Page 44 of 313 FirstFirst ... 41434394041424344454647484954748494144 ... LastLast
Results 646 to 660 of 4689
Like Tree7094Likes

PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

This is a discussion on PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos within the Navy forums, part of the China Defense & Military category; Sorry bladerunner , and i.e ., delft posted the same thing a few months back. But it is a good ...

  1. #646
    Red Moon is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    390

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Sorry bladerunner, and i.e., delft posted the same thing a few months back. But it is a good thing they're working on it.

  2. #647
    airsuperiority's Avatar
    airsuperiority is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,318

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Quote Originally Posted by bladerunner View Post
    \O.T. Its a pity the system does not allow me to give multiple likes , otherwise I would have given you ELEVENTY

    Heres a link to the Telegraph, outlining the Chinese interest in Thorium reactors

    Safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with thorium - Telegraph

    "...........If China’s dash for thorium power succeeds, it will vastly alter the global energy landscape and may avert a calamitous conflict over resources as Asia’s industrial revolutions clash head-on with the West’s entrenched consumption.

    China’s Academy of Sciences said it had chosen a “thorium-based molten salt reactor system”. The liquid fuel idea was pioneered by US physicists at Oak Ridge National Lab in the 1960s, but the US has long since dropped the ball. Further evidence of Barack `Obama’s “Sputnik moment”, you could say.

    Chinese scientists claim that hazardous waste will be a thousand times less than with uranium. The system is inherently less prone to disaster.

    “The reactor has an amazing safety feature,” said Kirk Sorensen, a former NASA engineer at Teledyne Brown and a thorium expert. ............If it begins to overheat, a little plug melts and the salts drain into a pan. There is no need for computers, or the sort of electrical pumps that were crippled by the tsunami. The reactor saves itself,” he said.

    “They operate at atmospheric pressure so you don’t have the sort of hydrogen explosions we’ve seen in Japan. One of these reactors would have come through the tsunami just fine. There would have been no radiation release.”

    Thorium is a silvery metal named after the Norse god of thunder. The metal has its own “issues” but no thorium reactor could easily spin out of control in the manner of Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, or now Fukushima.

    Professor Robert Cywinksi from Huddersfield University said thorium must be bombarded with neutrons to drive the fission process. “There is no chain reaction. Fission dies the moment you switch off the photon beam. There are not enough neutrons for it continue of its own accord,” he said.

    Dr Cywinski, who anchors a UK-wide thorium team, said the residual heat left behind in a crisis would be “orders of magnitude less” than in a uranium reactor.

    The earth’s crust holds 80 years of uranium at expected usage rates, he said. Thorium is as common as lead. America has buried tons as a by-product of rare earth metals mining. Norway has so much that Oslo is planning a post-oil era where thorium might drive the country’s next great phase of wealth. Even Britain has seams in Wales and in the granite cliffs of Cornwall. Almost all the mineral is usable as fuel, compared to 0.7pc of uranium. There is enough to power civilization for thousands of years.

    I write before knowing the outcome of the Fukushima drama, but as yet none of 15,000 deaths are linked to nuclear failure. Indeed, there has never been a verified death from nuclear power in the West in half a century. Perspective is in order.

    We cannot avoid the fact that two to three billion extra people now expect – and will obtain – a western lifestyle. China alone plans to produce 100m cars and buses every year by 2020.

    The International Atomic Energy Agency said the world currently has 442 nuclear reactors. They generate 372 gigawatts of power, providing 14pc of global electricity. Nuclear output must double over twenty years just to keep pace with the rise of the China and India.

    If a string of countries cancel or cut back future reactors, let alone follow Germany’s Angela Merkel in shutting some down, they shift the strain onto gas, oil, and coal. Since the West is also cutting solar subsidies, they can hardly expect the solar industry to plug the gap.

    BP’s disaster at Macondo should teach us not to expect too much from oil reserves deep below the oceans, beneath layers of blinding salt. Meanwhile, we rely uneasily on Wahabi repression to crush dissent in the Gulf and keep Arabian crude flowing our way. So where can we turn, unless we revert to coal and give up on the ice caps altogether? That would be courting fate.

    US physicists in the late 1940s explored thorium fuel for power. It has a higher neutron yield than uranium, a better fission rating, longer fuel cycles, and does not require the extra cost of isotope separation.

    The plans were shelved because thorium does not produce plutonium for bombs. As a happy bonus, it can burn up plutonium and toxic waste from old reactors, reducing radio-toxicity and acting as an eco-cleaner.

