Ask X about Nuclear Power

[ScottieK]

Do you think one day, we'll have a "Mr. Fusion" type device, as in Back to the Future?

How far can a submarine go without being recharged? An aircraft carrier?

How much would our electricity cost if it was 100% nuclear? (wild ass guesses are perfectly acceptable)

ScottieK

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
The largest nuclear weapon ever detonated was in the USSR. It was something like 155 Megatons and was a hydrogen bomb.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not quite that big but The Tsar Bomb at 50-57 megatons was pretty impressive as you can see in this video clip.

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Alright, what do you want to know?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you serve on a "boomer" or a "fast attack" type sub. And if it's OK, can you say which one or which class.

~ Rick

[LuckOfTheDraw]

I've heard that nuclear subs have a top speed underwater of about 45 knots, is this correct?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard that nuclear subs have a top speed underwater of about 45 knots, is this correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

X probably knows more than me but what matters isn't classified.

The Soviets developed the Alpa class submarine which was reputed to be the fastest every developed.

One problem with the this class is that an Alpha with the peddle to the metal could be heard by our sonar two oceans away. IOW, top speed really doesn't matter. What matters is the maximum speed where the sub can hear (using passive sonar) without generating so much hull noise where it can easily be detected by the enemy.

In what matters all throughout the cold war we held a significant edge.

~ Rick

[BluffTHIS!]

Exsub,

This question isn't really about nuclear power, but about cleanup of contamination. My question is how is Iran going to clean up the contamination after Israel uses a couple tactical nukes on their nuclear weapons development sites? I presume that they won't be able to use an airburst attack that produces no fallout, and that there thus will be a lot of fallout contamination, though of course not over as wide an area as with a larger bomb. Will they just bulldoze it all under and concrete it over and hope it doesn't contaminate the ground water? I guess this question could also be applied to how the Japanese cleaned up Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

As a side question, I wonder how big/widespread an EMP surge such a smaller tac nuke would cause, and thus how much damage to electronics outside the actual blast zone? It would be a bad time to be in a plane nearby.

[T-God]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP,

Do you like the simpsons?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do. In fact, I had the same job as Homer, once.

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you have a dental plan?

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Alright, what do you want to know?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you serve on a "boomer" or a "fast attack" type sub. And if it's OK, can you say which one or which class.

~ Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

I was on a fast attack, Rick. A Los Angeles class. I once parked next to a boomer. It was about three times the size on my boat.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think one day, we'll have a "Mr. Fusion" type device, as in Back to the Future?

How far can a submarine go without being recharged? An aircraft carrier?

How much would our electricity cost if it was 100% nuclear? (wild ass guesses are perfectly acceptable)

ScottieK

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about Mr. Fusion. I suppose something like that would be theoretically possible given enough miniturization and good enough superconductors.

Well, how far is greatly dependent on how fast it goes. Reactors are more efficient at some speeds than others. Basically, the faster you go, the less efficient it is. Many ships in the nuclear fleet spend 20 or more years in service before they are refueled. The life of a ship is greatly dependent on the quality of its hull construction and reactors do take a toll in terms of radiation embrittlement. So, depending on the condition of the hull, a ship may be put out of service without ever being refueled. Some of the LA class attack boats have new cores, and these boats will be in service for 40+ years.

Aircraft carriers, because of their size, have much larger and powerful cores. The current class of carrier has two 550 Megawatt reactors, I think. That's 1.1 Gigawatts for the Mr. Fusion fans. These cores will last, I am told, about three decades.

Nuclear power would produce exceptionally cheap electricity by todays standards. The reason is the fuel. The costs of the fuel are factored into the construction, whereas other sources of power do not calculate that into their costs. Therefore, a coal or oil fired plant must constantly have fuel dug out of the ground and hauled to it somehow in order to keep operation. The vast majority of electricity cost is to pay for the production and transport of fuel.

Nuclear plants would only need to be refueled once every several decades.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard that nuclear subs have a top speed underwater of about 45 knots, is this correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

If I told you, I'd have to kill you, or I could go to jail.

The correct answer to that question is greater than 600 feet depth and greater than 20 knots of speed.