Energy giant pledges consultation over new £100m power plant (From This is Hampshire)

Fawley's boiler house contains 4 independent boilers, and I doubt if all four have operated together in the last 20 years. Perhaps Helius could do a feasibility study into converting or repacing two out of four furnaces for woodchip (sorry "biomass") fuel. The generators don't care how the steam is generated so it makes no impact on the powerhouse turbines so long as the boiler pressures are identical. Two companies operating two "virtual" power stations but sharing common infrastructure such as generators, transformers and flue gas processing seems like a deal that benefits everybody especially certain residents of Freemantle!

I can't remember any time when more than 2 boilers had been used at the same time let alone 4 Andy.

And yes this would be a much better location to have this CHIP Power Station, also they be sharing the Intake and Outlets. Every thing is all ready there to be used.

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
Fawley's boiler house contains 4 independent boilers, and I doubt if all four have operated together in the last 20 years. Perhaps Helius could do a feasibility study into converting or repacing two out of four furnaces for woodchip (sorry "biomass") fuel. The generators don't care how the steam is generated so it makes no impact on the powerhouse turbines so long as the boiler pressures are identical. Two companies operating two "virtual" power stations but sharing common infrastructure such as generators, transformers and flue gas processing seems like a deal that benefits everybody especially certain residents of Freemantle!

No because biomass isn't sustainable and it's green credentials are dubious to say the least... whilst vs oil it may seem like a solution there is no way it could produce enough power.....

despite what you think Andy I have concerns wherever a Biomass power station is put near residential homes and whether it can be sustained, bearing in mind that after 10 years they can 'burn' anything... I imagine to sustain their £18 per share Helius will not be able to exploit the Fawley site it's owners wouldn't be willing to just hand it over...... there's big profit in all these methods which the government are throwing money at without a second thought... the whole thing needs looking at.... a wind farm may be viable in Fawley becasue of where it's located, not that i@m claiming that wind power can produce anything like what output that they imagine they need.....

southy wrote:
I can't remember any time when more than 2 boilers had been used at the same time let alone 4 Andy. And yes this would be a much better location to have this CHIP Power Station, also they be sharing the Intake and Outlets. Every thing is all ready there to be used.

Fawley was commissioned in 1971. After trials it cranked out 2000MW of power from its four units. Each unit had a GTG as a back up. 1995 saw 2 units mothballed. Currently, it only generates at peak demand. Fuel costs dictates use. Did you used to work there Southy?

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
I can't remember any time when more than 2 boilers had been used at the same time let alone 4 Andy. And yes this would be a much better location to have this CHIP Power Station, also they be sharing the Intake and Outlets. Every thing is all ready there to be used.

Fawley was commissioned in 1971. After trials it cranked out 2000MW of power from its four units. Each unit had a GTG as a back up. 1995 saw 2 units mothballed. Currently, it only generates at peak demand. Fuel costs dictates use. Did you used to work there Southy?

I have work in the place here and there. On maintence turnrounds.
Makes you wonder if we was so short of power why have then not been running this place all the time.

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
Fawley's boiler house contains 4 independent boilers, and I doubt if all four have operated together in the last 20 years. Perhaps Helius could do a feasibility study into converting or repacing two out of four furnaces for woodchip (sorry "biomass") fuel. The generators don't care how the steam is generated so it makes no impact on the powerhouse turbines so long as the boiler pressures are identical. Two companies operating two "virtual" power stations but sharing common infrastructure such as generators, transformers and flue gas processing seems like a deal that benefits everybody especially certain residents of Freemantle!

No because biomass isn't sustainable and it's green credentials are dubious to say the least... whilst vs oil it may seem like a solution there is no way it could produce enough power.....

despite what you think Andy I have concerns wherever a Biomass power station is put near residential homes and whether it can be sustained, bearing in mind that after 10 years they can 'burn' anything... I imagine to sustain their £18 per share Helius will not be able to exploit the Fawley site it's owners wouldn't be willing to just hand it over...... there's big profit in all these methods which the government are throwing money at without a second thought... the whole thing needs looking at.... a wind farm may be viable in Fawley becasue of where it's located, not that i@m claiming that wind power can produce anything like what output that they imagine they need.....

