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

The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 124 posts

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#31

Post by wrong_variable »

rtkwe wrote: post #22
wrong_variable wrote: post #6

> "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…

> "Rosatom, in a statement, insisted its plant was 'invulnerable to tsunamis.'" > - Coastlines near cities are expensive real estate (not to mention anyone with property there allowing a literal power nuclear plant blocking their view ) - it takes important real estate from ports that are much more useful for docking ships, etc. Its possible to build a separate port far away from the city; but then you have to pay th…

You are still leaving out storm surges etc. The ocean is a terrible place for infrastructure, its why we only do it if we really have no other option (offshore oil rigs etc).

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#32

Post by dmos62 »

_ph_ wrote: post #24

The nuclear power plant of the future can be found in a science museum. All dangers of a catastrophic accident aside, nuclear energy has become economically infeasible. Just recently, half-build powerplants have been abandoned in the US for pure financial reasons, and the other projects under constructions face severe cost problems too. And this is not counting for the still unsolved problem of disposing the nuclear…

> unsolved problem of disposing the nuclear waste

I'm not sure what you mean by unsolved disposal. Nuclear waste from power plants is stored in secure facilities. It takes up a manageable amount of space, is low maintanance and isn't dangerous. Furthermore, future reactors will be able to reuse it; the current reactors only use up a small fraction of the fuel. So actually, you wouldn't even want to throw it away.

Also, nuclear fuel is advantageous logistically. A typical plant needs 1 train-load of fuel a year. That's a relatively small freight, you can ship that from anywhere around the world. On the other hand, for carbon-fuel powerplants, you need a train load of fuel per day.

I'd love to see the planet off non-renewable-fuels, but a big hurdle is that, unless we figure out storage, the renewable energy sources have to be supplemented with something for when it's night and there's no wind. I don't see a better option for that something than nuclear. Of course, an alternative would be for society to switch to an energy usage scheme that doesn't presume that power is uninterruptable. However, that would require profound changes to our everyday lives, and I don't think we're quite mature enough as a species to go through with something like that at scale.

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#33

Post by fghhfgg »

wrong_variable wrote: post #29
cr1895 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How many tsunamis has one of their ships survived exactly A tsunami in sufficiently deep water is basically imperceptible. It’s only a problem once the sea floor starts pushing the water up.

The ship wont be in deep water though but in the shoreline ! You are safe in either direction, either 15 km inland of 15+ km offshore.

A 15km underwater line is not a problem.

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#34

Post by fghhfgg »

wrong_variable wrote: post #6

> "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…

Off shore drilling rigs aren’t anchored to he floor, but the pipe could literally snap if the rig floats away.

They are kept in place solely by GPS and thrust vectoring.

The Ruskies are going to use the same technology here, known for decades, and probably safer than oil rigs since there nothing to snap and a small volume to protect if the whole thing sinks.

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#35

Post by scrumper »

wrong_variable wrote: post #6

> "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…

> - "Rosatom, in a statement, insisted its plant was 'invulnerable to tsunamis.'" > Really ?? why are they trying to sell dumb electricity when they have the much more valuable technology of invincible ships. How many tsunamis has one of their ships survived exactly ?

A 10' dinghy in deep water is pretty well invulnerable to tsunamis. Invulnerability to hurricanes would be an entirely different proposition.

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#36

Post by trhway »

_ph_ wrote: post #24

The nuclear power plant of the future can be found in a science museum. All dangers of a catastrophic accident aside, nuclear energy has become economically infeasible. Just recently, half-build powerplants have been abandoned in the US for pure financial reasons, and the other projects under constructions face severe cost problems too. And this is not counting for the still unsolved problem of disposing the nuclear…

>in the case of disaster, it can be dumped into the ocean, which is somewhat better than contaminating occupied land, but still isn't acceptable.

dumping the stuff into ocean results in spreading the stuff around the world. It is much more preferable to keep it contained - like in case of Chernobyl's 30km exclusion zone at least we have a chance 100years from now when technology allows to clean up the zone - no such luck if it happens in the open ocean. Fukushima is still fighting to contain the stuff on site and don't let it get out to avoid making the disaster into a global one.

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#37

Post by fghhfgg »

wrong_variable wrote: post #6

> "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…

Also, these are small plants; not the amount of power that would cripple a country.

Make its e-supply more reliable, yes. But not replace the bulk of the supply. For that Rosatom will sell you a few GW units on land

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#38

Post by fghhfgg »

dmos62 wrote: post #32
_ph_ wrote: post #24

The nuclear power plant of the future can be found in a science museum. All dangers of a catastrophic accident aside, nuclear energy has become economically infeasible. Just recently, half-build powerplants have been abandoned in the US for pure financial reasons, and the other projects under constructions face severe cost problems too. And this is not counting for the still unsolved problem of disposing the nuclear…

> unsolved problem of disposing the nuclear waste I'm not sure what you mean by unsolved disposal. Nuclear waste from power plants is stored in secure facilities. It takes up a manageable amount of space, is low maintanance and isn't dangerous. Furthermore, future reactors will be able to reuse it; the current reactors only use up a small fraction of the fuel. So actually, you wouldn't even want to throw it away. Als…

Future reactors? Rosatom has 800 MW breeders now!

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#39

Post by _ph_ »

dmos62 wrote: post #32
_ph_ wrote: post #24

The nuclear power plant of the future can be found in a science museum. All dangers of a catastrophic accident aside, nuclear energy has become economically infeasible. Just recently, half-build powerplants have been abandoned in the US for pure financial reasons, and the other projects under constructions face severe cost problems too. And this is not counting for the still unsolved problem of disposing the nuclear…

> unsolved problem of disposing the nuclear waste I'm not sure what you mean by unsolved disposal. Nuclear waste from power plants is stored in secure facilities. It takes up a manageable amount of space, is low maintanance and isn't dangerous. Furthermore, future reactors will be able to reuse it; the current reactors only use up a small fraction of the fuel. So actually, you wouldn't even want to throw it away. Als…

What do you mean by "secure facilities"? Yes, currently the nuclear waste is in intermediate storage facilities. Which are buildings, with an useful life time of 50 years. Unless a nuclear technology for reusing or processing the waste appears, we are talking about safe storage for thousands of years.

Re: The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia

#40

Post by wrong_variable »

fghhfgg wrote: post #34
wrong_variable wrote: post #6

> "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…

Off shore drilling rigs aren’t anchored to he floor, but the pipe could literally snap if the rig floats away. They are kept in place solely by GPS and thrust vectoring. The Ruskies are going to use the same technology here, known for decades, and probably safer than oil rigs since there nothing to snap and a small volume to protect if the whole thing sinks.

- Your account was created 8 minutes ago

- defending some press release coming out of Russia.

How is the weather today in Moscow ?

Post reply on HN