Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

gcaptain.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 40 posts

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#11

Post by psunavy03 »

itishappy wrote: post #9
psunavy03 wrote: post #5

The fact that we as a world economy are not significantly relying on nuclear power at this point is one of the biggest failures of climate change policy, if not the biggest failure ever. Yes, waste is a concern which needs to be managed responsibly. But at worst, the waste would only contaminate a finite area where it is stored. Climate change will affect literally everywhere on Earth. The US Navy has operated reacto…

> The US Navy has operated reactors for 70 years with a perfect safety record Loss of the vessel is a unique concern for naval equipment. The reactors on the Scorpion and Thresher have been slowly diffusing into the environment for the past 50 years. I'd be interested to know how contamination from these compares to Fukushima.

The Navy periodically takes radioactivity measurements near the wrecks, and has never found anything out of the ordinary that I can find online.

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#12

Post by RetroTechie »

psunavy03 wrote: post #5

The fact that we as a world economy are not significantly relying on nuclear power at this point is one of the biggest failures of climate change policy, if not the biggest failure ever. Yes, waste is a concern which needs to be managed responsibly. But at worst, the waste would only contaminate a finite area where it is stored. Climate change will affect literally everywhere on Earth. The US Navy has operated reacto…

> Yes, waste is a concern which needs to be managed responsibly.

More than that: if I understand correctly, there are some newer designs which can take the waste of older plants, 'burn' it while extracting more energy, leaving a smaller amount of less-problematic waste at the end.

For that reason alone we should be building some of those newer plants. If (beyond burning through older plants' waste) they are safer, more efficient and/or have a 'nicer' fuel cycle of their own: bonus.

But for cost / climate etc: probably too little, too late. Renewables + storage will do the job. And later on, bring in fusion.

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#13

Post by itishappy »

psunavy03 wrote: post #11
itishappy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US Navy has operated reactors for 70 years with a perfect safety record Loss of the vessel is a unique concern for naval equipment. The reactors on the Scorpion and Thresher have been slowly diffusing into the environment for the past 50 years. I'd be interested to know how contamination from these compares to Fukushima.

The Navy periodically takes radioactivity measurements near the wrecks, and has never found anything out of the ordinary that I can find online.

This report from 2019 agrees:

> The conclusions of this report confirm the results of previous environmental monitoring expeditions and demonstrate that the THRESHER and SCORPION have had no discernible effect on the radioactivity in the environment

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/09/f66/NT-19-1....

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#14

Post by maxhille »

psunavy03 wrote: post #5

The fact that we as a world economy are not significantly relying on nuclear power at this point is one of the biggest failures of climate change policy, if not the biggest failure ever. Yes, waste is a concern which needs to be managed responsibly. But at worst, the waste would only contaminate a finite area where it is stored. Climate change will affect literally everywhere on Earth. The US Navy has operated reacto…

Nuclear is just not economical enough. Compare eg. to solar, where we installed the equivalent of 413 nuclear power plants just this year:

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2023/11/28/solar-surging-58-in-2...

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#15

Post by acidburnNSA »

sickofparadox wrote: post #2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NS_Savannah Related ship back during the nuclear tech boom.

I recently found and got digitized an amazing documentary about the Savannah: https://whatisnuclear.com/news/2023-07-12-the-nuclear-ship-s...

Also, she's currently for sale if you're interested. If they don't find a buyer it'll be scrapped.

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#16

Post by acidburnNSA »

nielsbot wrote: post #6

It says they will use a molten salt reactor--has anyone made one of those work reliably? I don't actually know--I just have a vague sense that every molten salt reactor I've read about suffered from corrosion problems and had to be shut down.

I'm in nuclear and I'm super annoyed at the mass hysteria around announcing projects like this using totally unproven reactors.

Just start with a time-honed PWR to decarbonize now and deal with the uncertainty and challenge of MSR development as a potential upgrade for later.

MSRs need tons of development. See ORNL-5018 https://doi.org/10.2172/4227904

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#17

Post by goodSteveramos »

maxhille wrote: post #14
psunavy03 wrote: post #5

The fact that we as a world economy are not significantly relying on nuclear power at this point is one of the biggest failures of climate change policy, if not the biggest failure ever. Yes, waste is a concern which needs to be managed responsibly. But at worst, the waste would only contaminate a finite area where it is stored. Climate change will affect literally everywhere on Earth. The US Navy has operated reacto…

Nuclear is just not economical enough. Compare eg. to solar, where we installed the equivalent of 413 nuclear power plants just this year: https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2023/11/28/solar-surging-58-in-2...

Does that include the cost of energy storage? Solar only works because fossil fuels can pick up the slack at night

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#18

Post by psunavy03 »

RetroTechie wrote: post #12
psunavy03 wrote: post #5

The fact that we as a world economy are not significantly relying on nuclear power at this point is one of the biggest failures of climate change policy, if not the biggest failure ever. Yes, waste is a concern which needs to be managed responsibly. But at worst, the waste would only contaminate a finite area where it is stored. Climate change will affect literally everywhere on Earth. The US Navy has operated reacto…

> Yes, waste is a concern which needs to be managed responsibly. More than that: if I understand correctly, there are some newer designs which can take the waste of older plants, 'burn' it while extracting more energy, leaving a smaller amount of less-problematic waste at the end. For that reason alone we should be building some of those newer plants. If (beyond burning through older plants' waste) they are safer, mo…

Fusion power is perpetually 50 years away. I'll believe it when I see it before I die.

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#19

Post by megaman821 »

goodSteveramos wrote: post #17
maxhille wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear is just not economical enough. Compare eg. to solar, where we installed the equivalent of 413 nuclear power plants just this year: https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2023/11/28/solar-surging-58-in-2...

Does that include the cost of energy storage? Solar only works because fossil fuels can pick up the slack at night

With the current trajectory of batteries, it is not looking like the cost of overnight storage is going to break the economics of solar.

Seasonal storage is another issue all together. Also, very northern latitudes may be better served by nuclear power.

Re: Plans for Nuclear-Powered 24,000 TEU Containership Unveiled in China

#20

Post by dmz73 »

andrewstuart wrote: post #4

Given chinas massive economic downturn theres no shortage of container ships.

That statement does not make sense. Container ships are transporting manufactured goods from China to other countries - US, EU, ROW. If there are no shortage of container ships that means that those regions are experiencing economic downturn, not China. Chinese economic downturns will result in "no shortage of" ships that carry raw materials.
Post reply on HN