Talk:EPR (nuclear reactor)

message: I could really use a peer edit on my contribution.  The sources seemed to be contradictory at first, but I think what I'm discovering is that all of these three:
*Stop-EPR
*Get Out Of Nuclear
*Sortir du nucléaire
Are all names for the same organization (covered in another section), even though the say 3 clearly different things.
:I believe this all comes down to the Sortir du nucléaire organization.  Can anyone out there confirm or deny this?  Anyone? theanphibian 06:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added another event, but I also want to note that Nicolas Sarkozy JUST got elected to office, so if we could get some links and notes on his policy regarding nuclear, I think it would be a good addition. theanphibian 04:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The policy is very clear, as stated by new Minister of Ecology Juppé. Example of source "Nuclear is not the only solution [to global warming], but there is no solution without nuclear."  Flamanville 3 will be built and you can expect announcement of a few more units in France in the coming years (Tricastin ?).Hektor 05:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In a way, it is being built right now.  I hope my last edit clarified a few things regarding this. -Theanphibian (talk • contribs) 22:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rallies

message: I want to see more of the politics since this has gotten significant news attention recently.  Ségolène Royal is a figure who has made a strong policy statement for new nuclear plants, and was even featured on CBS 60 minutes: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2661956n
Which I imagine has to do with the new construction and rallies.  The current material in this article relating to politics is very narrow, with so much more than should be in there.  We'll see. theanphibian 05:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added another event, but I also want to note that Nicolas Sarkozy JUST got elected to office, so if we could get some links and notes on his policy regarding nuclear, I think it would be a good addition. theanphibian 04:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The policy is very clear, as stated by new Minister of Ecology Juppé. Example of source "Nuclear is not the only solution [to global warming], but there is no solution without nuclear."  Flamanville 3 will be built and you can expect announcement of a few more units in France in the coming years (Tricastin ?).Hektor 05:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In a way, it is being built right now.  I hope my last edit clarified a few things regarding this. -Theanphibian (talk • contribs) 22:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Politics

message: The following phrases were removed for the following reasons:
For some environmental groups like the Regional Collective of Normandy and West of France "EPR, no thanks, neither somewhere else, nor here! " and the french Network Sortir du nucléaire, EPR is a wrong decision from those aspects :
* Energy : France doesn’t need a big centralized electrical production capacity for the next decades. Nuclear energy represents only 15% of French final energy consumption and 3% of the world’s. It is not a solution to reverse climate change either.
* Economy : this extremely expensive project (billions of euros) will delay the necessary redeployment of the French industry without addressing its difficulties.
* Social aspects : the increasing demand for renewable energy will help create many more jobs (up to 5 times more) and will be more adapted to the future than nuclear energy. For the same investment, a wind power program would lead to twice the amount of electricity production, for instance.
* Environment : EPR is not providing any response to the safety, security and waste management problems which will burden future generations.
Those groups have lauched an International Call to NGOs, groups, personalities, trade unions and political parties against the 'new' generation of nuclear European Pressurized Reactor (EPR) at Flamanville  : No to nuclear reactor EPR , Yes to energy alternatives.
#The first line is heavily POV.
#No cite, let alone a reliable one, is given stating what France does or doesn't need.
#No authoritative cite is given stating that nuclear is not a solution to climate change - since it doesn't emit Greenhouse Gases, it very well may be a viable solution.
#"extremely" and "necessary" are extremely POV.  Who says French industry needs to be redeployed?  Provide a cite.
#As to rising demand for renewable energy, state who determined that.
#EPR is a reactor, not a waste site, so I don't see how this comment fits.  According to a major Time Magazine article, France has a successful and popular waste disposal policy. 
#The last paragraph is extremely POV.  This is an encyclopedia, not a blog.
#The nuclear power controversy is discussed in the Nuclear Power article, so the above belongs there.
Simesa 00:27, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Simesa, as a former nuclear engineer now retraining into accounting, your are also not neutral when you say that nuclear may be a viable solution to climate change. I think nuclear is not a solution to climate change, because electrical power supply emit just 20% of geenhouse gases in the world! the rest, 80% are emitted by cars, trucks, planes... which cannot all be runned by nuclear reactors --Enr-v 18:03, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Our opinions are not included in Wikipedia.  Nuclear reactors may produce hydrogen for vehicle fuel - the IFR to be built in the Idaho National Laboratory is to do just that - so you may well be wrong that nuclear is not a viable solution.  Please try to back assertions with quality cites. Simesa 00:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  revert of Critisism (sic) 

