Talk:Laguna Verde Nuclear Power Station

is expected to finish late 2010

Do we not know, why does it say expected on the article if 2010 was 6 years ago — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.191.7.52 (talk) 07:37, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Testimonies

(moved from article)

• I can personally validate the safeness of this plant from 1980 to 1992, as I lived near it (10 miles) for this period during my childhood. There is no reason to believe it is not safe today. The families of the workers live in the same place I did. If it where not safe, people would not live near it.
• Daniel (2/Sep/05)
• I made a visit to the plant last september (September 30, 2006), in a scholar visit, I could enter the building of the reactor and generator in Unit 1, and saw that every security measure is taken care of, I don´t see the reason why there are people complaining about it.
• Victor (08/Oct/06)

Mexico, Importer of Natural Gas

Some would argue that it isn't high prices, but the lack of competition and lack sector-liberalization that make Mexico an importer of a product that it produces: natural gas... For NPOV purposes, the statement that implied that high prices MADE the country an importer of natural gas has been removed.

Additionally, it was removed because of relevance. The natural gas price is a global phenomenon that affects the whole world, not just Mexico. Plus, it is driving other countries as well to build Nuclear power plants (not just Mexico). Therefore, because of relevance issues, the sentence was removed. Hari Seldon 22:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Awards

This section gives no references and is biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.45.111.247 (talk) 14:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The whole article is heavily biased. Does NOT contain any reference to the enormous cost overruns that the installation had accumulated during the long long time it required for its construction to be able to start generating power (about 20 years!). The Technology was not the latest or the best available when the plant construction finally proceeded. It is needed that the real costs spent in this Power Station are given in the article and then compared to the "profit" made at the real energy price at that time. The numerous awards and exaggerated safety claims could turn into ridiculus statements should a serious incident occur, as has happened in 2011 in Fukushima Japan. Extending the life cycle to 50 years at an uprated output is perilous, since there is very little evidence of the long term behavior of this old design when "upgraded" to produce more power than originally designed. Those involved in the construction phase of this installation can attest that many things were needed to be corrected. Portraying the excellent safety record of the plant as a kind of "warranty" that no accident can/will ever happen is not proper, and makes the whole article invalid. In view of the several serious accidents in the nuclear power industry (Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and now Fukushima, which is NOT finished yet...) the article neutrality and completeness needs to be revised. Testimonials such as those on this page are NOT acceptable; unless the proclaimed "expert" shows its qualifications. amclaussen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.180.19 (talk) 16:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

It neither contains any mention of the 2002 reactor scram whose aftermath showed that the affected reactor's backfeed system had been inoperational for over a year due to negligent maintenance. -- 188.192.232.132 (talk) 21:49, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Laguna Verde Nuclear Power Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713000747/http://www.iberdrolaingenieria.com/ibding/contenido/documentacion/05.pdf to http://www.iberdrolaingenieria.com/ibding/contenido/documentacion/05.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061004221000/http://www.wano.org.uk/WANO_Documents/Inside_WANO/Vol13No2/Vol13No2_en.pdf to http://www.wano.org.uk/WANO_Documents/Inside_WANO/Vol13No2/Vol13No2_en.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.wano.org/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081202042755/http://www.fundibeq.org/Noticias/noticias2.html to http://www.fundibeq.org/Noticias/noticias2.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100316133053/http://www.cfe.gob.mx/QuienesSomos/publicaciones/genElectricidad/Paginas/Nucleoelectricas.aspx to http://www.cfe.gob.mx/QuienesSomos/publicaciones/genElectricidad/Paginas/Nucleoelectricas.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100328072502/http://www.cfe.gob.mx/QuienesSomos/queEsCFE/listadocentralesgeneradoras/Paginas/Nucleoelectricas.aspx to http://www.cfe.gob.mx/QuienesSomos/queEsCFE/listadocentralesgeneradoras/Paginas/Nucleoelectricas.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:49, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Red link

I saw what appeared to be a red link ( that actually turns to be a template). I don't know how to get rid of it. It probably is not important, but it should probably get removed. Could one of you guys get rid of it? ~~~~ Data Devourer (talk) 21:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

I got rid of it. I linked it to the closest page I could find Titanium-132 (talk) 20:15, 3 November 2023 (UTC)