There's a company that would love a Bio mass plant next to a railway as they could transport the wood chip by rail making the Bio-mass generator more green.I would have thought you & the waterside brigade would be definitely opposing this plant?What are they doing with the gasses from the burning of oil?Surely burning oil is more harmful to the environment than a sustainable wood chip burning plant with the wood taken from sustainable forests?Surely the No Campaign can't quote air quality & the Environmental effects but then think it's okay to have an oil generator belching fumes into the sky can it?your arguments against the bio-mass generator are looking thinner & thinner soon people won't believe a word you say So please talk to Helius & get the best deal for you & the peoples of Millbrook & Freemantle

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
I can't remember any time when more than 2 boilers had been used at the same time let alone 4 Andy. And yes this would be a much better location to have this CHIP Power Station, also they be sharing the Intake and Outlets. Every thing is all ready there to be used.

Fawley was commissioned in 1971. After trials it cranked out 2000MW of power from its four units. Each unit had a GTG as a back up. 1995 saw 2 units mothballed. Currently, it only generates at peak demand. Fuel costs dictates use. Did you used to work there Southy?

I have work in the place here and there. On maintence turnrounds.
Makes you wonder if we was so short of power why have then not been running this place all the time.

Don't you remember we employed all those miners to dig British coal to power our stations & we needed fawley as a back-up? what a pity through Scargills actions British coal became to dear & Gas was used.All those mines shut on the whim of a Union leader does that sound familiar?

Freemantle Girl There is nothing wrong with Biomass as a fuel compared with other combustible fuels, as I have already pointed out to you with referenced evedence which for some reason you seem to forget as soon as you are told, and if you insist on trying to inform yourself by googling websites using biassed search terms like "No to Biomasss" it is not wonder you always draw the wrong conclusion from every statement made about it. Even an O level student can point out some of the obvious advantages of turning a waste item into energy especially one that is cheaper and less pollution producing than fossil equivalents. I have previously posted here a clear rebuttal of the rubbish figures manipulated by those who understand nothing of the industry. When you start making spurious and fallacious claims that there is not enough biomass to build any new plant you will lose the few friends and supporters you already have.

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
Freemantle Girl There is nothing wrong with Biomass as a fuel compared with other combustible fuels, as I have already pointed out to you with referenced evedence which for some reason you seem to forget as soon as you are told, and if you insist on trying to inform yourself by googling websites using biassed search terms like "No to Biomasss" it is not wonder you always draw the wrong conclusion from every statement made about it. Even an O level student can point out some of the obvious advantages of turning a waste item into energy especially one that is cheaper and less pollution producing than fossil equivalents. I have previously posted here a clear rebuttal of the rubbish figures manipulated by those who understand nothing of the industry. When you start making spurious and fallacious claims that there is not enough biomass to build any new plant you will lose the few friends and supporters you already have.

Andy, I agree with your statement. Whilst I support alternative energy generation, there is still a reliance on fossil fuels. I suspect that the generation source is not the issue more than the location. Chasing wind and solar is not currently an option to totally back out fossil fuel. As a supplement I support, providing it does not hit the pockets of consumers. Despite the Japanese incident, I still think we ought to pursue the nuclear option. The French can manage it so with improved technology, so can we. I get annoyed when people dismiss fossil fuels etc. and still expect to have quality of life. I am convinced there will be an answer providing governments keep their noses out. This world will move on and sustain sensible development of energy generation. The big problem is environmental activists who do not understand the whole picture. They are focused on whales and polar bears (which are obviously important but not the only factor in the world's energy dilemma)

forest hump wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
Freemantle Girl There is nothing wrong with Biomass as a fuel compared with other combustible fuels, as I have already pointed out to you with referenced evedence which for some reason you seem to forget as soon as you are told, and if you insist on trying to inform yourself by googling websites using biassed search terms like "No to Biomasss" it is not wonder you always draw the wrong conclusion from every statement made about it. Even an O level student can point out some of the obvious advantages of turning a waste item into energy especially one that is cheaper and less pollution producing than fossil equivalents. I have previously posted here a clear rebuttal of the rubbish figures manipulated by those who understand nothing of the industry. When you start making spurious and fallacious claims that there is not enough biomass to build any new plant you will lose the few friends and supporters you already have.

