3 ms·

The US Army had a nuclear power barge which tied up in Panama and provided power to the Canal Zone for several years. See, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MH-1A h

The US Army had a nuclear power barge which tied up in Panama and provided power to the Canal Zone for several years. See, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MH-1A https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MH-1A Query whether Navy ships could be tied up in Houston and connected to the grid.

pseingatl 6y ago
In Panama, the barge was known at the Thor, wikipedia says the Sturgis, maybe there were two?
_joel 6y ago
There are a few large floating powerstations in use commercially now, like https://www.miningreview.com/energy/mozambique-100-mw-floating-power-station/ https://www.miningreview.com/energy/mozambique-100-mw-floati... I'm not sure you'd be able to float that down in poor weather, however.
Tade0 6y ago
Japan had a nuclear-powered cargo and later research vessel, but she started her journey with an incident: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RV_Mirai https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RV_Mirai And had to be converted to running on fossil fuels.
- LargoLasskhyfv 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Hahn_(ship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Hahn_(ship) > She had covered 250,000 nautical miles (463,000 km) on 22 kilograms of uranium.
- aftbit 6y ago
  It seems like the incidents were mostly political. Supposedly nobody was harmed and there was no substantial radiation release.
bluGill 6y ago
I believe the US navy has the the ability for many ships to supply power to the city when docked. One job of the Navy is to go to a port near a disaster and help the city recover, so if the ship can supply the city with needed power that is very helpful in some disasters. (when it isn't moving it has a lot of spare power) Most ports don't have the ability to use power from a ship (and even if they do it is questionable if that will survive the disaster)
Gravityloss 6y ago
The first nuclear power plant was a nuclear sub on a pier.
Ichthypresbyter 6y ago
It was done in the late 1920s/early 1930s with the aircraft carrier Lexington, which powered Tacoma, WA, during a drought which affected hydroelectric generation. The thing is that Lexington was very unusual for an American ship in having turboelectric propulsion, where the steam turbines were connected to generators which produced power for the electric motors which turned the propellers. Most US Navy steamships- including all of the modern nuclear-powered ones- use a mechanical transmission to connect their steam turbines to the propellers directly. They do run some generators from the turbines for so-called 'hotel load'- operating the ship's electrical systems- but the output of these is relatively limited. Some other countries' nuclear submarines do have turboelectric propulsion- I think the Russians have used submarines to power isolated Siberian cities in emergencies- and the USN's new Columbia-class SSBNs will. But the amount of electricity you could get from any current US Navy ship would be limited.
- aftbit 6y ago
  Interesting... Why has this mechanical transmission setup persisted so long in American Navy ships? Perhaps it is more efficient? I would naively expect it to be more expensive, require more maintenance, and be less flexible than a diesel-electric setup like trains use.
  - Ichthypresbyter 6y ago
    IIRC the weight of the generators was a big problem- particularly when the Washington Naval Treaty had to be taken into account. The US tried building turboelectric submarines twice, but in both cases they were heavier and slower than equivalents powered by geared turbines. Apparently advances in electric motor/generator technology in recent years have reached the point where it's practical again.

pseingatl 6y ago

In Panama, the barge was known at the Thor, wikipedia says the Sturgis, maybe there were two?

_joel 6y ago

There are a few large floating powerstations in use commercially now, like https://www.miningreview.com/energy/mozambique-100-mw-floating-power-station/ https://www.miningreview.com/energy/mozambique-100-mw-floati... I'm not sure you'd be able to float that down in poor weather, however.

Tade0 6y ago

Japan had a nuclear-powered cargo and later research vessel, but she started her journey with an incident: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RV_Mirai https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RV_Mirai And had to be converted to running on fossil fuels.

LargoLasskhyfv 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Hahn_(ship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Hahn_(ship) > She had covered 250,000 nautical miles (463,000 km) on 22 kilograms of uranium.
aftbit 6y ago
It seems like the incidents were mostly political. Supposedly nobody was harmed and there was no substantial radiation release.

bluGill 6y ago

I believe the US navy has the the ability for many ships to supply power to the city when docked. One job of the Navy is to go to a port near a disaster and help the city recover, so if the ship can supply the city with needed power that is very helpful in some disasters. (when it isn't moving it has a lot of spare power) Most ports don't have the ability to use power from a ship (and even if they do it is questionable if that will survive the disaster)

Gravityloss 6y ago

The first nuclear power plant was a nuclear sub on a pier.

Ichthypresbyter 6y ago

It was done in the late 1920s/early 1930s with the aircraft carrier Lexington, which powered Tacoma, WA, during a drought which affected hydroelectric generation. The thing is that Lexington was very unusual for an American ship in having turboelectric propulsion, where the steam turbines were connected to generators which produced power for the electric motors which turned the propellers. Most US Navy steamships- including all of the modern nuclear-powered ones- use a mechanical transmission to connect their steam turbines to the propellers directly. They do run some generators from the turbines for so-called 'hotel load'- operating the ship's electrical systems- but the output of these is relatively limited. Some other countries' nuclear submarines do have turboelectric propulsion- I think the Russians have used submarines to power isolated Siberian cities in emergencies- and the USN's new Columbia-class SSBNs will. But the amount of electricity you could get from any current US Navy ship would be limited.

aftbit 6y ago
Interesting... Why has this mechanical transmission setup persisted so long in American Navy ships? Perhaps it is more efficient? I would naively expect it to be more expensive, require more maintenance, and be less flexible than a diesel-electric setup like trains use.
- Ichthypresbyter 6y ago
  IIRC the weight of the generators was a big problem- particularly when the Washington Naval Treaty had to be taken into account. The US tried building turboelectric submarines twice, but in both cases they were heavier and slower than equivalents powered by geared turbines. Apparently advances in electric motor/generator technology in recent years have reached the point where it's practical again.