Its a good idea for china to deploy it on their artificial island in the West Philippine Sea. They may rigged it with explosives, so that if attacked and if the attack fail to damage it, they can explode it and blame it on the attacker. For sure it will be very harmful to nearby Philippines. It can be deterrent to any future attacks.
Sorry, but having gone through the frustration of getting quality manufactured goods out of China, I'm not sure if be lining up to have them build me a floating nuclear plant.
However, if a more reputable building company/country started making these, it might change the face of disaster relief and basic power infrastructure. It's not far-fetched either: the number of nuclear subs, carriers, and ice-breakers (and unknown military projects) proves this idea is hardly implausible.
It's just maybe not the best idea to be run through corrupt state enterprises, especially with 30 years of Chernobyl memories floating up this week.
However, if a more reputable building company/country started making these, it might change the face of disaster relief and basic power infrastructure. It's not far-fetched either: the number of nuclear subs, carriers, and ice-breakers (and unknown military projects) proves this idea is hardly implausible.
It's just maybe not the best idea to be run through corrupt state enterprises, especially with 30 years of Chernobyl memories floating up this week.
The US already has scores of 'floating nuclear power plants'. They are called Aircraft carriers and Submarines. China will build floating conventional power plants, assuming that a multinational 'Divine Wind' does not erase the Oligarchs manmade and illegal islands.
3
I think this is a good idea. There is probably a market for these type plants in numerous locations worldwide. They would have zero carbon footprint.
If the US can power its navy ships that sail the world, why not power plants.
It would be impossible for US companies to do this, but China could literally manufacture these plants for sale worldwide.
There are proposals for nuclear plants that would be safe anywhere using new technology.
Maybe the US is "Missing the Boat" on this because we are blind to the possibilities.
If the US can power its navy ships that sail the world, why not power plants.
It would be impossible for US companies to do this, but China could literally manufacture these plants for sale worldwide.
There are proposals for nuclear plants that would be safe anywhere using new technology.
Maybe the US is "Missing the Boat" on this because we are blind to the possibilities.
2
Ray, are you insane? Zero carbon footprint? If the ship sinks or starts taking on water, all of the surroinding ocean would be like Chernobyl. Our future has no room for inefficient reactors that run on radioactive material that we still have now way of recycling/reusing/disposing of. This is a terrible idea, unless you do not care about the safety and health of the ocean.
This really isn't true, but I wouldn't expect anyone who doesn't know anything about nuclear reactors to know that.
There are ways to prevent a meltdown. A lot of ways, actually. Many of them are insanely simple to the point that they are foolproof. If we were just allowed to build new reactors instead of relying on old ones...
... Anyway, there are ways to ensure that even a sinking ship such as this could shut down the reactor. At that point, the reactor compartment flooding and filling it with water could actually be a blessing instead of spelling doom.
I support nuclear reactors because I support the environment. And intellectual thought.
These are great ideas, and you'd know that if you did more than 5 minutes of googling to learn about the matter.
There are ways to prevent a meltdown. A lot of ways, actually. Many of them are insanely simple to the point that they are foolproof. If we were just allowed to build new reactors instead of relying on old ones...
... Anyway, there are ways to ensure that even a sinking ship such as this could shut down the reactor. At that point, the reactor compartment flooding and filling it with water could actually be a blessing instead of spelling doom.
I support nuclear reactors because I support the environment. And intellectual thought.
These are great ideas, and you'd know that if you did more than 5 minutes of googling to learn about the matter.
After seeing how China treats its rivers and lakes, I've got little confidence it will treat the oceans any better.
I suppose one silver lining with the Global Warming problem is that these islands will soon be submerged no matter how many coral environments China destroys, and the problem will soon take care of itself. Can't claim an island that isn't there. Can't claim a sea without any island nearby.
I suppose one silver lining with the Global Warming problem is that these islands will soon be submerged no matter how many coral environments China destroys, and the problem will soon take care of itself. Can't claim an island that isn't there. Can't claim a sea without any island nearby.
4
The proposal for floating nuclear power plants off the shore of New Jersey, in which PSE&G was involved, was unlicensable because, in the event of a meltdown, the nuclear fuel would go into the ocean just offshore.
