On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:14:24 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

In article , The Other Mike
writes

Could come to nothing,
but given similar operating hours, the severity / distribution of any defects
and capabilities to effect a number of parallel repairs or even replacements it
could quite easily lead to the loss of up to 2.3GW of generation on a temporary
or extended basis.

One report I read (I can try and find the link again if needed) stated
that the entire weight of the boiler is borne by the spine, so
repair/replacement may not be straightforward.

I have a feeling these reactors may be out of service for quite some
time, if not condemned altogether.

The boilers are designed to be removed from the concrete pressure / containment
vessel and have been in the past. A replacement can be dropped in and a small
number of spares, or more likely by now repaired boilers exist. But, being of
identical design these may also have the same defects.

Replacing a number of them and repairing or manufacturing replacements could be
an issue that restricts or possibly removes their ability to generate. Finding
out now is certainly a little better than finding out in late February when the
wind stops blowing again, the sun doesn't shine and the *******s at Greenpeace
turn the lights on in their vast offices and expect them to work.

What is significant, and maybe overlooked in the reports in the usual rags is
this is a *repeat* inspection, all these reactors having being taken offline for
similar checks in the past 12 months and they were then returned to service.
This revisit for another inspection possibly indicates that the previous checks
may have missed something significant.

But there are *lots* of unknowns

--