Nuclear Power vs Internal Combustion

Dune · 11-07-2009, 13:37

Here is a question for all you scientific yachters out there. With the advances in nuclear technology making reactors very small, when will the yachting industry develop a micro reactor that would take the place of internal combustion. Imagine a day when you would not have to fuel for many, many years, and have all the quiet energy you would ever need. And who couldn't use more water tankage? The technology is very advanced toward that goal. Check it out for yourself.

http://atomicinsights.blogspot.com/2008/01/update-posted-on-toshiba-micro-reactor.html

**David M** · 11-07-2009, 13:48

I think there are a number major reasons this will never happen.

Weight....reactors are very heavy. You also have to include the weight of a steam turbine, multiple heat exchangers, reduction gears and condenser when you count the weight of the power plant.

Safety and Politics...we all know the hazards of radiation. Most countries I imagine would ban any yachtie who wants to bring a nuclear reactor into their country.

Expense...I cant imagine a nuclear reactor ever being cheap to operate.

Knowledge....these are not simple devices.

National Security...just what the world needs is for enriched uranium to fall into the wrong hands. Can you imagine someone making a dirty bomb with one of these?

BTW, I am all for nuclear power but I don't think that nuclear power for yachts is something we will ever see in our lifetimes.

svquest2 · 11-07-2009, 13:52

I wouldn't hold your breath but even if you don't, you will never see it.

Admittedly, all the reactors I ever worked on were large for ship propulsion, but in addition to being, large they were heavy, complex, contaminating, expensive and dangerous for the neophyte. Everyone who worked on, or around them, had to be schooled, qualified, tested, and experienced. All directions for use and operation had to be in writing and complied with to the letter or the job stopped and the paper had to be changed. Then when the paper was changed the change had to be approved by just about the whole world.

I wouldn't want one if I ever thought they would work in a boat.

Have fun

Joe S

fstbttms · 11-07-2009, 13:59

A world where fissionable material is available to anybody who wants it? No thanks.

**sandy daugherty** · 11-07-2009, 14:04

I'm holding out for a fuel cell that extracts energy from post-consumer diet coke.

peter.bomberg · 11-07-2009, 19:17

The answer sadly is never and it's solely due to politics (sadly), I would install one with no hesitation, and they don't need to be all that heavy (measured in tons) as it would only need to put out a trickle of energy but the issue is politics, as soon as you release them you have a large % of the material you need for a dirty bomb and anyone with a basic understanding of physics and engineering "could" be a potential nutcase, but it would solve a lot of issues (forget tiny boats like ours) but anyone 100ft and up would benefit and so would the environment! + if we could supply MW's to ships they could make really good speed!

Dick Pluta · 11-07-2009, 21:53

Very unlikely for boats but small, unattended package plants are very much on the horizon. The attached is only the latest in a string of articles about small neuclear plants that would serve a relatively small area, much like the small "package plants" for sewage that serve only a single subdivision.

Technology Review: Small Nuclear

Dick Pluta
AEGEA

11-07-2009, 13:37	#1
Dune Registered User Join Date: Apr 2009 Boat: Gulfstar 50 - Escape Posts: 89	Nuclear Power vs Internal Combustion Here is a question for all you scientific yachters out there. With the advances in nuclear technology making reactors very small, when will the yachting industry develop a micro reactor that would take the place of internal combustion. Imagine a day when you would not have to fuel for many, many years, and have all the quiet energy you would ever need. And who couldn't use more water tankage? The technology is very advanced toward that goal. Check it out for yourself. http://atomicinsights.blogspot.com/2008/01/update-posted-on-toshiba-micro-reactor.html

11-07-2009, 13:48	#2
David M Moderator Moderator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: San Francisco Bay Boat: research vessel Posts: 5,181	I think there are a number major reasons this will never happen. Weight....reactors are very heavy. You also have to include the weight of a steam turbine, multiple heat exchangers, reduction gears and condenser when you count the weight of the power plant. Safety and Politics...we all know the hazards of radiation. Most countries I imagine would ban any yachtie who wants to bring a nuclear reactor into their country. Expense...I cant imagine a nuclear reactor ever being cheap to operate. Knowledge....these are not simple devices. National Security...just what the world needs is for enriched uranium to fall into the wrong hands. Can you imagine someone making a dirty bomb with one of these? BTW, I am all for nuclear power but I don't think that nuclear power for yachts is something we will ever see in our lifetimes. __________________ David Life begins where land ends. Last edited by David M; 11-07-2009 at 13:57.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Internal Bulkhead - How to Finish?	David_Old_Jersey	Construction, Maintenance & Refit	13	12-07-2009 10:25
Nuclear submarines collide in Atlantic	GordMay	Off Topic Forum	23	17-02-2009 13:00
Nuclear Energy Density	Trim50	Electrical: Batteries, Generators & Solar	23	26-01-2009 18:38
Why combustion air from outside?	cal40john	Plumbing Systems and Fixtures	2	02-11-2008 10:22

11-07-2009, 13:52	#3
svquest2 Registered User Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Manchester Washington Boat: Irwin- Barefoot 37CC (Custom MK V) "Quest" Posts: 159	I wouldn't hold your breath but even if you don't, you will never see it. Admittedly, all the reactors I ever worked on were large for ship propulsion, but in addition to being, large they were heavy, complex, contaminating, expensive and dangerous for the neophyte. Everyone who worked on, or around them, had to be schooled, qualified, tested, and experienced. All directions for use and operation had to be in writing and complied with to the letter or the job stopped and the paper had to be changed. Then when the paper was changed the change had to be approved by just about the whole world. I wouldn't want one if I ever thought they would work in a boat. Have fun Joe S

11-07-2009, 13:59	#4
fstbttms Commercial Vendor Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Francisco Bay Area Posts: 462	A world where fissionable material is available to anybody who wants it? No thanks.

11-07-2009, 14:04	#5
sandy daugherty Moderator Moderator Join Date: May 2008 Location: near Annapolis Boat: PDQ 36 "Page 83" Posts: 841	I'm holding out for a fuel cell that extracts energy from post-consumer diet coke.

11-07-2009, 19:17	#6
peter.bomberg Registered User Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 79	The answer sadly is never and it's solely due to politics (sadly), I would install one with no hesitation, and they don't need to be all that heavy (measured in tons) as it would only need to put out a trickle of energy but the issue is politics, as soon as you release them you have a large % of the material you need for a dirty bomb and anyone with a basic understanding of physics and engineering "could" be a potential nutcase, but it would solve a lot of issues (forget tiny boats like ours) but anyone 100ft and up would benefit and so would the environment! + if we could supply MW's to ships they could make really good speed!

11-07-2009, 21:53	#7
Dick Pluta Registered User Join Date: May 2009 Location: NJ, Paris FR and, for the moment, Cape Coral FL Boat: Islander Freeport 41, AEGEA Posts: 101	Very unlikely for boats but small, unattended package plants are very much on the horizon. The attached is only the latest in a string of articles about small neuclear plants that would serve a relatively small area, much like the small "package plants" for sewage that serve only a single subdivision. Technology Review: Small Nuclear Dick Pluta AEGEA