- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/17/21 at 3:51 pm to BRIllini07
quote:
Former navy nuclear operator.
1) A lot of the power is used to power the plant itself.
2) You need enough cabling and tie ins to make it work. Shore to ship power can only handle the minimum load to run the ship with the reactors shut down. Thus, you can’t export a 100% reactor power or remotely close (closer to 1%....maybe).
3) Raw MW goes mostly to steam production for the engines and catapults. So full reactor power can’t go toward electricity anyway. Without piping up extra turbines somehow.
What he said.
My old carrier is in Texas but it was conventional and now being broken into razor blades.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 4:08 pm to Zappas Stache
quote:
quote:
Power from new natural-gas-fired plants is also far cheaper than nuclear at $61 to $87 per megawatt-hour
That price is for now. Not after PedoJoe wrecks the fracking industry.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 4:24 pm to BobbyB965
Because by the time they run the extension cord from the Indian Ocean or the South China Sea, the freeze will be over.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 4:27 pm to BobbyB965
You really don't have an understanding of electrical power and how it works, do you Bobby?
Posted on 2/17/21 at 4:30 pm to BobbyB965
Run the Abraham Lincoln up the Brazos. We need power in Granbury.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 4:36 pm to BobbyB965
Subs can power a lot too.
We should just build more nuclear plants... would be way cheaper than using aircraft carriers with the built in .gov waste. Hell, maybe they can build floating nuclear plants that can be moved when storms are coming?
We should just build more nuclear plants... would be way cheaper than using aircraft carriers with the built in .gov waste. Hell, maybe they can build floating nuclear plants that can be moved when storms are coming?
Posted on 2/17/21 at 4:37 pm to Oates Mustache
quote:
Pretty amazing too, that people are willing to suffer through shite like what's going on in Texas rather than address this from a logical standpoint.
IMO there's a good case for solar and wind power. But not for base load generation. Basic demands have to be met with reliable power, and that's going to be by a variety of Nuclear, Natural Gas, or Coal plants.
I'd rather do hydroelectric than have giant wind farms.
This post was edited on 2/17/21 at 4:38 pm
Posted on 2/17/21 at 4:48 pm to BRIllini07
quote:
Former navy nuclear operator.
Are the reactors on a carrier or nuke sub to expensive to build and maintain for civilian use?
They aren't huge, generate a fair amount of juice, and aren't enclosed in a concrete pill.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 5:00 pm to blueridgeTiger
You will need an icebreaker to lead an aircraft carrier up the Brazos today.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 5:00 pm to BRIllini07
quote:
Former navy nuclear operator.
1) A lot of the power is used to power the plant itself.
2) You need enough cabling and tie ins to make it work. Shore to ship power can only handle the minimum load to run the ship with the reactors shut down. Thus, you can’t export a 100% reactor power or remotely close (closer to 1%....maybe).
3) Raw MW goes mostly to steam production for the engines and catapults. So full reactor power can’t go toward electricity anyway. Without piping up extra turbines somehow.
I mean, you don't have to go and get all smart and clear about his idea.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 5:06 pm to LSUBoo
quote:
How does that compare to wind and solar?
quote:
That is far above the unsubsidized costs of utility-scale solar power ($72 to $86 per megawatt-hour) and onshore wind ($37 to $81 per megawatt-hour).
In a deregulated market, private companies are not willing to invest in nuclear that takes a long, long time to pay for itself.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 5:16 pm to BobbyB965
Because aircraft carriers are used for forward projection of military might. How the frick do you project strength overseas with a carrier docked up the Houston ship channel?
Posted on 2/17/21 at 5:18 pm to BobbyB965
I’m just wondering why you are citing WordPress as a source 
Posted on 2/17/21 at 5:21 pm to BobbyB965
We have regulated nuclear energy to over $10k per kw to produce
Posted on 2/17/21 at 5:27 pm to goofball
I think solar and wind make limited situational sense. Like a remote area, disconnected from the grid.
Posted on 2/17/21 at 6:01 pm to BobbyB965
The stupid is done people is really hard to grasp sometimes...
Posted on 2/17/21 at 7:48 pm to Redbone
You mean there ain't one just moored in Lake Travis?
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News