4 ms·
We use them in nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers, so the tech seems feasible - not sure why commercial use for small reactors is such a difficult stretch
by docandrew 4y ago
We use them in nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers, so the tech seems feasible - not sure why commercial use for small reactors is such a difficult stretch.
- rippercushions 4y agoNuclear submarines cost on the order of $6B a pop, so I'd hesitate to describe anything about them as "cheap". We use nuclear reactors in them because there's no other power source that's as compact and self-contained.
- phone8675309 4y agoPlus worst case for a nuclear submarine is that you flood the reactor with sea water if you have a loss of cooling.
- sebcat 4y agoSurely there are worse cases for a sub than this?
- nine_k 4y agoThe idea is that you are not going to have a meltdown even in a badly malfunctioning reactor.
- thaumasiotes 4y agoIs it? It's not at all difficult to stock enough seawater to flood a terrestrial plant. What's distinguishing the submarine?
- HPsquared 4y agoSmaller size than commercial power station reactors, easier to keep cool.
- thaumasiotes 4y agoThis contradicts the comment I responded to, though. The scenario is that we've already failed to keep it cool.
- moloch-hai 4y agoThere is less of it to cool.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- phone8675309 4y agoA submarine (when submerged) has a large body of water for heat to radiate out into. A (previous generation) terrestrial plant already has systems that can dump ludicrous amounts of water onto the core, but they all rely on there being power to operate pumps. A nuclear submarine that can dump in sea water does not need this - the body of water it is in is cold enough (relative to the heat in the core) that it will naturally carry heat away.
- LgWoodenBadger 4y agoWikipedia says a 688 costs less than $2B in 2021 dollars. And that’s all in for the submarine on top of the reactor.
- Klinky 4y agoSub and ship reactors are effectively sealed units that are not intended to be refueled on a regular basis. They can be serviced and refueled eventually, but it is a major overhaul to do so. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refueling_and_overhaul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refueling_and_overhaul
- adgjlsfhk1 4y agoThe problem with a small reactor is that there's a lot of per reactor cost. Things like security, communicating with the grid, and paperwork don't get cheaper with a smaller reactor so the percent of cost going to overhead goes up.
- idontwantthis 4y agoThe exception proves the rule. If we have them already for subs, but still don’t have them on land then they must be bad ideas when cost matters.
- gghhzzgghhzz 4y agodon't they normally run on highly enriched fuel? I'm not sure there we currently have the supply chain, security and ability to deal with geopolitical fallout of using the same fuel for mass domestic use.
- credit_guy 4y agoNaval reactors usually run on weapons grade nuclear fuel, but not always. The French K15 reactor runs on 7% enriched fuel.