3 ms·
> "Rosatom, in a statement, insisted its plant was 'invulnerable to tsunamis.'" > - Coastlines near cities are expensive real estate (not to mention anyone wit
by rtkwe 8y ago
> "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 the extra cost of building some extra infrastructure to deal with the ship, at that point its just easier to build your own power plant.
Both of these are pretty easily solved by floating the plant a short distance off the shore and laying a power line along the sea floor. Tsunami's aren't an issue till right along the shore and the ship would practically disappear if it were just a bit off shore.
- wrong_variable 8y agoYou 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).
- rtkwe 8y agoStorm surge isn't a danger to a ship unless it's docked on shore or gets pushed ashore. It's really not that different from a tsunami in that regard a ship at sea just moves up with the bulk of the water.
- justinator 8y agoOh, ships sink in the middle of the ocean, I believe, with utmost certainty.