Andy, I agree with your statement. Whilst I support alternative energy generation, there is still a reliance on fossil fuels. I suspect that the generation source is not the issue more than the location. Chasing wind and solar is not currently an option to totally back out fossil fuel. As a supplement I support, providing it does not hit the pockets of consumers. Despite the Japanese incident, I still think we ought to pursue the nuclear option. The French can manage it so with improved technology, so can we. I get annoyed when people dismiss fossil fuels etc. and still expect to have quality of life. I am convinced there will be an answer providing governments keep their noses out. This world will move on and sustain sensible development of energy generation. The big problem is environmental activists who do not understand the whole picture. They are focused on whales and polar bears (which are obviously important but not the only factor in the world's energy dilemma)

The bit about Nuclear I can't agree with look at Germany's decision! A young sapling eats more carbon than is produced by burning wood or is eaten by an older tree so the scientists say! if there's a market for wood how many landowners would start new woodlands?remember when the fuel & building materials were wood how many new forests were planted? if those people think there's a quick profit there will be no shortage of wood or chip.so the bio mass would easily have an ample source of fuel this would also be good for wildlife & the environment yet Oil is running out so wake up we need alternatives & I think this new oil generator is ill conceived.with the new technologies associated with coal if built in the right place you can bury carbon but woodchip burners by planting new are in effect not putting carbon into the atmosphere would you people who know tell me if I'm on the right track thank You

loosehead wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
Fawley's boiler house contains 4 independent boilers, and I doubt if all four have operated together in the last 20 years. Perhaps Helius could do a feasibility study into converting or repacing two out of four furnaces for woodchip (sorry "biomass") fuel. The generators don't care how the steam is generated so it makes no impact on the powerhouse turbines so long as the boiler pressures are identical. Two companies operating two "virtual" power stations but sharing common infrastructure such as generators, transformers and flue gas processing seems like a deal that benefits everybody especially certain residents of Freemantle!

No because biomass isn't sustainable and it's green credentials are dubious to say the least... whilst vs oil it may seem like a solution there is no way it could produce enough power.....

despite what you think Andy I have concerns wherever a Biomass power station is put near residential homes and whether it can be sustained, bearing in mind that after 10 years they can 'burn' anything... I imagine to sustain their £18 per share Helius will not be able to exploit the Fawley site it's owners wouldn't be willing to just hand it over...... there's big profit in all these methods which the government are throwing money at without a second thought... the whole thing needs looking at.... a wind farm may be viable in Fawley becasue of where it's located, not that i@m claiming that wind power can produce anything like what output that they imagine they need.....

There's a company that would love a Bio mass plant next to a railway as they could transport the wood chip by rail making the Bio-mass generator more green.I would have thought you & the waterside brigade would be definitely opposing this plant?What are they doing with the gasses from the burning of oil?Surely burning oil is more harmful to the environment than a sustainable wood chip burning plant with the wood taken from sustainable forests?Surely the No Campaign can't quote air quality & the Environmental effects but then think it's okay to have an oil generator belching fumes into the sky can it?your arguments against the bio-mass generator are looking thinner & thinner soon people won't believe a word you say So please talk to Helius & get the best deal for you & the peoples of Millbrook & Freemantle

The burning of Oil or wood chip is the same, there is only one way to reduce CO2 and that is the Charcoal the wood and bury it deep under ground, close to natures way.
When you cut a tree down or the plant drop its leaves or bark and twigs ect, the moment that happens it is releasing the trap CO2 back into the air, has those very clever Sciencist in Kent have pointed out, They also pointed out most CO2 gas ends up on the sea bed being lock up in the layers of silt

loosehead wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
I can't remember any time when more than 2 boilers had been used at the same time let alone 4 Andy. And yes this would be a much better location to have this CHIP Power Station, also they be sharing the Intake and Outlets. Every thing is all ready there to be used.

Fawley was commissioned in 1971. After trials it cranked out 2000MW of power from its four units. Each unit had a GTG as a back up. 1995 saw 2 units mothballed. Currently, it only generates at peak demand. Fuel costs dictates use. Did you used to work there Southy?

I have work in the place here and there. On maintence turnrounds.
Makes you wonder if we was so short of power why have then not been running this place all the time.

Don't you remember we employed all those miners to dig British coal to power our stations & we needed fawley as a back-up? what a pity through Scargills actions British coal became to dear & Gas was used.All those mines shut on the whim of a Union leader does that sound familiar?

British Coal is a lot cheaper than the German and Polish coal, that Thatcher imported, and it was all down to Thatcher not Scargill, Thatcher wanted the Capitalist to take over to make money for them selfs and not let the state have the money.
Fawley was not design to be a back up, it was designed to take over from Marchwood, first though about when they started to build Esso Oil Refinery back in the 50's, to burn the waste oil and gas that the refinery would produce, that would not be used.
But things change, one of those changes was bought on by a german guy , who relise that you could turn this gas into a liquid and put it in steel bottles (LPG) using Jacques Cousteau air regulator for Diving to control the gas flow in much smaller containers, than the big containers that was needed before, this happen about the same time as cornish guy returning back from the states after working for the oil companys there, and he started up that very well known company Calor Gas.

