3 ms·
There were a couple of commercial cargo ships built with nuclear propulsion, I think in the 1950s, but perhaps they weren't economically viable.
by billfruit 7y ago
There were a couple of commercial cargo ships built with nuclear propulsion, I think in the 1950s, but perhaps they weren't economically viable.
- sandworm101 7y agoAnd the russians still have that nuclear icebreaker. The line between military combat ship, merchant marine, coast guard and fully civilian vessels is not bright, nor need it be. There is probably a case for running government-protected reactors on commercial ships, just as government-protected reactors power cities.
- Reason077 7y agoThree next-generation nuclear icebreakers are currently under construction in Russia. They are the largest and most powerful icebreakers ever built. https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_22220_icebreaker https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_22220_icebreaker You can also book an arctic cruise aboard a nuclear-powered icebreaker! https://www.polarcruises.com/arctic/ships/icebreaker/50-years-of-victory-p https://www.polarcruises.com/arctic/ships/icebreaker/50-year...
- pasabagi 7y agoWhat's the need for these icebreakers? I can understand that a nuclear icebreaker is a good thing for breaking ice - but I don't understand how it's economical. Is there really so much value in bringing cargo through pack ice?
- sandworm101 7y agoPeople need food. Isolated northern communities dont get everything by air.
- usrusr 7y agoOne problem they faced was that most ports would not allow them in, severely restricting the routes they could run. (and with the exception of two Soviet outliers in 1959 and 1988 all nuclear civilian vessels are from the 1960ies or 70ies)