4 ms·

To my layperson self, it seems like that would be a bad idea. We know how to secure a reactor on land, but the sea is a big, dangerous place - and it's only a

• yellowapple 5y ago
  Nuclear reactors are arguably a lot safer (in terms of meltdown risk) on the ocean than they already are on land, seeing as how they're in ships that float on a giant planet-wide heatsink that also happens to be exceptionally good at confining radiation. The more pertinent risk would be piracy and the like; if thorium ever catches on, it'd probably help make that less of an issue.
• Swizec 5y ago
  We already have nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers. The popular joke is that all military/navy/etc equipment is built by the lowest bidder. On the bright side: if a nuclear reactor melts down in the middle of the ocean, there’s basically nothing around to be inconvenienced by that event.
  • l33t2328 5y ago
    Those nuclear aircraft carriers have a bit more military protection than an arbitrary nuclear cargo ship will.
    • bronson 5y ago
      And a sliiightly bigger budget, both construction and maintenance.