Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

fistedtaco t1_j5emer2 wrote

Reply to comment by DocPeacock in 1st small modular nuclear reactor certified for use in US by sunflowerastronaut

Naval reactors aren’t “much less safe” than civilian/commercial reactors.

9

DocPeacock t1_j5fedbz wrote

I'm not saying they're less safe. I'm saying they would not have the type of safety requirements that a stationary civilian power plant must have.

−2

fistedtaco t1_j5fike6 wrote

And I’m saying you’re wrong. I’ve served on a nuclear powered naval vessel and worked ops at a commercial nuclear plant.

6

DocPeacock t1_j5fontj wrote

And I was a nuclear reactor safety analyst for commercial pwrs. So what. I worked with many ex Navy people. I think they would all agree there's a big difference in operating requirements and environments that make their safety strategies quite different. Are navy nukes subject to NRC regulations? Is a nuclear sub required to have an exclusion zone, or any of the other site conditions that a commercial plant does? A ship or sub doesn't have to worry about loss of offsite power, staging FLEX equipment, store spent fuel. So you could argue that naval reactors are more safe, but they don't have the safety requirements to protect a nearby civilian population.

2

fistedtaco t1_j5fprwz wrote

We actually did have all those concerns in the navy, just different ways of handling them. Navy nukes were subject to the heavy hand of Naval Reactors, who are way bigger cocksuckers than the NRC or INPO or those other ABC organizations.

Naval nuclear power and its development the reason civilian nuclear power is as safe as it is.

8