| Submit your comments on this article |
| Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia |
| Russia To Build Floating Nuclear Power Plant |
| 2005-05-30 |
| Russia will build the world's first floating nuclear power plant, Russia's Atomic Energy Agency (RosAtom) has announced. A low-power plant with an electrical capacity of 70 MWt and heat capacity of 140 Gigacalories may be constructed in the Russian northwestern town of Severodvinsk within five years, a spokesman for RosAtom told Itar-Tass on Thursday. The project's estimated cost is $180 million, and $30 million has already been spent on the planning stage. Calculations made by RosAtom experts suggest the floating power plant will pay for itself in eight years. The agency lacks funds, however, and is going to ask the government for help in obtaining loans in commercial banks or offer from other countries to join the project. China, Indonesia and a number of Middle Eastern and Mediterranean countries have reportedly voiced interest in the project, but they want the plant to be built first to show potential investors that it does not pose a threat to the environment. RosAtom head Alexander Rumyantsev said earlier that floating power plants are absolutely safe. The reactors "will be the same as those that are used by our submarines and nuclear ice-breakers," he said, stressing that after the Kursk submarine that sank in August 2000 was lifted from the bottom of the Barents Sea, its reactors were still in an operational condition. However, many critics say the main objective of nuclear plants all over the world is enrichment for building nuclear weapons, and after RosAtom first announced the building of the floating plant in the early 2000s, foreign media immediately called it a "floating Chernobyl". The Russian side says that the plant will be able to provide a town of 50,000 people with heating and electrical energy or be used to desalinate sea-water. |
| Posted by:Spavirt Pheng6042 |
| #15 Cold Fusion wins this one, no security required. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-05-30 20:33 |
| #14 Actually, this sounds like a pretty neat idea.... providing security is tight. |
| Posted by: Secret Master 2005-05-30 17:58 |
| #13 Its not the cables per se I'm thinking about...its how do you maintain them in various sea states or do you lay them along the sea bed? |
| Posted by: Valentine 2005-05-30 17:28 |
| #12 If I recall correctly, the enrichment of ship-based reactors is so high, it's nearly bomb-grade already. Great. From what I hear, these babies are a snap to start up and run for decades: I talked with a nuclear navy power operator once, and he played out the hand motions necessary to go from cold startup to full power. From memory. I counted 20 seconds. Apparently, when the skipper wants full power, they designed it to make sure he GETS full power ASAP. Refueling is a bitch, though, because the lid's welded on to prevent leakage in the event the ship/sub sinks. It's not a problem to connect to the grid: the cables on high voltage transmission lines are not that big to begin with... |
| Posted by: Ptah 2005-05-30 15:44 |
| #11 Quick question...um exactly how would you plug this thing into the grid? (Not to mention unplug it, move it then plug it back in somewhere else). I leave this as an exercise for the students. But think BuckyBallIum and SuperConductors. This material will be carried into the affected region by a fleet of high speed CaterMarans and the local Electrical Cooperatives will spin to suit. |
| Posted by: Dr. Science 2005-05-30 14:59 |
| #10 A really big power cord. Seriously, they have a way to do it, I just don't know the technical names or methods. I have seen them do this after stringing along miles of new power towers and cables. I'm thinking the same time of technology would be used. |
| Posted by: mmurray821 2005-05-30 14:43 |
| #9 Quick question...um exactly how would you plug this thing into the grid? (Not to mention unplug it, move it then plug it back in somewhere else). |
| Posted by: Valentine 2005-05-30 14:31 |
| #8 Mobility really is key, here. For places with very specific seasonal demand for energy, say California in summer and the northeast in winter, a nuclear ship plugged into the grid could give big help during surge demand, or when fuel prices have jumped. Also, if there is major power infrastructure damage, say to high-tension lines after a hurricane, then a nuclear ship could power a large chunk of the isolated, but otherwise undamaged grid, until the main lines had been fixed. The rest of the time, it could provide huge amounts of grid isolated energy to research projects. It is a situation of "if you come up with a good solution, we can think up plenty of problems for it to fix." |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-05-30 13:48 |
| #7 Bet you're right JIB. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-05-30 13:00 |
| #6 Aren't these called Nuclear Powered Warships? Building a floating one is just an engineering chore. The real trick is not screwing the thing up because the operators are sucking down cheap vodka while on duty. |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2005-05-30 12:17 |
| #5 I just keep thinking about a floating plant would be sooooo much easier for a SEAL team to sabotage. |
| Posted by: mmurray821 2005-05-30 11:13 |
| #4 Ship, I thought it was Westinghouse since they have PWR and GE is BWR (not the best idea for a floater)but then it could have been CE but their big yard was in Memphis. Anyhoo the last guys I would trust with any form of nuclear energy would be the russkies. They don't even have a word for QA despite the space legacy. |
| Posted by: Jack is Back! 2005-05-30 10:03 |
#3
| ||
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-05-30 09:47 |
| #2 "RosAtom head Alexander Rumyantsev said earlier that floating power plants are absolutely safe. The reactors âwill be the same as those that are used by our submarines and nuclear ice-breakers...,â Oh, that's reassuring. Why don't we all just order our lead-lined Speedos now and avoid the rush? Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2005-05-30 09:03 |
| #1 This idea comes around once every seven years or so. What's the advantage to a floating reactor? Mobility? Think it was GE that spent a fortune trying to build a factory/yard on the St. Johns river to turn these out. All that's left is a huge Krupp hammerhead crane. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-05-30 08:03 |