View Single Post
Old 04-11-2014, 03:33 PM   #17 (permalink)
RustyLugNut
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
Nuclear power isn't the answer for every battlecraft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CapriRacer View Post
That may be, but even a creative reading of the article doesn't yield a self sufficient ship without the addition of some sort of major electricity generator such as a nuclear reactor. And if that is the case, why not go there to begin with?
I can look out my office window and see across the San Diego bay at nuclear carriers and submarines. The rest of the escort and supply ships are steam and gas turbine powered. The rotorcraft and jets are JP-8 fueled. It is not the simple desire to power the capital ships that the navy has put time and money into this.

The first application ( ~10 years ) will be the drop in replacement fuel for the aircraft that operate off the ships and the ground vehicles that deploy on land. They mention land based refueling centers.

The next step will be to fuel the steam and gas turbine powered craft. More than likely, processing centers on the nuclear carriers will be augmented by in theater "fueling ships" that are nuclear powered and have fuel production as their main function.

Because of minimum regulatory restrictions and due to their modular design requirements, nuclear power units produced by the navy come in well under 1,500 dollars per Kilowatt in capital expenditures.

Can you imagine a commercial application where a modular Liquid-Fluoride Thorium Reactor powers the grid and then produces liquid hydrocarbon fuels during off peak hours? I can. And this tech can be integrated into that scheme with less input of electricity than previous technology and with little to no side pollution. All you need is a plentiful supply of sea water.
  Reply With Quote