There is much promise, in deep water, of energy from ocean waves. The moving action would drive pumps to build hydraulic energy, and that energy could be released through turbines to drive alternators.
Steam based power should be a thing of the past, be it fossil fuel or nuclear fired. When was the last time you saw a steam locomotive pulling a train?
There is much promise, in deep water, of energy from ocean waves. The moving action would drive pumps to build hydraulic energy, and that energy could be released through turbines to drive alternators.
Steam based power should be a thing of the past, be it fossil fuel or nuclear fired. When was the last time you saw a steam locomotive pulling a train?
1
Chinese people in Taiwan are not educated by the Chinese Communist Party. But we all know that the South China Sea is our heritage since ancient time (At least, Chinese Ming Dynasty). That’s the reason why the governments of China, including R.O.China(Taipei) and P.R.China(Beijing), both claim the same area of South China Sea.
After WWII, when R.O.China was still an ally of the US, the whole world, included the US government, accepted the claim. During the time when the Navy of R.O.China weakened and the Navy of P.R.China was not strong enough, some ASEAN countries occupied the rocks, reefs, and islands step by step. Then, the UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea) was proposed in 1982, they claimed their legitimacy based on the new rules.
Now, the US is containing the growing China, so, they drop their words, and they pretend the UNCLOS was approved since ancient time. If this is correct, then, the Diaoyutai (Senkaku Islands) should be returned to Taipei’s control, and the Falkland Islands should be returned to Argentina’s control.
After WWII, when R.O.China was still an ally of the US, the whole world, included the US government, accepted the claim. During the time when the Navy of R.O.China weakened and the Navy of P.R.China was not strong enough, some ASEAN countries occupied the rocks, reefs, and islands step by step. Then, the UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea) was proposed in 1982, they claimed their legitimacy based on the new rules.
Now, the US is containing the growing China, so, they drop their words, and they pretend the UNCLOS was approved since ancient time. If this is correct, then, the Diaoyutai (Senkaku Islands) should be returned to Taipei’s control, and the Falkland Islands should be returned to Argentina’s control.
5
So how about Tibet and the Uighur provinces like Xinjiang? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, no? I'm pretty sure Tibetans have claimed Tibetan lands since long before Mao rolled in. And I'm pretty sure the islands and seas off the coast of the Philippines have been long claimed by the Philippines. Look at a map.
Thanks.
Thanks.
3
Thank you for bringing this perspective.
Nuclear submarines were dumb. Floating nuclear power plants dumber. The quest for more power that jeopardizes humans and the environment seems to have no bounds. And the world thought the 3 gorges dam was extreme. Sure energy is critically important. But we underestimate our creative potential to find sustainable solutions. We must learn from our mistakes for civilization to advance or risk repeating our mistakes until the error is so great and the consequential suffering so profound that a repeat error would be unthinkable. Open, sincere and meaningful global consultation should precede any such technological proposal. Moe diverse minds collaborating create better solutions. Energy is a global entitlement, not a sovereign right.
1
Meanwhile people burn fossil fuel in their cars and homes because they are entitled and write posts demonizing nuclear power and hydroelectricity
1
We are products of our time, only when we reach a personal point of power can we change our little sliver into something more in line with our personal ideals. I would choose solar over anything, unfortunately the energy companies that power my condo refuse to go 100% renewable. What am I to do?
Offshore Power Systems' partially completed shipyard for building barge-mounted power plants at Jacksonville, Fl., was dismantled and the huge crane which spanned the building ways was later sold to China.
1
World War III is going to be the US & EU vs Russia and China, with India and the Arabs as the wild cards.
2
It is also likely that WW III will between an Islamic Caliphate and the West or even between Islam and the rest of the world.
1
What a happy though for those who love (but have not witnessed) war. Does the fact that many on your list are nuclear powers concern you? And to leave Pakistan out, how could you? There is a chance that nuclear states will contain their saber rattling when push comes to shove even when cheered on by ‘the crowd’. If not ….
Until there is a safe, clean way to dispose of nuclear waste there is no excuse for building more reactors anywhere. But, good luck telling China anything.
Eleanor, spent nuclear fuel is now stored safely and cleanly at over 100 locations in the U.S. It will soon be reused in Gen IV nuclear reactors to produce clean electricity, so no need to worry.
It would be beyond foolish to "dispose" of it. Spent fuel currently in storage holds enough energy to provide clean electricity to the entire world for over seventy years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UXXwWOImm8
It would be beyond foolish to "dispose" of it. Spent fuel currently in storage holds enough energy to provide clean electricity to the entire world for over seventy years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UXXwWOImm8
2
That is an overly optimistic opinion of our massive stockpile...but I embrace optimism. Unfortunately our future will not be powered by nuclear/steam reactors. I assure you.
China is known for their polluted air and water and their spectacular industrial accidents. I can't imagine a country less qualified to do something this foolish.
From their vantage point, it makes some sense, since otherwise, these little outposts that they've greedily stolen will otherwise have generators in need of a constant supply of fossil fuels.
From their vantage point, it makes some sense, since otherwise, these little outposts that they've greedily stolen will otherwise have generators in need of a constant supply of fossil fuels.
1
I'm guessing that Bruce Willis will star in the movie version.
3
As if enough of our resources weren't contaminated?
1
Did Chinese newspapers carry like stories as the US interfered with, dominated, abused, made war on, disrupted the governments of numerous countries in South America, Central America, the Mediterranean, Southeast Asia & the Mideast? Did Chinese newspapers have critical reports on the US testing over 500 nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, making war on hapless Mexico, Philippines, Nicaragua? How about Agent Orange in Vietnam and the PC liberal's favorite whine: drones?
We don't care if they did, right? That's your best indication of the power of this propaganda piece to Chinese eyes.
We don't care if they did, right? That's your best indication of the power of this propaganda piece to Chinese eyes.
1
Has China gone crazy? Floating nuclear reactors! What could possibly go wrong with that idea? Too Much! Permanent radioactive melting cores deep under water, for what? Electrical power for illegal military installations. China will be making enemies! Nein Atom Kraft!
Chine should explain exactly, it's long term goals. Another Cold War, is about to become a Hot War.
The world powers have all gone mad with nuclear this and that, smaller more efficient nuclear warheads, multiple war heads on ballistic missiles!
What in the name of progress do these insane minds desire?
Atom Kraft Nein!!
Chine should explain exactly, it's long term goals. Another Cold War, is about to become a Hot War.
The world powers have all gone mad with nuclear this and that, smaller more efficient nuclear warheads, multiple war heads on ballistic missiles!
What in the name of progress do these insane minds desire?
Atom Kraft Nein!!
While I'm skeptical about China, floating nuclear power plants are actually a wonderful idea. It makes getting access to coolant a trivial matter.
And if it does melt down and breach containment, it's not just going to sit on the bottom of the ocean; the fuel will continue to melt itself into the Earth's crust from whence it came.
And if it does melt down and breach containment, it's not just going to sit on the bottom of the ocean; the fuel will continue to melt itself into the Earth's crust from whence it came.
What a wonderful idea. If tensions escalate with the USA, all that's needed to take out one of the manmade islands would be a drone one a kamakazi flight path towards the nuked ship parked on the island.
The issue is not the south China sea, that will have to be resolved hopefully in court staring with the current case involving the Philippians’ clams due this summer. That case will pressure China too join working for a solution or not.
In a world starting to deal with global warming, nuclear power is a plus as is hydro, solar and wind and China is a leader here. But since the Three Mile Island event in the USA America has laid back on nuclear power facilities and the failure in Japan keeps the issue of safety central. There was just very recently a conference on Nuclear Power and safety had to be an issue but no coverage. With China pushing hard along with others, are regulations on construction and operations being continually upgraded? It was Pacific Gas & Electric that argued its geologists have found Bodega Head on top of the San Andreas Fault to be a safe location. A Berkeley Biochemistry Professor and a small group of activist got the Sec. of the Interior to send federal geologist to test the site and that was the end of PG&E’s project. The industry does not self regulate.
In a world starting to deal with global warming, nuclear power is a plus as is hydro, solar and wind and China is a leader here. But since the Three Mile Island event in the USA America has laid back on nuclear power facilities and the failure in Japan keeps the issue of safety central. There was just very recently a conference on Nuclear Power and safety had to be an issue but no coverage. With China pushing hard along with others, are regulations on construction and operations being continually upgraded? It was Pacific Gas & Electric that argued its geologists have found Bodega Head on top of the San Andreas Fault to be a safe location. A Berkeley Biochemistry Professor and a small group of activist got the Sec. of the Interior to send federal geologist to test the site and that was the end of PG&E’s project. The industry does not self regulate.
1
As if the Chinese have not done enough to poison their land, air and water, as if China has not done enough to destroy the conquered free nation of Tibet and ruin its pristine environment, as if China has not done enough to destroy forests and lands and waters of other nations where they deforest and mine, this fascist "technocracy" now brings you potential disasters on sea. Idiots of the first rank.
3
To SKVAN
Yes, China has finally passed the United States as the world major polluter. Fortunately it seems more willing to deal with the issue at all levels that the USA and itS dysfunctional government seems to be able to do. The Paris Accord between Xi and Obama has found its way into the current 5 year plan in China but is being questioned as illegal in US court, and what is Congress’ position on global warming? The anti-Chinese ranting does get a little boring and mindless at times, coning from the direction of a major sinner.
Yes, China has finally passed the United States as the world major polluter. Fortunately it seems more willing to deal with the issue at all levels that the USA and itS dysfunctional government seems to be able to do. The Paris Accord between Xi and Obama has found its way into the current 5 year plan in China but is being questioned as illegal in US court, and what is Congress’ position on global warming? The anti-Chinese ranting does get a little boring and mindless at times, coning from the direction of a major sinner.
1
Hard as we want to admit it, we (the USA and China) are stuck living across the street from each other. So let's make sure that we do atomic power together, for added safety, because without nuclear power our collective goose is cooked.
And don't even think about military conflict between us, which has to be the stupidest idea anyone ever postulated. We've got to help out each other and figure a way to turn the Pacific into a neighborhood, not a live fire zone.
The islands are reality, they are going to be powered, now what does the future require- pragmatism. Let's share our nuclear technology with the Chinese and hope for the best (it's all there is).
And don't even think about military conflict between us, which has to be the stupidest idea anyone ever postulated. We've got to help out each other and figure a way to turn the Pacific into a neighborhood, not a live fire zone.
The islands are reality, they are going to be powered, now what does the future require- pragmatism. Let's share our nuclear technology with the Chinese and hope for the best (it's all there is).
2
Since China has publicized it's plan for nuclear barges with at least some in disputed areas of the South China Sea, Poling and his group should start talking/negotiating now with China about this latest raising of the stakes.
Nuclear power plants incorporated into floating mobile platforms in the South China Sea are an intelligent response to the electrical needs of the area. This demonstrates a willingness in China to operate pragmatically while the West frets any electricity not driven by less efficient means and now operates in a regressive fear-based mode regarding all electric power generation.
3
These actions are going to escalate the simmering tensions already there and make it a lot worse. First, there is the danger of nuclear fallout that may contaminate the seas and affect shipping routes and fishing waters. Second, there is the signaling of an assertion of territoriality, intensifying the need for other countries to intensify theirs. It is completely irresponsible to do this preemptively.
1
They've choked the air with massive pollution, poisoned their soil and drinking waters with chemicals, adulterated and poisoned food and medicines for profits, hunted species to near extinction and "disappear" whistleblowers with impunity. Seems like the sort of capable and responsible guys to entrust with floating nuclear power plants in the worlds oceans.
The US also used a floating nuclear power plant to supply power to the USAF base in Thule, Greenland.
4
This'll end well
One more step in the militarization of the faux islands of the South China Sea by the PRC. In May the Hague will issue its ruling regarding China's territorial claims in that area. What if the ruling goes against China (which has said it would not abide by it regardless)? The US is then going to have to make a decision about direct action as none of the other parties there have the power to do much if anything when it comes to their huge neighbor. The question: will President Obama punt and leave it to his successor to do this? My hope is that he acts.
1
Oil drilling platforms?
With obvious dark intentions, starting about a year and a half ago, Beijing has constructed a military base on an illegally formed island in the South China Sea. This past week China's top military officer, Gen. Fan Changlong, visited the hotly disputed islands, and today, Chinese military aircraft landed on the military-grade airstrip -- all this while Beijing has claimed all along that the island construction was not intended for military operations.
The next thing that will happen, is that China will begin erecting drilling platforms in the South China Sea to explore for and extract oil, gas, and any other valuable resources it can find. Of course, this will happen without seeking permission from or negotiating with neighboring countries with legitimate claims for the valuable resources believed to be in those same areas. And this drilling will proceed with impunity, partly because China can now project immediate military power to protect their exploratory efforts, and partly because of China's bully mindset.
Bullies take what they want, and don't worry about law or consideration of right and wrong. Bullies ignore protestations of their actions being unfair, and threats of diplomatic repercussions; bullies understand only force.
With obvious dark intentions, starting about a year and a half ago, Beijing has constructed a military base on an illegally formed island in the South China Sea. This past week China's top military officer, Gen. Fan Changlong, visited the hotly disputed islands, and today, Chinese military aircraft landed on the military-grade airstrip -- all this while Beijing has claimed all along that the island construction was not intended for military operations.
The next thing that will happen, is that China will begin erecting drilling platforms in the South China Sea to explore for and extract oil, gas, and any other valuable resources it can find. Of course, this will happen without seeking permission from or negotiating with neighboring countries with legitimate claims for the valuable resources believed to be in those same areas. And this drilling will proceed with impunity, partly because China can now project immediate military power to protect their exploratory efforts, and partly because of China's bully mindset.
Bullies take what they want, and don't worry about law or consideration of right and wrong. Bullies ignore protestations of their actions being unfair, and threats of diplomatic repercussions; bullies understand only force.
1
Well played, China. From dams to railroads to schools and apartment buildings to chemical factories, we are well aware of what happens when China builds major construction projects: catastrophe. Safety regulations and building codes take a back seat to corruption and profit. And now they want to build floating nuclear power plants for illegally produced, militarily important islands in the South China Sea. So if and when disaster strikes and containment fails, deathly radiation won't poison their own land, but will contaminate international shipping waters. This is why we need to step up efforts to say 'no' to China.
OMG...!
oh my gosh, if China puts nuclear power plants on their destroyers, and position them in international waters, they'll become literally impossible to sink, because anyone who sinks them will cause radioactive waste to spill into their own coast and water supply. This is evil genius!!!
If China builds them it would use the new High Temperature Gas Cooling Gen 4 nuclear reactor technology to prevent such meltdown from occurring.
2
What could possibly go wrong ? . . . . .
If there was such a thing as criminal stupidity, this idea would qualify as such.
When the PRC poisons the oceans, who will make them fix it!?
When the PRC poisons the oceans, who will make them fix it!?
I'm sure they will be as well made as all the manufactured items that China exports.
Such as that fine job they did on the crane base the company sent there to be welded after it cracked. I'm sure all New Yorkers remember it, it was the crane that toppled over several years ago on E. 91st. St. in 2007 & killed two people & wrecked several buildings. The Chinese company lied about it experience [it didn't have any] & claimed it could do the job in three months for $22,000, while an experienced Ohio company said it would take six to seven months & cost $120,000.
Or the truck castings a different, yet equally incompetent Chinese manufacturer made for the Chicago Transit Authority's newest L cars.
All of them had to be replaced after they cracked within a few weeks of going into service.
I can't imagine what will happen with a nuclear plant meltdown at sea!
Such as that fine job they did on the crane base the company sent there to be welded after it cracked. I'm sure all New Yorkers remember it, it was the crane that toppled over several years ago on E. 91st. St. in 2007 & killed two people & wrecked several buildings. The Chinese company lied about it experience [it didn't have any] & claimed it could do the job in three months for $22,000, while an experienced Ohio company said it would take six to seven months & cost $120,000.
Or the truck castings a different, yet equally incompetent Chinese manufacturer made for the Chicago Transit Authority's newest L cars.
