5 ms·
> Nuclear reactors take ages to ramp up and down. Naval reactors are apparently very fast in this regard, so it's evidently not an inherent property of nuclear
by liability 6y ago
> Nuclear reactors take ages to ramp up and down.
Naval reactors are apparently very fast in this regard, so it's evidently not an inherent property of nuclear power.
(The USN also has an unparalleled record of safely operating reactors; more that 5,000 reactor-years clocked without major incident.)
- trimbo 6y agoDoes it count that a Navy man was killed at SL-1? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL-1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL-1 https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/67718734/richard-carlton-legg https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/67718734/richard-carlton...
- liability 6y agoSL-1 was an Army reactor, so I would say it doesn't count. I'd also not count the USS Thresher or the USS Scorpion, since reactor accidents weren't the reason those sank.
- stjohnswarts 6y agoRelative to how many people die every year from wood and coal smoke? I would say it doesn't count in a relative sense.
- baybal2 6y ago> Naval reactors are apparently very fast in this regard, so it's evidently not an inherent property of nuclear power. Ramping up is easy, ramping down... not so much. It's not as much of an issue if you swim in your coolant, hence naval reactors are unique in being able to ramp both up, and down quickly.
- liability 6y agoMost civil reactors are next to lakes or rivers so it seems like they should have plenty of water. Is it a matter of civil reactors using smaller[cheaper] plumbing and pumps? My intuition is that Naval reactors are built to be very responsive because that's useful for naval applications, but civil reactors aren't built like that because that ability has less relative value for civil reactors.