

Russia to Start Production on Floating Nuclear Power Plants - AsymetricCom
http://www.fastcoexist.com/1682788/sounds-safe-russia-to-turn-boats-into-floating-nuclear-plants

======
venomsnake
I think we have had Floating Nuclear Power Plants for the better part of 50
years now. They were called carriers and submarines.

Am I also the only one that begins to see red when someone uses "enough to
power X homes"? I have always thought that anyone that says it thinks his
audience is made of ignoramuses.

~~~
dalke
And nuclear powered icebreakers, which the Russians have. The power reactors
discussed here are based on the KLT-40 reactors used in Taymyr-class
icebreakers.

However, while a marine nuclear power source can be used to provide electrical
power, we don't tend to call them a "power plant" rather like how we don't
think of a 747 as a power plant, even though they also provide electric power.

For example, according to Wikipedia, "Taymyr has two main turbogenerators aft
of the reactor compartment consisting of Soviet-made steam turbines coupled to
Siemens generators, each producing 18,400 kW of electricity at 3,000 rpm for
the propulsion motors. In addition the ship has two auxiliary turbogenerators,
manufactured in the Soviet Union, which produce 2,000 kW of electrical power
for shipboard consumers." The first question that comes to mind is, is the
18,400 kW in three-phase AC? If not, then it can't be directly used to feed a
power grid.

Regarding the "enough to power X homes." I don't see red, but I'm close. The
reference source is a bit better, saying "up to 70 megawatts of electricity or
300 megawatts of heat, sufficient for a city with a population of 200,000
people." I'll assume that's 70 MWe for the people, vs. 300 MWt for heat.

How do they get that conversion ratio?

In the US, "the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential
utility customer was 11,280 kWh"
([http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3](http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3))
giving 250 MW for a population of 200,000 people.

However, that's only for the homes, which excludes industry. "Per capita
consumption from the electrical grid in 2011 was 13,187 kWh"
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_States](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_States))
so that's 300 MW for 200,000 people.

To double check myself, there are 1.392 million people living in Hawaii, and
800 GWh of power produced in the state, giving 314 MW/200,000 people.

To triple check myself, since that number is high compared to the 70MWe
reference number, Gizmodo says that the "260 million watts to power Google" is
"enough to power a city of 100,000 to 200,000 people."
[http://gizmodo.com/5838458/google-uses-more-power-than-
salt-...](http://gizmodo.com/5838458/google-uses-more-power-than-salt-lake-
city) . Yep, same ballpark as my previous two numbers: 300 MW.

Well, the US is known to be a high consumer of electricity. What about Russia?
"In per capita terms, electricity consumption in 2000-2006 grew 16.7 percent,
reaching 6,864 kWh in 2006 compared to 5,880 kWh in 2000." ([http://www.rao-
ees.ru/en/invest/reporting/reports/report2006...](http://www.rao-
ees.ru/en/invest/reporting/reports/report2006/7_1.htm) ), giving 157
MW/200,000 people.

This is still twice the 70 MWe that the Akademik Lomonosov is supposed to be
able to deliver.

Hmm. Interesting. "Akademik Lomonosov will be deployed at Vilyuchinsk, in the
Kamchatka region in Russia's Far East" says Wikipedia. The population of
Vilyuchinsk is 23,000 and all of Kamchatka is only 300,000 people. This again
leads me to think that 200,000 is too high.

What do other people use as their ratios? In Turkey, "It was presented that
the total installed power of two areas will be between 35 and 45 MW and
approximately 3,339 GWh will be produced. This amount is almost equal to a
capacity that can cover the power need of a city with a population of 200,000
people" [http://www.istac.com.tr/services/energy-production-from-
wast...](http://www.istac.com.tr/services/energy-production-from-wastes.aspx)
. I'll assume that they think 60 MW is needed.

In Bermuda, "the highest summer peak demand of 122.8 MW was recorded in August
2010" (and summer is higher than winter).
[http://www.belco.bm/index.php?option=com_content&view=articl...](http://www.belco.bm/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=82&Itemid=111)
. It looks like they average about 80 MW. That's for a population of 64,700,
so for 20,000 people it would be 240 MW.

In Indonesia, "the demand from the town’s current population of more than
200,000 people is estimated at well above 7.4MW"
[http://www.ephindo.com/responsibility/ephindo-and-the-
commun...](http://www.ephindo.com/responsibility/ephindo-and-the-
community.html) (Its power plant can only put out 7.4 MW).

In closing, I don't think the conversion ratio of 70 MW = a Russian city or a
US city "with a population of 200,000 people" is correct. I think it's off by
a factor of at least two.

So, not only is it infuriating you, it's also wrong.