All of them had to be replaced after they cracked within a few weeks of going into service.
I can't imagine what will happen with a nuclear plant meltdown at sea!
Well, I have a question. A submarine exchanges its spent fuel in port when the need arises. A land based reactor stores its waste in 50 gallon drums, by the back door. So, where is a barge going to put their trash. Given what I have come to expect from China in the past, I am none too confident that whatever they do will be good for any of us in the long run.
Fortunately, life as we know it will end first.
Fortunately, life as we know it will end first.
1
One can imagine fleets of nuclear powered vessels powering coastal cities across the globe. China's contribution to thwarting "global warming". Lucky us.
All 10 aircraft carriers and 60+ submarines of the US Navy are nuclear powered. There are at least 80 such ships floating around, already.
1
While the idea of mobile stations with the ability to generate massive power is actually quite intriguing, and could do worlds of good for bringing power to places devastated by natural disaster and help with relief efforts, this just doesn't seem like a great idea.
The island building has already decimated the marine environments around the reefs they have dredged and pumped; now they will suck up and then spew heated water there. The earth was a garden of eden and man continues to destroy it....
The US did the same thing many years ago when the US Army built a floating nuclear power plant to provide electric power for the US base at Thule, Greenland.
1
Kind of a smart move really. No one dare to try anything funny, militarily, otherwise would have millions of radioactive dead fish on their conscience. It is passive aggressive, expanding your influence, not by adding more military hardware, but semi-civilian, dual purpose assets: ports, air fields, hotels, hospitals, lighthouses and now add nuclear reactors to the list.
Congratulations Mr. Tang Bo, CNNSA, Safety Regulatory Authority, Mr. Xu Dahe, Director CAEA.
Global Climate Change necessiated this marvel technology earlier demonstrated by Finland today functioning courtesy respective Authorities in China safe and secure.
Tsunami, floods, earth quakes necessiated this dream to come true, which is today up and running.
I would suggest the respective authorities as CNNSA, CAEA to apply for Safety trails to respective agencies, authorities in Pakistan to overcome the energy production gap which otherwise is not possible with current technologies in Civilian Nuclear Power.
Global Climate Change necessiated this marvel technology earlier demonstrated by Finland today functioning courtesy respective Authorities in China safe and secure.
Tsunami, floods, earth quakes necessiated this dream to come true, which is today up and running.
I would suggest the respective authorities as CNNSA, CAEA to apply for Safety trails to respective agencies, authorities in Pakistan to overcome the energy production gap which otherwise is not possible with current technologies in Civilian Nuclear Power.
Seems downright creative to me, once one gets beyond what might be militaristic motives. Others will follow suit. The world and what we call nature will be less safe. What we call technology will overwhelm us.
A surprising way to acknowledge the recent fifth anniversary of the Fukushima disaster. I'm envisioning a move mash-up of "Poseiden Adventure" and "Captain Phillips" with a nuclear twist. Apparently Jim Mahaffey's "Atomic Accidents" has not been translated into Chinese.
The rendering looks like it was borrowed from the Russians who have been developing mobile nuclear power stations for several years.
1
Just another reason to avoid supporting China, buying Chinese goods or tolerating the Chinese push for world domination. A few decades of development and they are destroying the world's environment.
People are terrified of nuclear power, but strangely blase about using Clorox bleach on every surface that their kids touch and pesticides on their lawns. People are weird.
As for the specifics of this article, there was a good reason that we decided that putting a large nuclear plant on a boat was a bad idea, and, with the rise of terrorism, that idea is even worse these days. I hope the Chinese know what they are doing...
As for the specifics of this article, there was a good reason that we decided that putting a large nuclear plant on a boat was a bad idea, and, with the rise of terrorism, that idea is even worse these days. I hope the Chinese know what they are doing...
" there was a good reason that we decided that putting a large nuclear plant on a boat was a bad idea"
If that was the case, why does the US Navy have 10 x nuclear powered aircraft carriers, 60+ nuclear powered submarines and more of both now being built?
If that was the case, why does the US Navy have 10 x nuclear powered aircraft carriers, 60+ nuclear powered submarines and more of both now being built?
