![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Material from Nuclear power in the European Union was split to Nuclear energy policy by country on 6 August 2010. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
As of February 2020, 13 out of 27 countries have nuclear reactors. This should be probably nuclear power plants. Poland has nuclear reactors, but not power plants Maria_reactor
This page is a double from all the national nuclear energy pages, and it says nothing about European nuclear energy policy, for example Euratom. I think it needs a major rewrite, or otherwise be deleted as i see it as a fork. -- Eiland ( talk) 23:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Lets stop saying agree or disagree. I think everyone agrees that this page should basically contain EU stuff, and that the country specific info needs to be trimmed and moved to other pages. Now we still need to decide how to do that. But just to say I agree, or I disagree, isn't really helpful. -- eiland ( talk) 13:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I say just leave the article alone. The information is accurate and a merger may lead to a loss of information.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.252.11 ( talk) 04:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
So what now? There is still a lot of forked info, I asked Beagle what he plans now. -- eiland ( talk) 12:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Now that we are part of the Lisbon Treaty, whose aim is to create a "closer Europe" all nuclear power throughout the EU should come together under one title —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.32.10.140 ( talk) 20:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
A lot of content, for example the non nuclear countries is mere rephrasing of WNA and UIC articles ("emerging" countries), and therefore seems to me unreliable source? -- eiland ( talk) 14:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
DumZiBoT ( talk) 18:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
The opening sentence states "The nuclear energy in the European Union accounts approximately 15% of total energy consumption." I find this rather unlikely and would like to see a source. Nuclear energy is delivered in the form of electricity. In the Netherlands, electricity accounts for 20% of energy usage. If this is the same in the EU in general, then nuclear energy would cover 75% of that. And that sounds rather unlikely. Also note the two linguistic errors in that sentence; the 'the' should be dropped and a 'for' should be added. Amrad ( talk) 12:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Worldwide 437 nuclear power plants were in operation in 2006 ... covering 17% of world electricity demand and 6% of world energy demand. 144 of these power plants were located in the 27 member states of the EU with a total capacity of 131 gigawatt, covering 31% of European electricity demand." [5] (P.2, 1st paragraph, my bold) Mishlai ( talk) 18:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Back in 2005, it was decided not to have a nuclear power controversy or nuclear power debate article. Instead, that debate is now in an extensive section in Nuclear power#Debate on nuclear power. It seems more appropriate to have that debate complete in that article, and reference it everywhere else, rather than have multiple separate articles with their own debates ( Energy development and Anti-nuclear movement are two of the several other articles involved). I plan to eventually merge the various sections, but wanted everyone to have a chance to comment first - give it, say, 5 days so I can merge them all at once? Simesa ( talk) 06:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Nuclear power in the European Union's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "nip102":
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion which is also related to this article or category. You are welcome to take a part of this discussion. Beagel ( talk) 15:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Is that map up-to-date? As far as I know, at least Lithuania has a nuclear power plant in function; the infamous Ignalina, which is one of the biggest if not the biggest in Europe, providing for 80% of the country's energy. It would surprise me as well if neither of the other two Baltic states, nor Poland, Bulgaria or Romania have nuclear power plants!
I was looking at this article for reference but it seems that was a bad starting point. An update would be highly appreciated.
--
Bjørn Clasen (
talk)
16:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but this page is totally biased toward anti-nuclearism: it completely forgets other nuclear reactors construction programs other than French EPR (you just chose the worst one, right move for your anti-nuke campaign!) and as well the fact that many countries realised an increase in nuclear-generated electricity by upgrading existing plants. Moreover, the page gives a partially wrong idea of stress tests. Sorry folks, but Europe is not all Fukushima-worried people, gas or renewable investors, or Greenpeace activists. Filippo83 ( talk) 21:54, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Material from Nuclear power in the European Union was split to Nuclear energy policy by country on 6 August 2010. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
As of February 2020, 13 out of 27 countries have nuclear reactors. This should be probably nuclear power plants. Poland has nuclear reactors, but not power plants Maria_reactor
This page is a double from all the national nuclear energy pages, and it says nothing about European nuclear energy policy, for example Euratom. I think it needs a major rewrite, or otherwise be deleted as i see it as a fork. -- Eiland ( talk) 23:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Lets stop saying agree or disagree. I think everyone agrees that this page should basically contain EU stuff, and that the country specific info needs to be trimmed and moved to other pages. Now we still need to decide how to do that. But just to say I agree, or I disagree, isn't really helpful. -- eiland ( talk) 13:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I say just leave the article alone. The information is accurate and a merger may lead to a loss of information.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.252.11 ( talk) 04:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
So what now? There is still a lot of forked info, I asked Beagle what he plans now. -- eiland ( talk) 12:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Now that we are part of the Lisbon Treaty, whose aim is to create a "closer Europe" all nuclear power throughout the EU should come together under one title —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.32.10.140 ( talk) 20:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
A lot of content, for example the non nuclear countries is mere rephrasing of WNA and UIC articles ("emerging" countries), and therefore seems to me unreliable source? -- eiland ( talk) 14:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)
DumZiBoT ( talk) 18:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
The opening sentence states "The nuclear energy in the European Union accounts approximately 15% of total energy consumption." I find this rather unlikely and would like to see a source. Nuclear energy is delivered in the form of electricity. In the Netherlands, electricity accounts for 20% of energy usage. If this is the same in the EU in general, then nuclear energy would cover 75% of that. And that sounds rather unlikely. Also note the two linguistic errors in that sentence; the 'the' should be dropped and a 'for' should be added. Amrad ( talk) 12:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Worldwide 437 nuclear power plants were in operation in 2006 ... covering 17% of world electricity demand and 6% of world energy demand. 144 of these power plants were located in the 27 member states of the EU with a total capacity of 131 gigawatt, covering 31% of European electricity demand." [5] (P.2, 1st paragraph, my bold) Mishlai ( talk) 18:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Back in 2005, it was decided not to have a nuclear power controversy or nuclear power debate article. Instead, that debate is now in an extensive section in Nuclear power#Debate on nuclear power. It seems more appropriate to have that debate complete in that article, and reference it everywhere else, rather than have multiple separate articles with their own debates ( Energy development and Anti-nuclear movement are two of the several other articles involved). I plan to eventually merge the various sections, but wanted everyone to have a chance to comment first - give it, say, 5 days so I can merge them all at once? Simesa ( talk) 06:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Nuclear power in the European Union's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "nip102":
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion which is also related to this article or category. You are welcome to take a part of this discussion. Beagel ( talk) 15:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Is that map up-to-date? As far as I know, at least Lithuania has a nuclear power plant in function; the infamous Ignalina, which is one of the biggest if not the biggest in Europe, providing for 80% of the country's energy. It would surprise me as well if neither of the other two Baltic states, nor Poland, Bulgaria or Romania have nuclear power plants!
I was looking at this article for reference but it seems that was a bad starting point. An update would be highly appreciated.
--
Bjørn Clasen (
talk)
16:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but this page is totally biased toward anti-nuclearism: it completely forgets other nuclear reactors construction programs other than French EPR (you just chose the worst one, right move for your anti-nuke campaign!) and as well the fact that many countries realised an increase in nuclear-generated electricity by upgrading existing plants. Moreover, the page gives a partially wrong idea of stress tests. Sorry folks, but Europe is not all Fukushima-worried people, gas or renewable investors, or Greenpeace activists. Filippo83 ( talk) 21:54, 16 October 2014 (UTC)