Koeberg Power Station won't run at full capacity for the foreseeable future

[Daniel Puchert]

South Africa's nuclear power plant lands 20-year extension — but expect more outages

The National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) recently granted Koeberg's Unit 1 generator a licence to continue operating for the next 20 years, but the power station's two units will seldom run together for the foreseeable future.

Eskom is currently conducting the same maintenance on Koeberg's Unit 2 generator for a similar operating licence extension, the major component of which is the replacement of its steam generator.

 

[Lupus]

You mean like normal? As they need to refuel and do maintenance every 400 days on each unit.

 

[Grubscrew]

Western Cape, valuable real estate occupied by a bunch of rocks and a nuclear power station that is iffy. We be havin it...

 

[Virex]

Koeberg Kissing Full Capacity Goodbye?

 

[wingnut771]

Isn't Koeberg built on a fault line?

 

[wingnut771]

You mean like normal? As they need to refuel and do maintenance every 400 days on each unit.

Myles thinks the refuelling takes 200 days.

I might have missed it but the article doesn't even mention that unit 1 upgrades are not fully complete yet and have to be taken down again after unit 2 is finished in September. After that, both units should run at the same time.

 

[Lupus]

Myles thinks the refuelling takes 200 days.

I might have missed it but the article doesn't even mention that unit 1 upgrades are not fully complete yet and have to be taken down again after unit 2 is finished in September. After that, both units should run at the same time.

Only saw one mention of that, haven't seen that since

 

[wingnut771]

Only saw one mention of that, haven't seen that since

Me too.

 

[Mirai]

As long as it doesn't go full Fukushima, it can do what it wants.

 

[Lupus]

As long as it doesn't go full Fukushima, it can do what it wants.

Gonna be pretty hard for that, you'd need an earthquake, tsunami and a problem with cooling

 

[Mirai]

Gonna be pretty hard for that, you'd need an earthquake, tsunami and a problem with cooling

I'd settle for even a 1/10th of Fukushima not occurring. Apparently the main containment unit may have cracks or some such.

 

[Lupus]

I'd settle for even a 1/10th of Fukushima not occurring. Apparently the main containment unit may have cracks or some such.

Ooook cause you're getting Fukushima now?

 

[Mirai]

Ooook cause you're getting Fukushima now?

Cos there is controversy over the safety of Koeberg. Check some articles.

 

[Lupus]

Cos there is controversy over the safety of Koeberg. Check some articles.

From anti nuclear activists.

 

[wingnut771]

Ooook cause you're getting Fukushima now?

Koeberg is on a fault line. Did you just ignore that fact? Not quite the same as the pumps failing in Fukushima but what happens when the core cracks open after an earthquake?

 

[Lupus]

Koeberg is on a fault line. Did you just ignore that fact? Not quite the same as the pumps failing in Fukushima but what happens when the core cracks open after an earthquake?

It'll have to be a big one, cause koeberg can handle one up to 7, the largest they've had was 6.3 like 200 years ago

 

[wingnut771]

It'll have to be a big one, cause koeberg can handle one up to 7, the largest they've had was 6.3 like 200 years ago

Ok got it, its just a matter of time then.

 

[Magnum]

Isn't Koeberg built on a fault line?

an Ancient fault line that was completely welded together by molten volcanic rock. In other words that is rock solid now.

 

[wingnut771]

an Ancient fault line that was completely welded together by molten volcanic rock. In other words that is rock solid now.

So building code in cape town doesn’t factor in earthquakes?

 

[Mirai]

From anti nuclear activists.

Yes, let's brush it all off while the guys who gave us >10 years of loadshedding tell us it's not necessary to maintain French safety standards because 'we know better'.