4 ms·
I know land vs sea is different, but after decades of nuclear submarines working beautifully it's just so sad to me we don't have abundant SMRs by now.
by Ericson2314 3y ago
I know land vs sea is different, but after decades of nuclear submarines working beautifully it's just so sad to me we don't have abundant SMRs by now.
- preisschild 3y agoLarge nuclear reactors have better economics (per energy produced) than small reactors due to economy of scale benefits. But SMRs can still be useful for small towns, remote communities, district heating, process heat for nearby industry and so on.
- exabrial 3y agoAgree... although I do believe part of the problem is that a lot of US Naval reactors run on weapons grade uranium. Someone here probably knows more about this.
- niekze 3y agoThe fuel in US Naval nuclear reactors is enriched to a much higher percentage than civilian reactors due to size and longevity considerations. It has to fit the ship and refuels take months/years. A ship undergoing a refuel isn't a ship you can use. In a civilian plant, you can have multiple reactors and refuel them on a rotating schedule to avoid downtime, having a larger reactor vessel isn't a problem, and all of that is also going to be less expensive - which is a huge factor.
- Kimm0n0 3y agoI think the difference i >90% for military use and 3-5% for civilian use. Some new SMRs are planning on using >5%.
- Ericson2314 3y agoWith that grade fuel, can a nuclear submarine denote like a bomb?!
- shagie 3y agoI am of the understanding that part of this is because there are different profit margins in mind with a civilian reactor generating power to be sold and a military reactor powering a vessel. When that is combined with deregulation (or an anti-regulatory mindset) where things like insulation on water intake is deferred or ignored because it impacts the economics of the power plant, then building one becomes difficult.