Floating Nuclear Plants, anyone?
There is this somewhat "interesting" article in the Deccan herald , which talks of stuff like "second hand reactors" and the new floating nuclear plants (FNPP) that the Russians are building. I must admit, that at first glance the article seemed a little laughable , however on second thoughts there might be an issue or two there, somewhere.
Now the point is, these new mobile Russian power plants are essentially ships with a reactor integrated into the assembly. The idea itself is nothing new, and the U.S military actually operated a 'nuclear barge', the MH-1A Sturgis in the sixties. However, the article says that such floating nuclear powers may be supplied to India. This immediately raises the question as to how this could be facilitated outside the auspices of the NSG.
Well, to stretch a point , India is being transferred "floating nuclear plants" in the form of the Shchuka-B (NATO: Akula) class attack submarines, albeit on a lease basis. well, can it be that a similar arrangement is arrived at for a "real" FNPP , given that these are essentially ships with a nuclear reactor.?
Imagine a scenario wherein the reactor remains sealed most of the time and under supervision, while "replenishment " is done offshore and closely controlled by the supplier, in this case the Russians. Moreover, NSG guidelines are not really explicit on the issue of ship to shore power . this of course raises an interesting possibility.
Say, for arguments sake , such a reactor is transferred under a "military power supply program" . May be that's doable , but the much more interesting question relates to the supply of fuel. where would the enriched fuel required for these reactors be sourced from?
The larger questions pertaining to the evacuation of power from these plants and safety concerns are another area altogether. maybe some other time...
There is this somewhat "interesting" article in the Deccan herald , which talks of stuff like "second hand reactors" and the new floating nuclear plants (FNPP) that the Russians are building. I must admit, that at first glance the article seemed a little laughable , however on second thoughts there might be an issue or two there, somewhere.
Now the point is, these new mobile Russian power plants are essentially ships with a reactor integrated into the assembly. The idea itself is nothing new, and the U.S military actually operated a 'nuclear barge', the MH-1A Sturgis in the sixties. However, the article says that such floating nuclear powers may be supplied to India. This immediately raises the question as to how this could be facilitated outside the auspices of the NSG.
Well, to stretch a point , India is being transferred "floating nuclear plants" in the form of the Shchuka-B (NATO: Akula) class attack submarines, albeit on a lease basis. well, can it be that a similar arrangement is arrived at for a "real" FNPP , given that these are essentially ships with a nuclear reactor.?
Imagine a scenario wherein the reactor remains sealed most of the time and under supervision, while "replenishment " is done offshore and closely controlled by the supplier, in this case the Russians. Moreover, NSG guidelines are not really explicit on the issue of ship to shore power . this of course raises an interesting possibility.
Say, for arguments sake , such a reactor is transferred under a "military power supply program" . May be that's doable , but the much more interesting question relates to the supply of fuel. where would the enriched fuel required for these reactors be sourced from?
The larger questions pertaining to the evacuation of power from these plants and safety concerns are another area altogether. maybe some other time...
2 comments:
what about tsunamis and peoples that need to be kept away from glowing things?
yup , those are two key considerations on the safety side.
1. I guess for the first one , some sort of a shore based shelter will have to be kept handy..
2. force protection on the same lines as any nuclear powered ship,
Post a Comment