm, maybe that is better, unless it prompts someone to delete the sentence. Rhkramer (talk) 12:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should have been "revealed" and I have altered it to suit and put the comment into hiding! Dabbler (talk) 13:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: To no end, as it turns out. Our local CANDU apologist has removed the entire statement as being "off topic". I believe a separate section on this might be in order. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Relieved"?  Should be some other word: "believed", "discovered" 

message: I think the economic performance section should be updated to include information on some of the non-Ontario units. This link from the Canadian Nuclear Association include some information on the capacity factors. It might also be good to include reference to the capacity factors or cost of competing designs to give context?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hologram0110 (talk • contribs) 04:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economic performance 

message: "A CANDU power plant generates power in the same fashion as a fossil fuel power station; heat is generated by "burning" fuel, and that heat is used to drive a steam turbine, normally located in a separate "power hall". A typical coal-fired plant burns coal and air and produces mostly carbon dioxide and fly ash, the CANDU burns nuclear fuel in-situ; when the fuel is "burned up" it is removed from the reactor and stored."
That entire bit there can be replaced by a single sentence including a hyperlink:  "CANDU power plants generate power through the same basic design principle at the heart of all nuclear power plants."  This intro is misleading and out of place in an article about a highly specific proprietary power plant design.  It would be appropriate in a general article on nuclear power generation.68.6.76.31 (talk) 08:55, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to favor such introductory material be placed in-situ, it saves considerable click-itis. If we do as you suggest, then the reader would have to click out to some other article, locate the description in question, read it, and then page back. I think a single para as it is helps rather than hinders. Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Design:  Is This Information Necessary or Relevant? 

message: "mainly from external factors"
This claim requires a reference.
It is followed by a claim concerning success in China with no reference to an reputable auditor or international organization but instead public relations material from "Canteach", a PDF file at http://canteach.candu.org/library/20031701.pdf
I am not an opponent of nuclear power, but this is SNC-Lavalin who is the owner now and an experienced wikipedia editor needs to look at reference 10 and what it means in this context that the prior claim has no reference.
Canadians long tolerated Atomic Energy of Canada exaggerations, but since the Libya-Mexico affair, I believe that fewer Canadians have illusions about the lack of scruples of SNC-Lavalin.
In the past I worked on the world's "best selling" audit software (post-Enron) and I now have some considerable skepticism even of claims by big name auditors (that OEM firm is owned by the owners of Reuters, so we all have a lesson there in having doubts about "references" when these big corporations "speak for themselves", let alone "report" on economic results in China.)
Here is a University of Toronto publication relating to transparency and governance where CANDU is concerned: http://www.utppublishing.com/The-Politics-of-CANDU-Exports.html byDuane Bratt, IPAC Series in Public Management and Governance, University of Toronto Press, Scholarly Publishing Div., 2006, 336 Pages.
The Calgary Herald blog site says of Duane Bratt: 
"
Duane Bratt is Chair and Professor in the Department of Policy Studies at Mount Royal University (Calgary, Alberta). He was educated at the Universities of Windsor (BA 1991, MA 1992) and Alberta (Ph.D 1996). He teaches in the area of international relations and Canadian public policy, with specialty in the sub-field of Canadian foreign policy. His primary research interest is in the area of Canadian nuclear policy
"  http://blogs.calgaryherald.com/author/duanetbratt/
The book is suggested reading in the Bennett Lewis article.
The IPAC site on GRC is http://ipac.ca/PMandG
For a glimpse of the challenge of NPOV for Canadian commentators on this subject, I suggest the OCI website https://oci-aic.org/  where it may not be obvious to a visitor that this is the Organization of CANDU Industry suppliers (the "C" is not for Canada) as they prefer to only use the moniker OCI on their web pages and even their "ABOUT OCI" page does not state the origin of the acronym.
Governance at CANDU: the players include an SNC-L internal auditor (Senior V-P, F and A)
   http://www.candu.com/en/home/aboutcandu/governance.aspx
   former Vice President, Finance and Administration at SNC-Lavalin Inc.
   former Director of Finance, Middle East Oil and Gas at SNC-Lavalin Inc.
   former Internal Auditor at SNC-Lavalin Inc.
G. Robert Shiplett 01:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It strikes me that there's two different items here - one is about a specific reference / potential weasel wording, and CANteach can't be considered neutral but it looks like the link is dead anyway. Not sure I follow what's wrong with the reference on political interference but the wording you highlighted of "mainly from external factors" does seem to have a ring of opinion to it. Respectfully, the rest of this section seems unfocused in its criticism which makes it hard to respond to; however, the original/first point seems clear and fair enough. 99.239.118.172 (talk) 04:56, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV and missing reference 