message: The following phrases were removed for the following reasons:
A first EPR reactor in France should be built in Flamanville in the Manche  département and be operational in 2012.
There is a bidding in process to build four new EPR reactors to China, and an intent to market EPRs in the US with Constellation Energy.
#The first line is heavily POV.
#The paragraph is extremely POV. 
#French population is opposited to EPR project : see 
--Enr-v 18:03, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't write those sentences, but I restored them with cites.  I can see how the first paragraph was misphrased, but the second is a simple statement of two facts - and your own cite confirms one of them.  As to whether the majority of the French population is opposed to nuclear, we certainly can't tell that from your cite. Simesa 00:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *This is outdated, 2006 is over and what are the results ?Hektor 07:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The French population is overwhelmingly pro-nuclear, every poll shows this. There has been some opposition to the Flamanville build, but there is no evidence that there is majority opposition to it.
216.203.27.99 11:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  revert of EPR building plans

message: Is the name really spelled with a 'z'? Using American English for a European project is rather odd. What is the official spelling? DirkvdM 09:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly, that is the spelling Areva use. So I guess we have to go along with it. Rwendland 11:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

text: From American and British English spelling differences#Greek-derived spellings: The -ize spelling is often incorrectly seen as an Americanism in Britain. However, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) recommends -ize and notes that the -ise spelling is from French: "The suffix...whatever the element to which it is added, is in its origin the Greek -ιζειν, Latin -izāre; and, as the pronunciation is also with z, there is no reason why in English the special French spelling should be followed, in opposition to that which is at once etymological and phonetic." The OED lists the -ise form separately, as an alternative.--46.223.21.230 (talk) 21:01, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 

message: Just as AREVA is properly expressed in all-caps, EPRTM is properly expressed with a little superscript TM, for trademark.http://www.areva.com/servlet/cp_30_01_09_epr-c-PressRelease-cid-1233262804383-en.html.Ratherthanlater (talk) 22:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: EPR<sup>TM</sup> an AREVA Trademark

message: I believe AmerenUE has put their reactor plans on hold due to the state of Missouri not allowing pre-construction rate increases.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/business/energy-environment/29nuke.html?_r=2  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.242.6.118 (talk) 00:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  AmerenUE plans put on hold 

message: The contruction site at Taishan has seen activity for months and the working at the site was officialy announced at the 21st dec 2009.
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90883/6849430.html
This might be a good time to update the article to include Taishan 1+2 in the same manner as Olkiluoto 3 and Flamanville 3.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.63.19.26 (talk) 19:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Construction started i China 

message: Now that Areva has been using EPR (tm) as the name for this reactor for many years, since 2005 or earlier, I propose we rename this article "EPR (nuclear reactor)". Areva has entirely purged names like "European Pressurized Reactor" from use, eg see . This seems broadly in line with the views in the previous move discussion. Rwendland (talk) 11:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As there are no adverse comments, I will move to "EPR (nuclear reactor)" tomorrow, unless anyone objects beforehand. Rwendland (talk) 11:03, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to "EPR (nuclear reactor)" proposal 