Some thing else for you to think about Loosehead, The Green issue and man made glowable warming is a farse, if it was not a farse they would be having Deposits on all Recycling goods like Glass bottle and jars, all recycling plastics containers ect ect.

LPG was introduced by Dr Walter Snelling in 1910. Arthur Scargill was a menace and was the downfall of the British coal mining industry. Wrong again mr troll.

southy wrote:
Some thing else for you to think about Loosehead, The Green issue and man made glowable warming is a farse, if it was not a farse they would be having Deposits on all Recycling goods like Glass bottle and jars, all recycling plastics containers ect ect.

you are right about AGW being a farce. In the 70's we were all being scaremongered about the next ice age. How things can change in a few years when climate has been around for many billions of years. Governments like nothing more than scaring the community into paying more taxes. Sack them all and let honest, knowledgeable people run the country. Unfortunately, greed prevails. Al Gore is the biggest proponent of this with his 35K sq ft house, spouting on about saving the planet. The world's biggest hypocrite.

southy wrote:

loosehead wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
I can't remember any time when more than 2 boilers had been used at the same time let alone 4 Andy. And yes this would be a much better location to have this CHIP Power Station, also they be sharing the Intake and Outlets. Every thing is all ready there to be used.

Fawley was commissioned in 1971. After trials it cranked out 2000MW of power from its four units. Each unit had a GTG as a back up. 1995 saw 2 units mothballed. Currently, it only generates at peak demand. Fuel costs dictates use. Did you used to work there Southy?

I have work in the place here and there. On maintence turnrounds.
Makes you wonder if we was so short of power why have then not been running this place all the time.

Don't you remember we employed all those miners to dig British coal to power our stations & we needed fawley as a back-up? what a pity through Scargills actions British coal became to dear & Gas was used.All those mines shut on the whim of a Union leader does that sound familiar?

British Coal is a lot cheaper than the German and Polish coal, that Thatcher imported, and it was all down to Thatcher not Scargill, Thatcher wanted the Capitalist to take over to make money for them selfs and not let the state have the money.
Fawley was not design to be a back up, it was designed to take over from Marchwood, first though about when they started to build Esso Oil Refinery back in the 50's, to burn the waste oil and gas that the refinery would produce, that would not be used.
But things change, one of those changes was bought on by a german guy , who relise that you could turn this gas into a liquid and put it in steel bottles (LPG) using Jacques Cousteau air regulator for Diving to control the gas flow in much smaller containers, than the big containers that was needed before, this happen about the same time as cornish guy returning back from the states after working for the oil companys there, and he started up that very well known company Calor Gas.

Coal mined in the UK was responsible for the acid rain that fell on Scandinavia for decades and it was stopped when coal usage was reduced and clean foreign coal was burned in its place. The Fawley oil refinery was begun in the 40s and it wasn't waste oil that was sent to the Power Station but a product made to the specification laid down by the SEB. The price stopped the use of that eventually. Overall you haven't got a lot right here, have you?

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

loosehead wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote: I can't remember any time when more than 2 boilers had been used at the same time let alone 4 Andy. And yes this would be a much better location to have this CHIP Power Station, also they be sharing the Intake and Outlets. Every thing is all ready there to be used.

Fawley was commissioned in 1971. After trials it cranked out 2000MW of power from its four units. Each unit had a GTG as a back up. 1995 saw 2 units mothballed. Currently, it only generates at peak demand. Fuel costs dictates use. Did you used to work there Southy?

I have work in the place here and there. On maintence turnrounds. Makes you wonder if we was so short of power why have then not been running this place all the time.

Don't you remember we employed all those miners to dig British coal to power our stations & we needed fawley as a back-up? what a pity through Scargills actions British coal became to dear & Gas was used.All those mines shut on the whim of a Union leader does that sound familiar?

British Coal is a lot cheaper than the German and Polish coal, that Thatcher imported, and it was all down to Thatcher not Scargill, Thatcher wanted the Capitalist to take over to make money for them selfs and not let the state have the money. Fawley was not design to be a back up, it was designed to take over from Marchwood, first though about when they started to build Esso Oil Refinery back in the 50's, to burn the waste oil and gas that the refinery would produce, that would not be used. But things change, one of those changes was bought on by a german guy , who relise that you could turn this gas into a liquid and put it in steel bottles (LPG) using Jacques Cousteau air regulator for Diving to control the gas flow in much smaller containers, than the big containers that was needed before, this happen about the same time as cornish guy returning back from the states after working for the oil companys there, and he started up that very well known company Calor Gas.

