Skip to main content

Sure, A Nuclear Plant, But Does It Float?

This one does:

In three years, Russia will have the world’s first floating nuclear power plant, capable of providing energy and heat to hard-to-get areas as well as drinking water to arid regions.

The unique vessel should be operational by 2016, the general director of Russia’s biggest shipbuilders, the Baltic Plant, Aleksandr Voznesensky told reporters at the 6th International Naval Show in St. Petersburg.

The Akademik Lomonosov is to become the spearhead of a series of floating nuclear power plants, which Russia plans to put into mass-production.

This is a pretty large portfolio of activities – electricity, heat, desalination – it’s like the Ginsu knife of nuclear facilities. Although shaped like a boat, it has no means of locomotion. instead, it is towed where ever it needs to be and anchored in place. I suspect what it ends up doing depends on who buys (leases?) it.

Each ship will have two modified KLT-40 naval propulsion reactors together providing up to 70 MW of electricity or 300 MW of heat, which is enough for a city with a population of 200,000 people.

The Russians admit that there’s nothing particularly new about the technology, just its application.

The floating power-generating unit, aimed at providing energy to large industrial enterprises, port cities and offshore gas and oil-extracting platforms, was designed on the basis of nuclear reactors which are equipped on the icebreakers ships. The technology has proved itself for over 50 years of successful operation in extreme Arctic conditions.  

The reaction to the Akademik Lomonosov has been mixed. ZDNet’s David Gewirtz compares it to the scheming of a Bond villain:

I'm also betting that the producers of Bond flicks could build an entire movie around this premise: "See, okay, this evil villain Leonid Arkady has become the head of Spectre and wants to make his own power."

"He doesn't want to be dependent on other countries for power ever again, see, so he's gonna launch this floating nuke plant and then destroy the world and start civilization over, all living off the power of his floating nuke plant."

Wasn’t this Ras-al-Ghul’s plan for Gotham City in Batman Begins? At least Gewirtz suggests that it is the plant that keeps life plausible after the earth is otherwise denuded of people.

The Week’s Keith Wagstaff keeps the issues in better balance and comes out in favor:

Still, the barges themselves don't seem to be any more dangerous than Russia's nuclear-powered ice-breaker ships, which use the same KLT-40 naval propulsion reactors. The reactor-equipped barges would hold 69 people, and would have to be towed to their locations. They would also be able to power 200,000 homes, and could be modified to desalinate 240,000 cubic meters of water per day.

I could have done without this line:

Of course, no nuclear reactor is completely safe.

No car or anything else is completely safe, either. Nuclear reactors come closer than a lot of human activities, but I’d be willing to just retire the line. Consider it a compromise.

Frankly, the Russians have been beavering away at this project since 2007, until running short of money. It maybe a project worth reviving, but it’s worth hesitating before deciding it’s value. If the Russians can find some customers, fine. Right now, it’s an odd variation on small reactors, if also admittedly an interesting one.

---

Mikhail Lomonosov was an 18th century – well, everything. He was a scientist in several fields, a poet, an historian, and several etceteras. His pile of accomplishments is quite high. Russiapedia has a thorough accounting, though you have to accept lines describing him as “the first Russian scientist-naturalist of universal importance.” National pride and all.

Comments

Anonymous said…
>Russia will have the world’s first floating nuclear power plant,

Except for the hundreds of floating nuclear power plants found on board submarines, the dozens found onboard aircraft carriers, cruisers, and (as mentioned) ice breakers.

Except for those nearly 1000 past and present floating nuclear reactos, it will be the first...
Will Davis said…
The Russian plant will be the first floating, non self-propelled nuclear plant to provide electric power and steam heat to surrounding areas. It will not however be the first floating, non self-propelled nuclear plant; that distinction goes to the STURGIS, which powered the Panama Canal for a number of years and which was operated by the US Army.
Floating nuclear power plants located far out to sea could be used immediately to manufacture ammonia through water electrolysis and the extraction of nitrogen from the air without adding excess CO2 to the atmosphere.

Nitrogen production for fertilizer represents more than 1% of the total energy consumed in the world.

Marcel F. Williams
jimwg said…
re: Marcel F. Williams

Isn't it frustrating as hell that superb points as yours will never make it to -- nor even be accepted by -- the media?

James Greenidge
Queens NY
Rod Adams said…
Whether they are first or not is far less important than the fact that the Russians are building their plants TODAY.

By the way, the Russians started working on the concept long before 2007.

http://atomicinsights.com/russia-announces-floating-power-plants-again/

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin