Russia to build and deploy floating nuclear power plants

July 15, 2013 MOSCOW The general director of one of Russia’s largest shipbuilders, Aleksandr Voznesensky, has announced to reporters that a floating nuclear power plant is currently under construction at one of Russia’s ship yards. He added that it will likely be ready for use by 2016. The Russians are calling it a “floating power” station, abbreviated to PEB. The vessel has been given the name Akademik Lomonosov. Several countries, including the United States and China have considered building floating nuclear power plants but until now, no other known vessels have reached the construction phase. The advantages of a floating nuclear power station are obvious—electrical power could be brought to areas that are not currently being served by other means. Russia in particular has many far-flung outposts in its eastern region that have had difficulty flourishing due to the financial constraints of building power plants so far away from everything else. The Akademik Lomonosov will have two KLT-40 naval propulsion reactors modified to serve as power providers for an external location—with a displacement of 21,500 tons. Lomonosov noted that nuclear powered marine vessels have a proven safety record going back 50 years.
Many nations now routinely deploy nuclear powered ships, submarines and even ice-breakers. He also stressed that the design of the vessel will be such that the platform will be capable of withstanding a tsunami or even a collision with land or a ship. The Akademik Lomonosov will not be able to power itself however, which means it will be towed to wherever it’s needed. The vessel will be operated by a crew of 69 people and will also conform to regulations set by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Lomonosov said that plans are underway to build a fleet of the floating platforms to provide cities and towns across Russia with electricity for general use and more specifically for heating homes and businesses. The Akademik Lomonosov will be capable of generating 70 MW of electricity—enough to power a city of 200,000 people. He noted also that such vessels could also be used to power desalination plants, providing 240,000 cubic meters of fresh water daily. –Physics
This entry was posted in Earth Changes, Earth Watch, Environmental Threat, Hazardous chemical exposure, High-risk potential hazard zone, Nuclear plant crisis, Time - Event Acceleration. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Russia to build and deploy floating nuclear power plants

  1. Cooter Bug says:

    Great idea maybe the Russians can show the Japanese how to float the Fukashima reactors and rid the mainland of Japan and her cities of dangerous levels of radiation ???


    • recalcitran.patriot says:

      Something like that happened and millions of square miles of debris (probably hot) is washing up along the shore of B.C. and south to CA.


  2. F1_master2013 says:

    bullsh@* idea what if the ship sinks then all that radiation and waste gets dumped into the ocean


  3. George says:

    The Russians haven’t yet solved the clean-up from their former nuclear fleet of submarines and ships (or land based nuclear power-stations) yet they are building more; it’s an insanity. There are several nuclear submarines rusting on the sea bed and others in docks; here is part of a newspaper article published in June 2007, I don’t think the problem has been solved….’
    A decaying Russian nuclear dump inside the Arctic Circle is threatening to catch fire or explode, turning it into a “dirty bomb” that could impact the whole of northern Europe, including the British Isles.
    Experts are warning that sea water and intense cold are corroding a storage facility at Andreeva Bay, on the Kola Peninsula near Murmansk. It contains more than 20,000 discarded fuel rods from nuclear submarines and some nuclear-powered icebreakers. A Norwegian environmental group, Bellona, says it has obtained a copy of a secret report by the Russian nuclear agency, Rosatom, which speaks of an “uncontrolled nuclear reaction”.
    John Large, an independent British nuclear consultant who has visited the site, told The Independent on Sunday: “The nuclear rods are fixed to the roof and encased in metal to keep them apart and prevent any reactions from occurring. However, sea water has eroded them at their base, and they are falling to the floor of the tanks, where inches of saltwater have collected.’


  4. Mercedes says:

    Is just ridiculously unfair how governments made the most stupid decisions without even considering the well being of the world’s population!!


  5. George says:

    What could possibly go wrong?


  6. Irene C says:

    I’m not sure about this idea. I was thinking – one rouge wave…? imo


  7. Sparius says:

    Is it with traditional nuclear reaction or a new kind of nuclear process ?
    Yes, why not !
    Can also be used as sea mobile powerplant and everywhere to be used if necessary.
    Nice idea for the military, but they have their nuclear powered aircraft carriers !


  8. nanoduck says:

    BAD IDEA!!!! Unless they are going with thorium reactors, which have been proven to be lot safer and less wasteful. We really need to do away with uranium reactors….not worth the trouble and the only reason governments want them is for the plutonium for the weapons.


  9. Irene C says:

    Fukushima 2013 “Remaining Radioactive Mass”, “Dangerous Leaking Radioactive Water”, All Four Reactors are “Getting Worse”


    • emoro says:

      Yes, you are right! We have to stop relying on all nukes in this world. I’m a Japanese, so I think that WE must appeal abolition of nuclear power plants, but Japanese government wants to re-start all nukes and the worse, it is planning to sell nuclear power plants to India, Portgul, Vietnum, Turky and other countries…. It is really crazy.


  10. MarkJS says:

    article states: “The advantages of a floating nuclear power station are obvious—electrical power could be brought to areas that are not currently being served by other means.”

    Maybe they never heard of high-tension cables?


  11. Stephanie C says:

    Why does this make me think of the movie 2012…


    • Steven J. says:

      Exactly! When the world’s landmasses are devistated by the coming cleanse, this appears to be the only viable solution to getting power – If, that is, they can survive the tsunamis…


  12. mike d. says:

    I see this ending up in disaster


  13. JoeM says:

    Just want to say every USN submarine has one nuclear reactor, every carrier has two reactors except for the Uss Enterprise that one has eight. I understand the fear of nuclear power but I spent the last nine years in the navy operating it,we need a different source of energy even though we could support ourselfs for centuries one the fossil fuels we have now, until wind and solar becomes a viable option to reduce my energy cost then I say use nuclear and whatever we have perfected until the technology allows us all to have cheap affordable energy!!!!


  14. Cafe' Black says:

    When ever I see stop signs… I can’t resist the urge to get out my car if possible, so I can add on to the word “Stop”. Like “stop” war! Or “stop” building nuclear weapons or facilities. Or “stop” hating.


  15. Kylie says:

    Uh oh!!!!


  16. Geri says:

    Yea sure, why don’t they also put them in the air attached to giant balloons…unbelievable


  17. cafe' black says:

    Mother earth gives us energy at no cost… It actually provides us with everything we need. We all choose to rely on things we dont need and effect us negatively in the long run.


All comments are moderated. We reserve the right not to post any comment deemed defamatory, inappropriate, or spam.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s