33 ms·
This is a terrible idea when nuclear powered aircraft carriers and submarines exist. Just...build a couple of those reactors into this thing, put it under mili
by XorNot 3y ago
This is a terrible idea when nuclear powered aircraft carriers and submarines exist.
Just...build a couple of those reactors into this thing, put it under military control for logistics purposes and get a much better system.
Edit: in fact basically you'd take the tanker form factor, build in a large desalination plant, hospital and kitchen and basically produce the disaster relief/logistics supertanker hopefully at a lower price then an aircraft carrier.
- pjc50 3y agoNuclear powered civilian ship run by minimum wage staff with a Liberian or Panamanian flag? Are you sure? Oh, military control. At which point the cost becomes either ridiculous or hidden in a different budget.
- rob74 3y agoThe Russians already did something similar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Lomonosov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Lomonosov Ok, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_nuclear_power_plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_nuclear_power_plant the US had a prototype in the 1960s already, but the project was ultimately scrapped...
- pydry 3y ago>nuclear powered aircraft carriers and submarines exist. provided you dont mind 10x-ing your electric bill...
- XorNot 3y agoA tanker full of batteries isn't going to move enough energy to be worth it. Chemical batteries are god awful for stationary power applications. You'd be better off synthesizing carbon fuel from the air or electrolyzing hydrogen...or using the technology we already have which can just do it (nuclear).
- pyrale 3y agoThat's basically the assumption made by this project.
- pydry 3y agoRight. As I mentioned above I dont think it's a good idea either. Not energy dense enough.