Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
1–10 of 353 posts
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#2"Production line mistakes may lead to generic defects that propagate throughout an entire fleet of reactors and are costly to fix," (person from University College London) warned.
Wouldn’t the knowledge gained by fixing a large one-off reactor be of limited transferable value, as compared to expensive knowledge that could be used to upgrade an existing “fleet” plus improve subsequent versions?
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#3"Production line mistakes may lead to generic defects that propagate throughout an entire fleet of reactors and are costly to fix," (person from University College London) warned. Wouldn’t the knowledge gained by fixing a large one-off reactor be of limited transferable value, as compared to expensive knowledge that could be used to upgrade an existing “fleet” plus improve subsequent versions?
The point is that every mistake propagated over 10 reactors has to be fixed 10 times. If you have a single reactor, you just fix it once.
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#4That sounds like a very bad idea. Although I am confident that the tech has evolved since Chernobyl, terrorism has evolved as well. It just takes a bunch of assholes to destroy a small town.
And yes, I think they will be pretty well guarded. But if you have lots of them some of them will have security flaws.
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#5I really wanted this to be about Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited rather than Rolls-Royce Holdings plc. A nuclear-powered Rolls-Royce Phantom would be incredibly boss.
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#6I really wanted this to be about Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited rather than Rolls-Royce Holdings plc. A nuclear-powered Rolls-Royce Phantom would be incredibly boss.
Would a nuclear powered EV ever need refuelling?
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#7"Production line mistakes may lead to generic defects that propagate throughout an entire fleet of reactors and are costly to fix," (person from University College London) warned. Wouldn’t the knowledge gained by fixing a large one-off reactor be of limited transferable value, as compared to expensive knowledge that could be used to upgrade an existing “fleet” plus improve subsequent versions?
The point is that every mistake propagated over 10 reactors has to be fixed 10 times. If you have a single reactor, you just fix it once.
The point is rather short sighted: after fixing the production line issue, you make another 100 and recoup the expense of those first 10.
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#8I really wanted this to be about Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited rather than Rolls-Royce Holdings plc. A nuclear-powered Rolls-Royce Phantom would be incredibly boss.
Would a nuclear powered EV ever need refuelling?
If it were a radioisotope thermoelectric generator, then probably yes.
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#9That sounds like a very bad idea. Although I am confident that the tech has evolved since Chernobyl, terrorism has evolved as well. It just takes a bunch of assholes to destroy a small town. And yes, I think they will be pretty well guarded. But if you have lots of them some of them will have security flaws.
This is both a flawed argument, and a point addressed directly by the article – with the proposal being to place these reactors in existing nuclear sites with security strategies in place.
Re: Rolls-Royce plans mini nuclear reactors by 2029
#10That sounds like a very bad idea. Although I am confident that the tech has evolved since Chernobyl, terrorism has evolved as well. It just takes a bunch of assholes to destroy a small town. And yes, I think they will be pretty well guarded. But if you have lots of them some of them will have security flaws.
You can't just walk into a nuclear reactor and take away bomb grade material. Even if you run a reactor, you can't get bomb grade material out of it if you allow regulators in.
Dirty bombs are also far less dangerous as they are made out to be.