    Dr Cywinski is developing an accelerator driven sub-critical reactor for thorium, a cutting-edge project worldwide. It needs to £300m of public money for the next phase, and £1.5bn of commercial investment to produce the first working plant. Thereafter, economies of scale kick in fast. The idea is to make pint-size 600MW reactors.

    Yet any hope of state support seems to have died with the Coalition budget cuts, and with it hopes that Britain could take a lead in the energy revolution. It is understandable, of course. Funds are scarce. The UK has already put its efforts into the next generation of uranium reactors. Yet critics say vested interests with sunk costs in uranium technology succeeded in chilling enthusiasm.

    The same happened a decade ago to a parallel project by Nobel laureate Carlo Rubbia at CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research). France’s nuclear industry killed proposals for funding from Brussels, though a French group is now working on thorium in Grenoble.

    Norway’s Aker Solution has bought Professor Rubbia’s patent. It had hoped to build the first sub-critical reactor in the UK, but seems to be giving up on Britain and locking up a deal to build it in China instead, where minds and wallets are more open.

    So the Chinese will soon lead on this thorium technology as well as molten-salts. Good luck to them. They are doing Mankind a favour. We may get through the century without tearing each other apart over scarce energy and wrecking the planet. ."


    The same could be sesaid for the "Peeble Beds" but new news on its progress and implementaion seems to be rather sparse.
    Wow a Western article that semi-praises China...what are the odds?

  3. #648
    no_name is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    1,837

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Quote Originally Posted by airsuperiority View Post
    Wow a Western article that semi-praises China...what are the odds?
    But within that article is a link to this:Leading physicist calls China's nuclear programme 'rash and unsafe' - Telegraph

  4. #649
    airsuperiority's Avatar
    airsuperiority is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,318

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Quote Originally Posted by no_name View Post
    ahh there we go. now that made more sense. OT aside, i have this feeling that for more serious industries like defence and energy, they seemed to be more heavier regulated, therefore i'd hope that ever step they are making are really something they are confident will happen

  5. #650
    bladerunner is offline Banned Idiot
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Xin Xi Lan
    Posts
    3,000

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    But the detracting professor was referring to uranium reactors? Ill leave it to the bright young physisist , to tell us whether they think the profs concerns are applicable here. IMO If anything it makes it more desirable to wish the the Chinese scientists every success and if they can make it work, then they deserve all the acolades comming their way.
    Last edited by bladerunner; 09-01-2011 at 11:42 PM.
    delft and airsuperiority like this.

  6. #651
    airsuperiority's Avatar
    airsuperiority is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,318

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Quote Originally Posted by bladerunner View Post
    But the detracting professor was referring to uranium reactors? Ill leave it to the bright young physisist , to tell us whether they think the profs concerns are applicable here. IMO If anything it makes it more desirable to wish the the Chinese scientists every success and if they can make it work, then they deserve all the acolades comming their way.
    agreed. every advance anyone makes for the frontier of science is one bigger step for mankind.

  7. #652
    i.e. is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,109

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    I must disclose at this point that I own some Huaneng stocks.

    They are to install a trial commercial gas pebble bed reactor in Shi dao wan

    http://www.hsnpc.com.cn/

    demo project scale up from HTR-10 10MW Tsinghua reactor.
    suppose to go online in 2013-11. under construction now.

    from what I understand it is a scalable reactor, i.e. every reactor is self contained but daisy chained together to power couple of big turbines.

  8. #653
    i.e. is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,109

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Quote Originally Posted by no_name View Post
    Most of reactors online today in china and in the future are western designed reactors. French, American, Canadian .

    personel is trained by western companies, even those under construction got their learnings from western companies.

    so
    tell me, whats so unsafe?
    delft likes this.

  9. #654
    bladerunner is offline Banned Idiot
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Xin Xi Lan
    Posts
    3,000

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    So in time, we may even see "Peeble Bed" powered subs, destroyers and daisy chained up for use in aircraft carriers?

  10. #655
    delft is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,344

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    The ones being build by Huaneng, pebble bed reactors based on technology that has now been abandoned by Germany, use expensively manufactured graphite balls with within them fuel particle consisting of Uranium dioxide and Thorium ditto.
    See for the horror story of the German reactors: Pebble bed reactor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
    Similar but simplified reactors have been proposed for ship propulsion. See the same wiki.
    The reactor design that is the subject of the FT article uses liquid fluoride salts. The real fuel is U233 that is bred from irradiated Thorium. The main difficulty is the reprocessing. Th232 absorbs a neutron and becomes Th233. This decays to Proactinium, Pa233, which is flushed out of the reactor by fluor in order not to absorb more neutrons. Pa 233 decays to U233, which is returned to the reactor as the fuel. When the reprocessing problem was solved the decision was taken to develop the system. We can expect major results in about ten years time. See China Initiates Thorium MSR Project « Energy from Thorium.
    This is rather removed from the real subject of this thread, but I would expect these reactors might be powering Chinese naval vessels, perhaps even large merchantmen from perhaps 2030.
    Last edited by delft; 09-02-2011 at 07:21 AM.

