RSSFloating Nuclear Reactor: What Could Go Wrong?
By Alex in Everything Else on Oct 13, 2006 at 6:14 pm
|
From Popular Science:
|
HOME |
| 
|
From Popular Science:
|
Sandy
Is that picture for real? It looks like a miniature sitting on painted concrete.
dead_red_eyes
of course it’s not. it says they’re planning on making it, so it’s a model of course!
dead_red_eyes
also, just what this world needs … a floating nuclear disaster waiting to happen and kill our precious ocean. one huge wave and i bet that sh-t would crack!
Bryan
Aren’t there already many floating nuclear reactors out there already? The US and Russia all have several nuclear-powered carriers, subs and cruisers. Russia also has serveral nuclear icebreakers. Japan and Germany have a couple of nuclear cargo ships. I also thought that the USS Thresher had a severe problem with its reactor back in 1963 without destroying the ocean.
dead_red_eyes
apparently the nuclear fuel is still intact, and I guess it’s only a matter of time (20,000 years?] before the ship decomposes …
pld
Oh come on. Nuclear (fission) power is certainly a better source of energy than burning oil or coal until we have cheap, clean and practically infinite fusion power. The only problem is making it safe enough, and of course, Russia doesn’t have a good record at that.
Brian
Actually Russia’s record is pretty clean. You’re probably referring to the Chernobyl incident in 1986 in the Czech Republic.
Comment RSS
