3 ms·
> Experience builds up rapidly as the same damned thing is built and installed over and over. Nuclear doesn't have that. Do you think this is the reason the U
by javagram 8y ago
> Experience builds up rapidly as the same damned thing is built and installed over and over. Nuclear doesn't have that.
Do you think this is the reason the US Navy doesn’t seem to have major problems getting nuclear power plants built and installed in submarines and aircraft carriers? It’s interesting how civilian power companies have had a bunch of high profile failures in this area but as far as I can tell new warships still seem to be able to get reactors fine.
- afterburner 8y agoWhat's the power output of those I imagine much smaller reactors, compared to ones meant to power entire regions and millions of consumers? What did they cost to build? What risks are there, compared to regular reactors?
- javagram 8y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Naval_reactors https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Naval_... The A1B being installed on the newest carriers is a 700 MW unit being installed in a pair, so 1.4 GW total. That number seems comparable to a lot of commercial power generation, e.g. Vermont Yankee is a 620 MW plant.