101–110 of 124 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you spent much time in industrial facilities? Especially prototypes?
It still looks dingy even if dingy is usual. So from my perspective it seems like a description rather than a criticism. Not a necessary paragraph, but more likely included to justify the reporter's visit to the ship than some attack.
There isn’t a country on earth that would actually allow Russia to park an actual nuclear bomb off their coast. Even the ones aligned with Russia. Oh, how do you build a sarcophagus on a sunk nuclear reactor?
There isn’t a country on earth that would actually allow Russia to park an actual nuclear bomb off their coast. Even the ones aligned with Russia. Oh, how do you build a sarcophagus on a sunk nuclear reactor?
> "Rosatom plans to serially produce such floating nuclear plants, and is exploring various business plans, including retaining ownership of the reactors while selling the electricity they generate." No sane govt will allow a foreign power to literally be able to shutdown one of their cities on a whim. I think what the Russian Govt realized is that instead of building nuclear power plants, its going to be more profit…
>No sane govt will allow a foreign power to literally be able to shutdown one of their cities on a whim. Hasn't Gasprom done this [cut supply] in the past but continues to have customers in Europe? If it's cheap enough they will probably have customers.
Note that Naftogaz (Ukraine gas organisation) later admitted to this theft, which was worth $3 billion.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_dis...
> "Rosatom plans to serially produce such floating nuclear plants, and is exploring various business plans, including retaining ownership of the reactors while selling the electricity they generate." No sane govt will allow a foreign power to literally be able to shutdown one of their cities on a whim. I think what the Russian Govt realized is that instead of building nuclear power plants, its going to be more profit…
Doesn’t Europe, and in particular Germany, already do this with Russian natural gas?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren't dirty bombs considered a Hollywood trope, and not a weapon of any actual utility (except scaring people with the thought of it)? See e.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb .
dirty bombs can function as a denial of access ordinance... when isotopes or persistent toxin are scattered spattered over an area the cleanup is prohibitively expensive , we than have a kiev/chornobl scenario...were this to happen on wall street or silicon valley, it would be a major setback, or we would have to requantify the acceptable titre of radionucliides in a "occupiable" region
Also reactor fuel is a terrible material for a dirty bomb because of its long half life time, you need materials which are much more active than that to be effective like those used in radioactive medicine and sensors those isotopes and are much more controlled than processed nuclear fuel and for a good reason.
The loss of competence in nuclear engineering worldwide worries me. Do we need to start sending engineering grads to Brazil? Britain outsourced it's coming plants to China didn't it?