message: Right now the "future plans" is a mix of confirmed construction plans(UK), Blocked construction plans(US) and MoUs resulting in no orders(UAE), and MoUs that has resultet in firm contracts(India)
We need to find a way to filter out MoUs or include the all. There is Finland, Poland and so on who has MoUs.
I Suggest moving the UAE-case to its own section or simply removing it. It is not future. The remaining cases I would list by relevance. The most firm plans first and loose MoUs last.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llaarrss (talk • contribs) 18:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting up the "future plants" 

message: John Quiggin edited my elaboration on the Italian referendum. I believe this is cutting away valuable information. Im all for better information. So how do we keep the information but remove the "speculative" part?
Personally I dont se it as speculative. Berlusconi himself recommended "not to vote", just as any italian law maker does when they want to avoid the risk of oosing a referendum. By just leaving the result of 94% in favour of banning nuclear power is misleading and can misinterpreted as 94% of all Italians are against nuclear power. Which is clearly NOT the case! I suggest reverting John Quiggins editions.Llaarrss (talk) 17:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I support what JQ has done. I couldn't believe it when you introduced material about "sex with an underage prostitute" and other unsourced info that had no relevance to this article. Please keep your future contributions on topic and make sure they are supported by WP:RS. Thanks. Johnfos (talk) 21:23, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italy 

message: Article claims : "On November 4th 2009, the nuclear power regulatory authorities in France, Finland and the United Kingdom issued a joint letter to Areva, citing serious problems with the EPR's digital Instrumentation and Control systems (I&C)" but there is no indication of how Areva responded. What can we say ? - Rod57 (talk) 02:59, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What response to safety concerns 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on EPR (nuclear reactor). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927094543/http://www.ol3.areva-np.com/project/chrono.htm to http://www.ol3.areva-np.com/project/chrono.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061018024548/http://www.de.framatome-anp.com/anp/e/foa/anp/press/anp054.htm to http://www.de.framatome-anp.com/anp/e/foa/anp/press/anp054.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070929135733/http://construction.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0249-218321_ITM_platts to http://construction.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0249-218321_ITM_platts
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on EPR (nuclear 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.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2007/07/30/afx3965097.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on EPR (nuclear 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.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2006/12/05/afx3228309.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111004210130/http://www.mineweb.co.za/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page72103?oid=107035&sn=Detail&pid=102055 to http://www.mineweb.co.za/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page72103?oid=107035&sn=Detail&pid=102055
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100907020504/http://www.businessweek.com:80/news/2010-06-24/areva-s-overruns-at-finnish-nuclear-plant-approach-initial-cost.html to http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-24/areva-s-overruns-at-finnish-nuclear-plant-approach-initial-cost.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927191242/http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectionCode=132&storyCode=2043436 to http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectionCode=132&storyCode=2043436
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929005415/http://www.eveningecho.ie/news/bstory.asp?j=13919232&p=y39y9z78&n=13919320 to http://www.eveningecho.ie/news/bstory.asp?j=13919232&p=y39y9z78&n=13919320
*Added  tag to http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2009/apr/23/amerenue-pulls-plug-callaway-2/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:11, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on EPR (nuclear 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521234633/http://www.areva.com/mediatheque/liblocal/docs/pdf/energies/pdf-field-report-3-va.pdf to http://www.areva.com/mediatheque/liblocal/docs/pdf/energies/pdf-field-report-3-va.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110613091002/http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectionCode=132&storyCode=2048041 to http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectionCode=132&storyCode=2048041
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620074942/http://www.iaea.org/cgi-bin/db.page.pl/pris.powrea.htm?country=CN to http://www.iaea.org/cgi-bin/db.page.pl/pris.powrea.htm?country=CN
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) 17:50, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: French newspaper Le Monde made a nice info-graphic  about the evolution of the evolution cost of the cost of the French EPR plant in Flamanville. The last update is € 19.1 billion and an expected completion date of 2025. I tried to put this info in the article but it was quickly edited out. warpozio (talk) 11:03, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cost Flamanville