Talk:Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As I found it, the article was barely comprehensible. I decided to make only the most superficial changes, and to leave it to a later author to tell the full story properly. Simesa 01:45, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Neutrality

This subject had a great deal of negative attitudes towards it in the early 1980s. Please don't allow that attitude to produce yet another unusable Wikipedia article like this one. The language and one-sided view of this article must be fixed. --KJRehberg 19:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. — Omegatron 23:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Agreed again. Note some articles cited seem to be written by the nuclear industry. There must be other sources. — User:WayneH 05:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.148.26.22 (talk)

[edit] Plagiarism

The Grimston and Fagin articles have several identical passages, and many other similarities. Of course Newsday doesn't give a date, so I'm not sure when that article was written. This would seem to suggest a date before October 2004 for the Newsday article. Regardless of who copied whom, we can't copy either. — Omegatron 03:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, what a waste of money this plant was. Chalk another victory up for the "environmentalists" who seem hell bent on forcing us to derive all of our power from coal. These same idiots are now the ones probably complaining about global warming...130.71.96.19 19:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LIPA website

Thanks for the links. I posted the wind turbines and am working on digesting the surcharge links. Americasroof (talk) 03:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Two 50 kW wind power plants = 100 kW total peak. If run at maximum power constantly (which never happens), this would be 876,000 kilowatt-hours per year. The article says up to 200,000 kWh per year, so the capacity factor is expected to be around 23%. Assuming a conservative 60% capacity factor for the nuclear plant, (chart of Millstone 1 here) this means the actual energy output by the wind turbines is less than 1/20,000th. [1] — Omegatron 01:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wading River vs. East Shoreham Location

A constant attempt is being made to say the reactor was in Wading River. Here's this about that. The reactor was totally within the town of Brookhaven. Wading River immediately across the Wading River (actually an estuary) from the reactor is in Riverhead town. Shoreham and Wading River are in the same school district. Neither community is incorporated and so its boundaries are not "legal" but rather the way census best guesses the area. All articles about the reactor refer to Shoreham and not Wading River. This is a very important distinction because the reactor was officially Brookhaven's problem and not Riverhead's. Americasroof (talk) 03:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)