The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2018 AFPRussia unveils world's first floating nuclear power station
By Alexander NEMENOV MURMANSK, Russia©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
16 Comments
Login to comment
englisc aspyrgend
And pollute the ocean and maritime food chain, sounds like a plan!
Gorramcowboy
Yup, an accident just waiting to happen. Idiots.
Jandworld
So its not a submarine?
those are rotting away far away from Fukushima.
ozziedesigner
Not the first. There was one of these in Fukushima :P
FizzBit
Interesting. It's probably state of the art tech so I don't understand some of the debbie downers here. Besides, if there ever was a cooling problem, they've probably installed a way to manually pump cold salt water into the system.
theFu
Not the first.
Panama Canal had a USA 10MW nuclear power ship one during the 1970s, the USS Sturgis (converted to nuclear in 1963) to ensure power in the area.
smithinjapan
Guess they never learned much from the nuclear sub still sitting down below, waiting for disaster. This thing could easily be used as a weapon, or just a major accident.
1glenn
Not sure I would trust this thing not to go nuclear at the wrong time. That said, I wonder why nuclear powered ships are not sailed to areas of natural disaster, like Puerto Rico, and used to give emergency power.
Netgrump
The US Navy lost 2 nuclear subs still resting on the ocean floor and the Russians 7 subs with 6 subs rusting underwater.
mmwkdw
Couldn't they have painted it better, rather than looking something like Chocolate Sandwich Cake ?
Harry_Gatto
Not to mention the Farallon Islands nuclear waste dump just off the coast of San Francisco.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/farallon-islands
Haruka
Very good for preventing a meltdown.
nandakandamanda
What is the lifetime of nuclear waste? What is the lifetime of an iron barge?
Aw, forget it, cake today and pass the problems to our children.
theFu
nandakandamanda
4th generation molten salt reactions can burn waste from earlier generation reactors and don't use water for cooling.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hN7mXUg88JM
Because the US Navy was behind all the initial nuclear research, water cooling was very natural. There are a multitude of other nuclear reactions that aren't based on uranium and produce waste with much shorter half-lives than what is currently used.
There are some downsides for some of the reactions, serious downsides, but using less than 8kg of fuel a year (vs 20 metric tons) and going from 300K years for storage to just 200 yrs are some pretty great upsides. These are for the same energy output.