message: this article needs to be cleand up.  so many typos and run ons etc.  I kept rereading it.  does anyone agree?Longinus876 (talk) 17:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  readability 

message: I removed the following paragraph from the Basic design and operation section:
"A CANDU power plant generates power in the same fashion as a fossil-fuel power station: heat is generated by "burning" fuel, and that heat is used to drive a steam turbine, normally located in a separate "power hall". Whereas a typical coal-fired plant burns coal and air and produces mostly carbon dioxide and fly ash, the CANDU consumes nuclear fuel in-situ; when the fuel is "burned up" it is removed from the reactor and stored as high level radioactive waste."
There are a couple of issues here...
For one, nothing here is specific to a CANDU reactor - as opposed to any old solid uranium-fueled, once-through cycle reactor.  People reading this article will want to know specifics about *this* reactor type - what makes it unique - e.g. it can run on un-enriched uranium, uses heavy water, etc.
There's also something of a POV issue here and heavy use of non-sequitors.  Yes, nuclear reactors use heat to make steam to turn turbines - the same as any thermal power plant - be it fossil or biomass or solar-thermal.  Why is this being featured in the intro to the design section for the *CANDU* article?
It seems there's an agenda to pain nuclear (including CANDU) with the same brush as fossil fuels.  There are some (at least superficial) similarities - both involve fuel being consumed and some amount of waste products.  There are also some big differences though - e.g. nuclear using about a million times less fuel for the same amount of energy.  In any event though - not a debate to be sorted out in this section of this article.  -Helvetica (talk) 11:36, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basic design and operation section 

message: I'm confused. The article says there are 29 reactors but then lists them by country and there are 31 reactors on the list. Can someone explain or correct this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.134.242.106 (talk) 13:38, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of CANDU's 

message: The CANDU_reactor#Nuclear_nonproliferation section of the article makes the unsourced claim that, 
"There is a common misconception that plutonium for India's first nuclear detonation, Operation Smiling Buddha in 1974, was produced in a CIRUS design. In fact, it was produced in the safeguarded indigenously built PHWR reactor."
This is contradicted by sourced claims on the articles Heavy_water_reactor#Nuclear_proliferation and CIRUS_reactor. I'd suggest that it be removed and replaced with a statement congruent with the other articles and their sources. If there is legitimate controversy as to whether CANDU/CIRUS reactors were used to make the weapons material, then a reference for that should be cited. 202.155.85.18 (talk) 02:43, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nuclear nonproliferation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on CANDU reactor. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cns-snc.ca/history/DouglasPoint/DouglasPoint.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cns-snc.ca/history/DouglasPoint/AECL-2400/AECL2400-1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110827032951/http://www.energyquest4nanticoke.ca/intent.htm to http://www.energyquest4nanticoke.ca/intent.htm
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) 10:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article needs some updates to reflect the name change of the company. The company formerly called SNC Lavalin is now called AtkinsRéalis. I am not sure the best/simplest way to show that change here. 70.178.193.113 (talk) 10:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: What was the name of the company at the time it worked on CANDU?  Articles are about their subjects; the whole weary history of corporate name-changes can be accessed by a mouse click and is not relevant to this article. --Wtshymanski (talk) 23:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  SNC Lavalin now AtkinsRéalis