Coal mined in the UK was responsible for the acid rain that fell on Scandinavia for decades and it was stopped when coal usage was reduced and clean foreign coal was burned in its place. The Fawley oil refinery was begun in the 40s and it wasn't waste oil that was sent to the Power Station but a product made to the specification laid down by the SEB. The price stopped the use of that eventually. Overall you haven't got a lot right here, have you?

Fawley started as AGWI. The Anglo Gulf and West Indies oil company in 1920. It was expanded and started uo in 1951 by the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, in Europe known as ESSO. (pheonetics for Standard Oil) Southy does not get too much right but I salute his resolve.

southy wrote:

loosehead wrote:

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

southy wrote:
I can't remember any time when more than 2 boilers had been used at the same time let alone 4 Andy. And yes this would be a much better location to have this CHIP Power Station, also they be sharing the Intake and Outlets. Every thing is all ready there to be used.

Fawley was commissioned in 1971. After trials it cranked out 2000MW of power from its four units. Each unit had a GTG as a back up. 1995 saw 2 units mothballed. Currently, it only generates at peak demand. Fuel costs dictates use. Did you used to work there Southy?

I have work in the place here and there. On maintence turnrounds.
Makes you wonder if we was so short of power why have then not been running this place all the time.

Don't you remember we employed all those miners to dig British coal to power our stations & we needed fawley as a back-up? what a pity through Scargills actions British coal became to dear & Gas was used.All those mines shut on the whim of a Union leader does that sound familiar?

British Coal is a lot cheaper than the German and Polish coal, that Thatcher imported, and it was all down to Thatcher not Scargill, Thatcher wanted the Capitalist to take over to make money for them selfs and not let the state have the money.
Fawley was not design to be a back up, it was designed to take over from Marchwood, first though about when they started to build Esso Oil Refinery back in the 50's, to burn the waste oil and gas that the refinery would produce, that would not be used.
But things change, one of those changes was bought on by a german guy , who relise that you could turn this gas into a liquid and put it in steel bottles (LPG) using Jacques Cousteau air regulator for Diving to control the gas flow in much smaller containers, than the big containers that was needed before, this happen about the same time as cornish guy returning back from the states after working for the oil companys there, and he started up that very well known company Calor Gas.

Southy British coal wasn't in competition with German coal it was in competition with Australian strip mining coal which/was a darn sight cheaper than our deep mined coal.also you never had the problem of restricted supply due to Scargill calling them out on strike,people like you make me laugh do you not remember the three day weeks? people on three days pay or their factories shutting & going abroad? the damage to our industry was done by the unions before Maggie got into power if you look back at the true history when she beat the unions we started to get more investment from abroad if I'm not wrong Nissan,Toyota & honda opened plants in that time.As for the green issue being a farce what planet are you on? have you not read the latest report by the Australian Government?Carbon is a green house gas which has been stored in coal for millions of years & were releasing it? oil/petrol is bad for our health & the environment if you can prove otherwise do it & take your findings to the environment agency.wood chip burning isn't the total answer to a clean fuel but as long as you replant trees it isn't adding to the problem,nuclear is a big safety risk & it's waste is here for thousands of years so I personally would not want it.Methane gas generators will always have a fuel supply whilst there are Humans but is highly volatile so were left with wind,waves ,tidal & solar but look at the opposition to these we have to have power so something has got to give soon

southy wrote:
Some thing else for you to think about Loosehead, The Green issue and man made glowable warming is a farse, if it was not a farse they would be having Deposits on all Recycling goods like Glass bottle and jars, all recycling plastics containers ect ect.

Why do you think you've got a recycle bin ?

Looshead - why is Nuclear a safety risk any more than a windmill blade hitting me on the head? For decades CND and the idiotic morons in the Green movement - oh yes and Chris Huhne have banged on about the "safety risks" and even when things have gone catastrophically wrong the danger the actual impact has been negligible due to the extremely high safety standard compared to other industries. Even dear old Chernoby - about as incompetenent and insane as it's possible to imagine - killed less people than FLixborough - yet we don;t hear about that any more do we? And in Japan - have you forgotten it was the Tsunami that killed tens of thousands of people - how many did the Nuclear reactor kill? Well let's just say you could have got the death toll on a motorbike. Anti Nuclear campaigners still talk about the "big one" but the "big one" has happened - more than once and you know what? It wasn't that big at all.
Bring on Nuclear - it's clean, it's reliable it's safe. Prove me wrong.

