3 ms·
> As for covering things up, that's a specialty of this field, as any former nuclear insider will tell you. We do not know the same "insiders in the field" the
by adev_ 5y ago
> As for covering things up, that's a specialty of this field, as any former nuclear insider will tell you.
We do not know the same "insiders in the field" then.
As a former electrical engineer, many of my friends works for EDF in Nuclear. And none of them ever talk about covering things up.
It is quite the opposite, any minor incident generally trigger a ton of process and often a partial shutdown "just in case".
Every possible interaction with the installation is documented, planned and part of a process with X layers of human verification before any intervention.
I do not know how the nuclear industry run in other countries but that is not the culture for EDF to cover things up. For politicians with their own agenda, it's an other story....
- southerntofu 5y agoSo first it's not just EDF. It's also AREVA and ANDRA. All three of those entities had major scandals in the past decades and seem to have taken exactly zero lesson from them. I'm really not the person most knowledgeable/aware on this topic, this is just from 5 minutes of searching the web. 2008: Greens/EFA report says official "energy independance" stat of 50% of a lie; when calculated on final energy not primal energy, it falls down to 24%, and down to just 8.5% when you take into account that uranium is in fact imported; it also touches on engineering issues, staffing problems... 2011: As part of a Greenpeace report about EPR, two insiders reveal serious defects https://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/IMG/pdf/greenpeace-2011-05-01-briefing-epr_nucle_aire_su_r_a_la_franc_aise_-_chantier_de_flamanville_les_langues_se_de_lient.pdf https://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/IMG/pdf/greenpeace-2011-05... 2013: The post-Fukushima audit revealed no french setup takes such scenarios (no water/electricity) into account. https://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/IMG/pdf/globalchance-laponcheb-2013-les_accidents_et_la_su_rete_des_centrales_nucle_aires-citations_et_questionnements.pdf https://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/IMG/pdf/globalchance-lapon... 2017: EDF/Areva knew since 2005 that they relied on an unreliable factory for building sensitive equipment https://www.franceculture.fr/economie/scandale-de-la-forge-du-creusot-areva-et-edf-alertees-des-2005 https://www.franceculture.fr/economie/scandale-de-la-forge-d... 2021: A whistleblower denounces defects he's been silenced about, says he's a nuclear lover but torn apart by this worrisome situation and sues EDF for endangering people's lives https://www.francetvinfo.fr/societe/nucleaire/centrale-nucleaire-du-tricastin-un-cadre-denonce-une-politique-de-dissimulation-des-incidents-et-porte-plainte-contre-edf_4842217.html https://www.francetvinfo.fr/societe/nucleaire/centrale-nucle... And there's of course the many many many incidents we barely hear about, when at all: https://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/Nucleaire-des-accidents-partout?id_mot=116 https://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/Nucleaire-des-accidents-pa...
- LunaSea 5y agoI don't think that the greens, Greenpeace and a lobbying website are particularly good sources.
- southerntofu 5y agoWho would be better sources? Other entities don't care or are already bought for by this mafia. Also, i encourage you to take a read at the actual material: it's solid despite what you may think of such organizations. If it can reassure you, i'm also very skeptical of greens and greenpeace because they've been corrupted/coopted by big business over the years and don't stand for actual ecology (degrowth/anticapitalism) anymore. Such reports is one of the few instances of them still doing a good job on specific issues, so i thought taking these serious sources instead of more radical material would take us closer to an understanding.