Talk:Ratcliffe-on-Soar Power Station

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nottinghamshire Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nottinghamshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NottinghamshireWikipedia:WikiProject NottinghamshireTemplate:WikiProject NottinghamshireNottinghamshire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

What are the C02 Emissions of this power station

What are the CO2 emissions from this power station?

E.ON doesn't say, but it does provide the information to allow it to be calculated.

For its renewable site at Scroby Sands wind farm it says that it "produces power for 30000 homes, saving the emission of 67802 tonnes of carbon dioxide" (and also nearly 600 tonnes of sulphur dioxide and nearly 200 tonnes of oxides of nitrogen each year).[1] This allows us to calculate that each home is equivalent to 2.26 tonnes CO2.

They also state that the Ironbridge Power Station is a coal powered station with 1000MWhour and this is capable of supplying 750,000 homes.[2]

And that Ratcliffe is 2000 MWhours, which one can assume is enough to supply 1,500,000 homes.

So... 1,500,000 * 2.26 = 3,390,000 tonnes CO2.

If anyone can find a more accurate figure with a suitable reference then please replace my figures. PeterEastern (talk) 19:50, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental Protests

Is it still correct to say that "a number of environmental protests have been associated with the plant" in the introduction? It's been 5 years since there were any environmental protests there, and other coal power stations have been targetted, which don't have the same line in the introduction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.44.230.210 (talk) 14:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No longer owned by E.ON

This power station is now owned by Uniper after E.ON split its business in two. Most of the E.ON related links are no longer valid. The.spike (talk) 12:08, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which Babcock?

I would assume that the boilers were constructed by the UK B&W, now trading under the name Doosan Babcock, rather than the US Babcock & Wilcox. I have no evidence for this other than common sense, however, so I'll leave the link as it is for now. If someone could find out and make sure it's correct, that would be useful. Adacore (talk) 02:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, the boilers were built by Babcock & Wilcox UK, renamed Babcock Power Ltd in the 1970s, and now trading as Doosan Babcock [3] --Sunbite (talk) 09:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what happened here, but as of 2023 the link was going to the US company, so in the absence of further discussion I have pointed it at the UK company. GA-RT-22 (talk) 23:41, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

History

'The public enquiry...' What was its brief? 'It was approved...' What was? Notreallydavid (talk) 10:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-breaking spaces

@ThisCatLikesCrypto: We normally use a non-breaking space between a number and a unit symbol. See MOS:UNITNAMES and MOS:NBSP. Why did you remove these? GA-RT-22 (talk) 12:24, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah alright, I didn't know that. I'll revert the changes. ThisCatLikesCrypto (talk) 12:46, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closure date

The article currently says "The station closed for power generation on 30 September 2024 at one minute past midnight", but this is not supported by the citations. The Mirror (dated 29th) says "midnight tomorrow", which is ambiguous. Energy Live News (dated 30th) just says "today". I couldn't access The Times because it is paywalled. Regardless, at time of writing (12:47 on 30 September), the power station is still generating 430MW (https://grid.iamkate.com/). I have no idea where the "1 minute past midnight" time came from - I've not seen any source that backs that up, but the idea that the power station closed at the start, rather than the end, of 30 September is certainly wrong. FireFury (talk) 11:51, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have four sources for the plant having closed, but none of them actually say that. I had reverted to the version that matches the sources here [4] but got reverted. So I added a "failed verification" tag that then got removed. I put the tag back in, but can we agree that the article shouldn't say the plant has closed without citing a source that says that? This is required by Wikipedia:Verifiability, which is a Wikipedia policy. GA-RT-22 (talk) 12:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit confusing. The Times says 00:01 on 30 September, but several other sources say it has yet to stop and will close at 00:00 on 1 October. I've deferred to the first source but they are conflicting to say the least DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 13:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FireFury It says one minute past midnight on The Times DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 13:17, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of the four sources says the plant has closed. Reuters, for example, says "Britain will become the first G7 country to end coal-fired power production on Monday with the closure of its last plant." It does not say the plant has already closed. Which source do you thing says it already closed? GA-RT-22 (talk) 13:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, The Times said it closes at one minute pas midnight on 30 September. That suggests to me it's already closed DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 13:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does the Times say it actually closed? Or just that it will close? Can you provide a quote? GA-RT-22 (talk) 14:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article was from yesterday, so it says it will close DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 14:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, it sounds nuts to me that you're arguing about whether the plant has or has not closed based on a single source whilst it is still generating power at the moment. Even if The Times says that (can't check - it's behind a paywall), its clearly wrong! FireFury (talk) 15:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It finally appears to have closed according to your live dashboard (within the last 10 minutes or so) 194.80.232.22 (talk) 15:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, and its gone: https://x.com/NationalGridESO/status/1840773737030762694 FireFury (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I finally found a source that gave a time for the desync from the national grid, so I've added it in DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 22:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I took the tag off, and have now put it back (after a very brief restoration). I think "failed verification" is the wrong tag, since we definitely have sources saying it closed/was due to close at midnight, and they are cited here. There's a (minor) contradiction as to whether it's happening at 00:00 or at 00:01, which I'd suggest is probably no contradiction at all: at 00:00 the switches will be pulled, meaning that it 00:01 on Tuesday will be the first full minute for which it is off. However, suggest that this will probably all solve itself by tomorrow, when we will have reports saying what happened -- or else we can simply say that it happened at the end of today. If we really need a tag in the interim, [Dubious] would be better, as we're talking about a potential error of fact in those sources. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:00, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the confusion over the exact time of closure the page also states in the first paragraph that the plant is decommissioned, which is incorrect. Decommissioning starts after it has been shut down and will take two years, it states this (with a citation) further down the page. 149.34.191.15 (talk) 18:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Decommissioned" for most people means not in use any more, which is definitely the case here: it was an "active" power station, now it's a "decommissioned" power station, and in two years when the demolition and decommissioning process is complete it's going to be "was" a power station DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 22:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]