Talk:Jervis Bay Nuclear Power Plant proposal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Energy (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Australia (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon Jervis Bay Nuclear Power Plant proposal is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to help@wikimedia.org.au for other than editorial assistance.

The SGHWR was a steam generating heavy water reactor, and only ever existed as a prototype, at Winfrith Heath in Dorset in the UK. Had they won this tender they may well have received another from South Africa, but they never received any orders at all, and the prototype closed down some years later. Andrewa 03:23, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Nuclear weapons...[edit]

One point that should be addressed in this article would be the issue of how it relates to the potential for an Australian nuclear weapon. The ABC's 4 Corners program claimed in a recent program that the decision to pursue nuclear power was directly related to John Gorton and bureaucrat Philip Baxter's desire to give Australia the option of making nuclear weapons if it so chose. While, in normal operation, nuclear plants don't make bomb-grade plutonium, as I understand things it certainly *could have been* be operated in such a fashion. If it's a heavy water reactor, Australia wouldn't even have had to master uranium enrichment to get the bomb (but would have had to use an implosion design rather than the almost trivially easy gun bomb). --Robert Merkel 05:36, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Google maps link[edit]

The site is visible on the right hand side - here: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&t=h&om=1&z=14&ll=-35.128473,150.728559&spn=0.063178,0.072956

Does anyone know the proper wikipedia style for merging that into the main article? I couldn't find one.

Letter as a source[edit]

The following text has been added, citing an unpublished letter as a source:

Organizations like the World Union for Protection of Life‎, the Ecology Action and the Society for Responsibilty in Science had tried to ward off the dangers connected with the nuclear power plant[1].

WP:RS says that "Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." As this is not the case here, I plan to remove the above text. Johnfos (talk) 00:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Done Johnfos (talk) 00:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The text is back in for some reason, and it's now linking to a US TV station. In any case I can't see why the text is there in the first place - there is no apparent link to the power plant proposal (being dated 1972) - so have deleted it . 120.153.109.2 (talk) 02:46, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
    • ^ Letter from Harry F. Kurth, World Union for Protection of Life, President of the South East Asia and Oceanic Region, to Joshua Lederberg, 8 April 1972