Nuclear power plant facts are measured in different ways:
- net vs brute MW, electrical vs thermal MW
- "operating" status means different things in different sources (connected, commercially available, operable but suspended, etc)
- official sources publish state changes on different cycles, (for example PRIS vs GEM, etc), so for weeks at a time the same unit has two different states
- some sources publish data per unit and day, other per power plant and per year, etc.
- different names for the same power plant in different sources (for example, KANUPP & Karachi, Chashma & CHASNUPP, Zaporizhzhia & Zaporozhye, etc).
I went in expecting to find errors. Almost none of it was error: each institution answers a different question on its own calendar, and each is right by its own definition. But I found an important gap for those who need the updated and standardized information.
This is why I created reactoratlas.com
If you have built something similar over institutional data, how do you handle that?
- net vs brute MW, electrical vs thermal MW - "operating" status means different things in different sources (connected, commercially available, operable but suspended, etc) - official sources publish state changes on different cycles, (for example PRIS vs GEM, etc), so for weeks at a time the same unit has two different states - some sources publish data per unit and day, other per power plant and per year, etc. - different names for the same power plant in different sources (for example, KANUPP & Karachi, Chashma & CHASNUPP, Zaporizhzhia & Zaporozhye, etc).
I went in expecting to find errors. Almost none of it was error: each institution answers a different question on its own calendar, and each is right by its own definition. But I found an important gap for those who need the updated and standardized information.
This is why I created reactoratlas.com
If you have built something similar over institutional data, how do you handle that?