It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Russians to deploy floating nuclear power plant

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 11 2013 @ 07:20 PM
Oh goody... more nuclear reactors waiting to sit at the bottom of the ocean:

Radioactive nuclear reactors are resting around the globe on the seafloor in derelict subs—some the results of accidents, some intentionally dumped.

Whether they pose a threat to marine and human life now, or if they ever will, remains an open question—and one that may not be answered for another thousand years.

The remains of two U.S. and three Soviet nuclear subs, including reactors and in some cases nuclear-tipped torpedoes, all rest in deep water on the bottom of the Atlantic; any removal efforts would be extremely difficult and costly.

Seafloor reactor sites and surrounding waters are periodically tested for radioactivity levels. Mildly elevated radioactivity has been detected at some sites but not at levels that appear dangerous. The safety features seem to have been effective so far.

Nonetheless, some environmentalists are concerned that the sites pose significant threats, because no one can rule out the possibility of harmful leaks now or in the future.

While it is possible that released radioactive material would be confined to surrounding sediment, some spreading is also conceivable. Either way, marine life could be contaminated, as could humans who eat contaminated seafood.

Based in part on such concerns, most of the Russian nuclear submarine Kursk, which sank in 2000 in relatively shallow water (350 feet/107 meters), was raised last year.

National Geographic

Anyone still wondering why we have so many mass oceanic die-offs ?

Gawd only knows what else and how much crap humans have dumped into the bottom of our oceans...

posted on Jul, 11 2013 @ 09:50 PM
reply to post by CranialSponge

Personally I think oil exploration and shipping is more a threat to the ocean environment than these floating reactors. The BP disaster comes to mind, Exxon Valdez and many many more. The nuclear reactors built for ships are some of the safest out there. Also these have no propulsion so they are just towed from place to place. They will be close to shore most of their lives and are hardened from Tsunami or even being struck by other ships or the shore.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 02:24 PM
reply to post by angrymartian

our society has only known nuclear power for a very small amount of time and has been put into practice for an even less amount of time. And we have had more than one nuclear event do to system failures or natural disasters. I dont think that is very good odds

new topics
<< 1   >>

log in