4
This article has to be read in the context of another article in today's NYT that discusses Mr. Xi's new title as military commander in chief and his desire to have a more direct role over China's military. The stated purpose of these plans that China wants to become a "maritime power" is just a cover. These plans are clearly intended to support China's plans to enhance its ability to project military power as it expands its sphere of influence.
Will China carry a liability insurance on the potential floating disaster elsewhere close to other countries in the South China Sea?
The use of floating nuclear plants seems fairly reasonable from an engineering standpoint. As the article mentioned, submarines and aircraft carriers have been nuclear powered for decades now. A floating plant would likely be like a unmilitarized aircraft carrier, and would be less vulnerable to certain disasters like earthquakes and tsunami (when was the last time a submarine or carrier sunk from either?). The reactor used on modern ships could generate enough power and fresh water for a small city and its mobility is a key advantage.
4
Oh, what a great idea! Floating nuclear reactors, with the potential to contaminate the entire Pacific Ocean. Sounds like something out of a novel by Margaret Atwood! If China's leaders build them, it will prove they are even dumber than the executives of Tokyo Electric whose reactor blew up in the March 11, 2011 earthquake/tsunami in Japan.
3
The Chinese might view the vulnerability of a floating nuclear power plant as an advantage. It could be seen as some insurance against a US attack. The very dangers of it would make the US reluctant to risk a strike on the atoll, or so the Chinese might reason.
3
I do not think a barge is a safe place for an operating nuclear reactor.
I do not think anchored in an artificial atoll nearly awash at the best of times is a safe place for such a barge.
I don't think the pack ice of Siberia's Arctic coast is a safe place for such a barge either.
It isn't just China doing this, and not just dangerous atolls as inappropriate sites for this.
In the West, we foolishly built reactors on top of earthquake faults. That is nothing compared to a barge. But it is the same thoughtlessness of consequence and risk.
If nuclear power has any place in the future, it would be as different sorts of reactors put in only the safest of places. This is nuts. It is not unfortunately in any way unique in its nuttiness.
I do not think anchored in an artificial atoll nearly awash at the best of times is a safe place for such a barge.
I don't think the pack ice of Siberia's Arctic coast is a safe place for such a barge either.
It isn't just China doing this, and not just dangerous atolls as inappropriate sites for this.
In the West, we foolishly built reactors on top of earthquake faults. That is nothing compared to a barge. But it is the same thoughtlessness of consequence and risk.
If nuclear power has any place in the future, it would be as different sorts of reactors put in only the safest of places. This is nuts. It is not unfortunately in any way unique in its nuttiness.
18
The West does not build nuclear reactors with the impunity of the Chinese.
Mark, what's unique in its nuttiness are the beliefs that nuclear energy is unsafe (per unit of energy, it's safer than every method of generating electricity except for wind), that storing spent fuel is unsafe (there's no record of a single death or injury occurring from stored spent fuel), and that it doesn't represent the most effective way to generate clean electricity, with the peril of climate change breathing down our necks.
Oh, forgot a couple of important ones: 1) not a single individual has died as a result of the Fukushima accident (other than casualties from panicked evacuations) and 2) not a single individual has died as the result of a nuclear accident caused by an earthquake.
What's dangerous about nuclear, again?
Oh, forgot a couple of important ones: 1) not a single individual has died as a result of the Fukushima accident (other than casualties from panicked evacuations) and 2) not a single individual has died as the result of a nuclear accident caused by an earthquake.
What's dangerous about nuclear, again?
2
Nuclear power should not be in anyone's future. We cannot control it and the consequences-well, look at Chernobyl and more recently Fukushima. The truth is we don't need it. Our countries should have been investing in what they know works and is safe--clean energy. We always get sold out to big fossil fuel moneybags. Nuclear power plants are ticking time bombs.
What could possibly go wrong? Just about everything...
39
Agree, the Chinese should use coal. Then their toxic emissions would go way up high in the sky and like, not add to global warming or anything.
2
LOL..but I'm really not laughing at all. You literally took the words out of my mouth.
This will light up countries around the South China Sea in more ways than one...
32