  11. #656
    no_name is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    1,837

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Maybe large commercial ships and even cruise liners, But I doubt normal merchant vessels will use them. You still need qualified peoples working with such systems. And if it becomes more popular it just means resources will get used up faster.
    bd popeye likes this.

  12. #657
    delft is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,344

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    I would be especially surprised by nuclear powered cruise liners. My own interest is in the development of wing sails for the propulsion and control of boats and ships and a wing sail powered cruise liner will look much more attractive to people who will not yet have forgotten Fukushima.
    Whatever will happen with regard to ship propulsion, you will need qualified peoples working with such systems.

  13. #658
    no_name is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    1,837

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    The things is I wonder if countries like NZ would allow nuclear powered civilian/merchant vessels to enter their harbour.

    Anyway should head back to topic about PLAN carrier.

  14. #659
    bladerunner is offline Banned Idiot
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Xin Xi Lan
    Posts
    3,000

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Quote Originally Posted by no_name View Post
    The things is I wonder if countries like NZ would allow nuclear powered civilian/merchant vessels to enter their harbour.

    Anyway should head back to topic about PLAN carrier.
    Nz.is nuclear free zone, and popular sentiment will prevent that from changing for a very long time to come. THerfore any Chinese nuclear powered naval/ or civilian ship would have the same problem as the U.S.Navy did. Not allowed in N.Z. waters.

    Futhermore I would'nt be surprised if we saw at least one Chinese 2nd/or3rd gen Aircraft carrier being thorium based nuclear powered.
    Last edited by bladerunner; 09-03-2011 at 01:42 AM.
    delft likes this.

  15. #660
    Spartan95's Avatar
    Spartan95 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    557

    Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

    Quote Originally Posted by i.e. View Post
    No,
    with the new generation of small Thorium reactors, a container sized reactor would generate anywhere from 10 to 100 mw. ditto with pebble beds designs.

    which is comparable to any low speed marine diesel plants today.

    as deisel and heavy fuel oil prices goes up these will get used more and more.
    The issue is 1 of cost, not size. The cost of designing, building, operating and maintaining a nuclear powered vessel is expensive. The USN experimented with nuclear-powered cruisers in the past, but these were eventually dropped due to cost.

    A related issue is how many shipyards can build and maintain nuclear-powered ships? This has implications on where the ship can go to for maintenance on its nuclear power plant.

    There is also the issue of training the crew to operate a nuclear reactor. Whilst this can be done, shipping companies that recruit from 3rd world countries probably won't be too keen to have lowly skilled crew fiddling with nuclear power plants. Recruiting higher skilled crew means higher manpower cost.

    Quote Originally Posted by i.e. View Post
    whoever can 1st put a safe thorium reactor in a destroyer application would have great advantages, as it seems in the near future ship electrical powers consumption is the main driver for propulsion designs.
    The all-electric ship is currently touted as the future of warships. And being powered by a nuclear (or thorium) reactor is certainly the way to go. However, I'm not sure how viable it will be to scale it down to a destroyer size warship due to the amount of shielding and cooling systems that a reactor needs.

    Reactors work well for large ships such as carriers. And soon, there may be nuclear powered LPDs/LHDs. Potentially even cruisers again (CGN). But destroyers I'm not so sure.
    Equation likes this.

Similar Threads

  1. Uploading Photos and Videos!
    By WebMaster in forum Announcements
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-27-2013, 05:05 PM
  2. Chinese Daily Photos, Videos & News!!
    By bd popeye in forum General Pictures
    Replies: 1188
    Last Post: 12-31-2011, 04:03 PM
  3. Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos
    By Jeff Head in forum Navy
    Replies: 4952
    Last Post: 08-09-2011, 07:17 PM
  4. US Aircraft Carrier Operations
    By Jeff Head in forum World Armed Forces
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-29-2006, 10:31 PM
  5. Questions concerning US carrier operations
    By Totoro in forum World Armed Forces
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-24-2006, 11:29 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13