4 ms·

> The operational limit for the latest period of operation was 350 cracks but an inspection found that allowance had been exceeded. > > EDF plans to ask the re

> The operational limit for the latest period of operation was 350 cracks but an inspection found that allowance had been exceeded. > > EDF plans to ask the regulator for permission to restart with a new operational limit of up to 700 cracks. Yeah, next time you exceed the speed limit, just ask the police officer for permission to double the fun... No seriously, what the article is missing, is why there was a limit of 350. Was it just made up at some point to correlate with the expected lifetime? What real, increased risk is involved when operating up to 700 cracks? Just telling they would have to get the power elsewhere and jobs would be at risk, is obvious and just one side of the medal. If there is no additional risk involved, there is no reason to condemn asking to raise the limit.

pjc50 7y ago
Ah, the "normalisation of deviance"; the space shuttle flew just fine with partially eroded O rings in the boosters, until the day it didn't.
- kortilla 7y ago
  Ah, the assumption that limits in one of the most red-tape ladened industries have anything to do with safety.
  - mikeash 7y ago
    Better or worse than the assumption that limits in one of the most safety-conscious industries are unrelated to safety?
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - pjc50 7y ago
    These rules aren't put in for a laugh.
cwaffler 7y ago
Totally agree and it also seems like the bbc is trying to scare the shit outta people. Everyone does have a right to know, but a crack within the core that's been accounted for by professionals needs a concise article with a way better title than this crap.
mbell 7y ago
> Yeah, next time you exceed the speed limit, just ask the police officer for permission to double the fun... This is a rather weak analogy - I don't know where you live, but where I live driving the speed limit is not the norm and ironically driving against the common speed of traffic is more dangerous. i.e. You are safer exceeding the speed limit if that is with the flow of traffic than you are driving the speed limit when the flow is faster. > No seriously, what the article is missing, is why there was a limit of 350. Was it just made up at some point to correlate with the expected lifetime? What real, increased risk is involved when operating up to 700 cracks? To keep with the same analogy - what you are missing is that speed limits tend to be set assuming the _worst case_ driver, someone that really should not be on the road in the first place. i.e. the limit is not designed for the average driver/car but for the worst. i.e. they are _extremely_ conservative. > Just telling they would have to get the power elsewhere and jobs would be at risk, is obvious and just one side of the medal. If there is no additional risk involved, there is no reason to condemn asking to raise the limit. I think the challenge here is to quantify the 'risk' in full, which has to include where the power would come from as an alternative. The present situation is that the capacity is mostly replaced with natural gas, a net CO2 emission loss.
- blub 7y ago
  "To keep with the same analogy - what you are missing is that speed limits tend to be set assuming the _worst case_ driver, someone that really should not be on the road in the first place. i.e. the limit is not designed for the average driver/car but for the worst. i.e. they are _extremely_ conservative." This is usually not the case in Europe. If someone doesn't belong on the road, they normally don't pass the exam, but: * some countries have problems with bribes, I've heard of some egregious cases. * some countries have a reckless driving culture, for instance traffic in Italy is quite crazy, they don't seem to care at all about the rules. Sometimes the road does allow one to go faster, but speed limits are enforced through fines and I think in most EU countries you lose your license if you go 30 kmph over the speed limit.
  - mbell 7y ago
    I'm not familiar with EU laws on this but I highly doubt it. You don't define speed limits assuming a capable driver in an M3, you define them for a questionable driver in a Renault Clio. > I think in most EU countries you lose your license if you go 30 kmph over the speed limit It's also a significant penalty in the US, this has no impact on the reality of the speeds that exist in reality, nor the safety.

pjc50 7y ago

Ah, the "normalisation of deviance"; the space shuttle flew just fine with partially eroded O rings in the boosters, until the day it didn't.

kortilla 7y ago
Ah, the assumption that limits in one of the most red-tape ladened industries have anything to do with safety.
- mikeash 7y ago
  Better or worse than the assumption that limits in one of the most safety-conscious industries are unrelated to safety?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- pjc50 7y ago
  These rules aren't put in for a laugh.

cwaffler 7y ago

Totally agree and it also seems like the bbc is trying to scare the shit outta people. Everyone does have a right to know, but a crack within the core that's been accounted for by professionals needs a concise article with a way better title than this crap.

mbell 7y ago

> Yeah, next time you exceed the speed limit, just ask the police officer for permission to double the fun... This is a rather weak analogy - I don't know where you live, but where I live driving the speed limit is not the norm and ironically driving against the common speed of traffic is more dangerous. i.e. You are safer exceeding the speed limit if that is with the flow of traffic than you are driving the speed limit when the flow is faster. > No seriously, what the article is missing, is why there was a limit of 350. Was it just made up at some point to correlate with the expected lifetime? What real, increased risk is involved when operating up to 700 cracks? To keep with the same analogy - what you are missing is that speed limits tend to be set assuming the _worst case_ driver, someone that really should not be on the road in the first place. i.e. the limit is not designed for the average driver/car but for the worst. i.e. they are _extremely_ conservative. > Just telling they would have to get the power elsewhere and jobs would be at risk, is obvious and just one side of the medal. If there is no additional risk involved, there is no reason to condemn asking to raise the limit. I think the challenge here is to quantify the 'risk' in full, which has to include where the power would come from as an alternative. The present situation is that the capacity is mostly replaced with natural gas, a net CO2 emission loss.

blub 7y ago
"To keep with the same analogy - what you are missing is that speed limits tend to be set assuming the _worst case_ driver, someone that really should not be on the road in the first place. i.e. the limit is not designed for the average driver/car but for the worst. i.e. they are _extremely_ conservative." This is usually not the case in Europe. If someone doesn't belong on the road, they normally don't pass the exam, but: * some countries have problems with bribes, I've heard of some egregious cases. * some countries have a reckless driving culture, for instance traffic in Italy is quite crazy, they don't seem to care at all about the rules. Sometimes the road does allow one to go faster, but speed limits are enforced through fines and I think in most EU countries you lose your license if you go 30 kmph over the speed limit.
- mbell 7y ago
  I'm not familiar with EU laws on this but I highly doubt it. You don't define speed limits assuming a capable driver in an M3, you define them for a questionable driver in a Renault Clio. > I think in most EU countries you lose your license if you go 30 kmph over the speed limit It's also a significant penalty in the US, this has no impact on the reality of the speeds that exist in reality, nor the safety.