Skip to comments.
A submarine nuclear reactor in your backyard?
Today Online ^
| 3/20/2010
| Today Online
Posted on 03/20/2010 7:57:56 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
To: sonofstrangelove
“But the kinds of marine reactors the Russians are promoting also create a by-product - used fuel - that no one knows how to handle. Right now, that spent fuel is being stored at naval yards in the Russian Arctic. No engineering solution has yet been devised to decontaminate the fuel. “
BS, we already know what to do with but the Democrats won’t let us. Carter’s ‘no reprocessing’ EO which became a congress-passed law is why we have so much nuclear waste.
Nuclear fuel can be reprocessed and reused over and over until about only 1% of the original mass is left.
2
posted on
03/20/2010 8:02:31 PM PDT
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: Spktyr
3
posted on
03/20/2010 8:04:18 PM PDT
by
ErnstStavroBlofeld
("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
To: sonofstrangelove
Russian nuclear reactors in my back yard? Oh, hell no.
4
posted on
03/20/2010 8:05:04 PM PDT
by
OCCASparky
(Obama--Playing a West Wing fantasy in a '24' world.)
To: Spktyr
BS, we already know what to do with but the Democrats wont let us. Carters no reprocessing EO which became a congress-passed law is why we have so much nuclear waste. Bingo! The FRENCH solved this one long ago. God bless the French!
5
posted on
03/20/2010 8:05:28 PM PDT
by
sionnsar
(IranAzadi|5yst3m 0wn3d-it's N0t Y0ur5:SONY|Remember Neda Agha-Soltan|TV--it's NOT news you can trust)
To: Spktyr
BS, we already know what to do with but the Democrats wont let us. Carters no reprocessing EO which became a congress-passed law is why we have so much nuclear waste. Completely correct!
6
posted on
03/20/2010 8:07:25 PM PDT
by
Nuc1
(NUC1 Sub pusher SSN 668 (Liberals Aren't Patriots))
To: sonofstrangelove
There are reactors that are clean and also can handle nuclear waste.
7
posted on
03/20/2010 8:09:09 PM PDT
by
Cheetahcat
(Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
To: OCCASparky
Oh, hell no.Ooops? What do you mean "Ooops!"? There's no "Ooops" in nuclear fission...
8
posted on
03/20/2010 8:13:10 PM PDT
by
IYAS9YAS
(The townhalls were going great until the oPods showed up.)
To: sonofstrangelove
At least some of those Soviet reactors used liquid sodium as the primary coolant.
9
posted on
03/20/2010 8:13:26 PM PDT
by
USNBandit
(sarcasm engaged at all times)
To: sonofstrangelove
Using these kinds of reactors is actually pretty dumb. They're designed to create steam to turn turbines, which in turn are designed to provide propulsive power to the shafts/screws.
If the USN had used the USS Lipscomb style plant for the 688s, it might be a different story. The Lipscomb was a one-off sub between the Sturgeons and the 688s that had a turbo-electric plant. Reactor provided steam to turbines that were designed to generate electricity, the electricity being used to power electric motors that drove the shafts/props. Similar in concept (much more advanced, obviously) to the plants on the USS Lexington and Saratoga (CVs 2 and 3) which were used to power the city of Tacoma in the late 1920s and early 30s (clocks allegedly ran fast when the Lex was plugged into their power grid).
To: Spktyr
I don’t know who makes those reactors, but they should have been promoting the safe power on subs and aircraft carriers years ago. I’ve been suggesting it since 2002.
11
posted on
03/20/2010 8:23:13 PM PDT
by
q_an_a
To: sionnsar
WE solved it - that ‘French’ tech was bought from Westinghouse in the 50s, 60s and 70s.
But then Cahtah wanted to ‘send a message’.... which nobody listened to.
12
posted on
03/20/2010 8:24:55 PM PDT
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: sonofstrangelove
I think I’d feel safer with the nuke plant from a US sub, rather than a Russki one.;o)
13
posted on
03/20/2010 8:30:46 PM PDT
by
SuziQ
To: SuziQ
14
posted on
03/20/2010 8:31:38 PM PDT
by
ErnstStavroBlofeld
("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
To: q_an_a
The nuclear industry has been pointing this out for decades, but nobody’s been listening because was drowned out by the hysterical screams of the irrational nuke haters.
Some of which are now coming to regret their former positions.
15
posted on
03/20/2010 8:42:48 PM PDT
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: sonofstrangelove
I’d be OK with a US Navy sub/ship reactor in my backyard, but I wouldn’t want a Russian one in the farthest corner of my state, and I live in he second largest state, after Alaska.
16
posted on
03/20/2010 10:15:28 PM PDT
by
El Gato
("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
To: sonofstrangelove
Do an online search for “thorium energy”. THAT’S what we need.
To: Spktyr
While you and I “know” they have said this -they don’t run advertising which is how the majority of Americans get their Points of View. They don’t push the story in newspapers or send out mailings that may get attention. Heck they could spend 5 million a year in ads, mail and pr to get 100s of millions in sales - they dropped the ball.
18
posted on
03/21/2010 6:26:41 AM PDT
by
q_an_a
To: Spktyr
Carter was a Navy reactor officer and so familiar with the technology & physics behind fission reactors — intimate with it. Why do you suppose he chose to scr3w the entire industry like that?
19
posted on
03/21/2010 8:34:55 AM PDT
by
Tallguy
("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
To: Tallguy
Because he was a Democrat and thought that messages and gestures for ‘world peace’ were more important than preservation of America.
20
posted on
03/21/2010 9:52:29 AM PDT
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson