Talk:Taum Sauk Hydroelectric Power Station

	Missouri portal This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MissouriWikipedia:WikiProject MissouriTemplate:WikiProject MissouriMissouri
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Energy High‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Photos

We should add some before and after photos of the breach and of Johnson Shut-ins State Park. --Bushido Hacks 01:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(Someone who want to verify copyright can find a bunch of them them here: [1])

(Here's a fun sattelite photo)

[2]

I'm anxious to see what the after photos will look like. I probably can dig up some before pictures for the park. (Been meaning to get around to writing the article for the park.) I've visited the reservoir a few times, and I think I have some pictures looking out over the water, but probably none that capture the essence of the thing. You've seen my oblique topographic map of the place. Maybe I can do the same but with aerial photo overlay, and make sure it captures the lower reservoir, too. Unless there are ready, unencumbered images such as fit the bill already available. -- Kbh3rd ^talk 01:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Geo-Synthetics

Curious how Geo-Synthetics' webpage about their relining of the upper reservoir disappeared the day after the failure. That wasn't wholly unexpected, but it had some really good pictures of the drained reservoir taken during the relining project. — Kbh3^rd talk 17:52, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(The Google cache still has the pics:) [3]

(No, it does not -- 2006 Aug 14)

Spillway

How on earth could such a project be permitted to be constructed by Missouri county and state authorities without the protection of a spilway ? Instrumentation installed for saftey without a fail-safe backup (usually a physical one, but not aleays) is instrumentaion installed by a total fool. It has all the signs of another egineering project designed by accountants.

The costs of this failure, as indicated on the AmerenUE page indicate that more than $100-million had been spent or will be for corrective efforts and liability claims -- I wonder whether this plant has paid for itself, including these losses.

Given that they spent at least $450 million on rebuilding it despite having to pay out close to $200 million in settlements (and have continued to invest in keeping it modernized after rebuilding)...I'd say it's got to be quite profitable for them. They were also very interested in building a sister plant on Church Mountain at two points prior to Taum Sauk's failure (2001/2005), so that says quite a bit about the profitability of these plants. The reason it was constructed without a spillway is complicated, a mixture of a lot of different factors, one major one being that it was built back in 1963 and was only the sixth pumped-storage plant in the United States. Design standards were a bit different back then... At any rate, the new plant design appears to have accounted for every possible safety consideration, including a spillway, and is rather impressively well designed. Garzfoth (talk) 04:40, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a dam, so it doesn't need a spillway. It has a drain that could have been used to lower the level and they chose not to use it. It had plenty of instrumentation which they let fail and, because of over-reaction to 9-11, they had stopped the tours that would have brought observers to the reservoir on a regular basis who would have detected the signs of over-topping. Three d dave (talk) 03:03, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ignorance

Spillway has two "L"s. This just serves as an example of how many ignorant, uninformed people are able to post articles and comments on issues they can even begin to understand. Oh yeah, "always" and "engineer" are the correct ways to spell the other difficult words you attempted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.51.216.55 (talk) 16:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a bit harsh, I'd say. At Misouri S&T they joke, "Four years ago I couldn't even spell engineer, and now I are one!" It's an unjust stereotype based, like many, perhaps, on a small kernel of truth. I take pride in my writing and try to spell and punctuate correctly, while using proper grammar to render readable prose. Mistakes still manage to creep in. I guarantee you, though, that most of those engineers and scientists, spelling-challenged though a few may be, have a far deeper and subtler understanding of the issues involved here than I will ever grasp. I'd be ecstatic if some of them would add their expertise to this article—I'd be more than happy to come behind and clean up their spelling.

That said, dear students, you would do much to enhance your future careers by enhancing your verbal and written communications skills. And don't trust F7![4]

--Kbh3^rd talk 01:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ref for 25 Mar 10 corporate release

I added a short paragraph on the progress of the reconstruction, based on a corporate press release, properly cited. I tried to make a WebCite archive of the release, to protect against link rot, but the results page is blank even though I've received the email telling me the process has completed. For future reference, the WebCite link is (should be) here. --Kbh3^rd talk 03:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Taum Sauk Hydroelectric 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:

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) 03:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aug 2019 - That intro scarebox was bizarre and old

So I canned it. It was over a year old with zero talk page comments referencing it. No idea what the original drive-by tagger was so mad about. They certainly didn't add anything. 67.240.31.94 (talk) 05:27, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]