The Wickham Man wrote:
Looshead - why is Nuclear a safety risk any more than a windmill blade hitting me on the head? For decades CND and the idiotic morons in the Green movement - oh yes and Chris Huhne have banged on about the "safety risks" and even when things have gone catastrophically wrong the danger the actual impact has been negligible due to the extremely high safety standard compared to other industries. Even dear old Chernoby - about as incompetenent and insane as it's possible to imagine - killed less people than FLixborough - yet we don;t hear about that any more do we? And in Japan - have you forgotten it was the Tsunami that killed tens of thousands of people - how many did the Nuclear reactor kill? Well let's just say you could have got the death toll on a motorbike. Anti Nuclear campaigners still talk about the "big one" but the "big one" has happened - more than once and you know what? It wasn't that big at all.
Bring on Nuclear - it's clean, it's reliable it's safe. Prove me wrong.

Clean? what about the waste which is radioactive for thousands of years? you know the stuff that goes into drums & at the moment is being stored in caverns ( man-made ) If you want to walk under a wind turbine you take the risk same as walking under a ladder but how much wind waste will take thousands of years to go & is dangerous to all live? I don't think you can compare the two if someone could find away to stop all radioactive waste I would be for it but the Wickham man you must have seen the news & saw that Germanies doing away with all their nuclear power plants if it's safe why?

loosehead wrote:

The Wickham Man wrote: Looshead - why is Nuclear a safety risk any more than a windmill blade hitting me on the head? For decades CND and the idiotic morons in the Green movement - oh yes and Chris Huhne have banged on about the "safety risks" and even when things have gone catastrophically wrong the danger the actual impact has been negligible due to the extremely high safety standard compared to other industries. Even dear old Chernoby - about as incompetenent and insane as it's possible to imagine - killed less people than FLixborough - yet we don;t hear about that any more do we? And in Japan - have you forgotten it was the Tsunami that killed tens of thousands of people - how many did the Nuclear reactor kill? Well let's just say you could have got the death toll on a motorbike. Anti Nuclear campaigners still talk about the "big one" but the "big one" has happened - more than once and you know what? It wasn't that big at all. Bring on Nuclear - it's clean, it's reliable it's safe. Prove me wrong.

Clean? what about the waste which is radioactive for thousands of years? you know the stuff that goes into drums & at the moment is being stored in caverns ( man-made ) If you want to walk under a wind turbine you take the risk same as walking under a ladder but how much wind waste will take thousands of years to go & is dangerous to all live? I don't think you can compare the two if someone could find away to stop all radioactive waste I would be for it but the Wickham man you must have seen the news & saw that Germanies doing away with all their nuclear power plants if it's safe why?

So because the German's are anti Nuclear it's the right answer? How many people are currently being mutated by nucleat waste? Please do not believe what the gutter press publishes

for the record....after reading all the posts above it is clear, none of you have any clue about the power industry, especially the generation front, and even if you did or may have worked in them in the past you should full well know, the market, buisiness and the portfolio of stations. also it is obvoius that everyone has sort throught and takes wikipedia as the bible, an example being fawley did not close two units in 1995, unit 4 seased generation in 1991 with a generater exiter fault followed by unit 2 in 1992 withe generater fire, unit 1 then was mothballed in 1994 leaving unit 3 running alone at peak till 2006 when it was returned to service.
The 1995 you were refering to was when the national grid permently disconnected units 2 and 4 from there substation.

any other questions?

the truth!!! wrote:
for the record....after reading all the posts above it is clear, none of you have any clue about the power industry, especially the generation front, and even if you did or may have worked in them in the past you should full well know, the market, buisiness and the portfolio of stations. also it is obvoius that everyone has sort throught and takes wikipedia as the bible, an example being fawley did not close two units in 1995, unit 4 seased generation in 1991 with a generater exiter fault followed by unit 2 in 1992 withe generater fire, unit 1 then was mothballed in 1994 leaving unit 3 running alone at peak till 2006 when it was returned to service. The 1995 you were refering to was when the national grid permently disconnected units 2 and 4 from there substation. any other questions?

Yes, who won the FA cup in 1962?

or do you only know when a "generater seased" production? The fact is until the units were still connected, there was potential for generation. Every time a unit is down does not constitute termination.