Ozian Nuclear Deal

[Dockhead]

Very interesting article in today's NYT about the Australian nuclear submarine deal:


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/29/w...n=World%20News


Looks like a very high stakes gamble. Australia has no nuclear power? I didn't know that. Only 5 nuclear engineering graduates per year from Australian universities?



This is not good going into a decarbonizing new world.


So I guess this nuclear deal is actually a very good thing -- since the boats will be built and substantially engineered in Oz, will be a real kick in the pants to Ozian technological capability, including high tech manufacturing. Of course failure would be awful -- and it's quite a stretch.

[AndyEss]

It’s behind the NYT paywall.
Did the article say Australia was going to build the reactor section also?
As far as I understand, the USN builds the reactor section as a sealed unit, fueled for its expected life time use. I guess I find it a bit hard to believe the USN won’t just provide the reactor already built for installation into RAN built sub hulls.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by AndyEss

It’s behind the NYT paywall.
Did the article say Australia was going to build the reactor section also?
As far as I understand, the USN builds the reactor section as a sealed unit, fueled for its expected life time use. I guess I find it a bit hard to believe the USN won’t just provide the reactor already built for installation into RAN built sub hulls.

You can get past the NYT paywall by registering with an email address. Then you get 10 free articles per month.


Yes, the plan at the moment is for the reactors to be supplied by the U.S. and U.K. But to build a nuclear submarine, even with a reactor supplied complete from a country with this capability, and even more, to operate that nuclear submarine, requires nuclear competence:


"Although the plan is for the eight submarines to be constructed in South Australia, it is understood the nuclear equipment will be supplied by the US and UK. Senior public policy adviser at ANU’s National Security College, Dr William Stoltz, said: “The notion that Australia will be able to operate nuclear-powered submarines without having its own extensive nuclear infrastructure, including domestic nuclear energy production, is not sustainable over the long-term.”"

https://www.neimagazine.com/news/new...energy-9156685

[AndyEss]

I apparently used my quota up😀

I was spending too much time online, so let my NYT and Economist subscriptions lapse. I keep my WSJ (fun group to converse and troll) and WaPo subscriptions going.
I get that Australia will benefit tremendously by acquiring nuclear power (not weapon) experience.
As you pointed out, as the world de-carbonizes, nuclear power is the only current non-CO2 source for baseload power.

Along with phased array radar for boats, a good wish is for advances in fusion power.