rikko

Its all the unsold copies of the N64 ISS football game.

Life on a submarine would be utter utter shit tbh. You live in a metal tube sharing your bed with 2 other blokes. There are 16 nuclear missiles on one side of you and a reactor on the other. You wont see sunlight or hear from friends or family for up to 3 months at a time. You could be fresh out of school with no real skills or qualifications and earning £30k/year doing it though so its not all bad. The biggest risk on a submarine is fire, thats what has caused the most deaths on subs since WW2. When you think about most things its pretty far fetched. Like oil, dinosaurs and plants from millions of years ago decomposed underground and water and turned into oil. We then drill down and extract this oil from under the ocean floor and use it heat water to make electricity or to fuel a car that allows us to drive around. Its nuts really, doesn't mean its a big conspiracy theory though. Try explaining that to someone from 200 years ago. They'd think you were nuts, yet its all true.

It seems like a sensible solution to complex engineering problem to me. Its quite common in industry to use this type of system when you want to prevent hazardous materials escaping into the environment.

Also the water isnt cold. The stuff coming of a civil nuclear reactor is about 300 Celsius, and the stuff going back in is about 260 Celsius, it doesnt boil as its at a pressure of about 160 atmospheres. The steam made in the steam generator will be somewhere between 140 and 200 celsius. Hence it boils easily.

Got your point now. Its done to prevent the turbine getting contaminated with radiation. The primary coolant comes into contact with the fuel and passes through a very high neutron flux which makes it radioactive. Not massively so, but enough to make maintenance on the primary circuit a pain in the arse. By using a secondary coolant loop you stop the contamination. On a coal or gas power plant the steam is generated directly. Some nuclear power stations do this too, they are known as boiler water reactors but you have problems in maintaining the turbines.

Its how you can continuously make the steam. Otherwise it becomes a batch process which would be totally useless for making electricity or moving a submarine. If you can invent a better system you will make millions. One pipe takes in old the other sends out the hot. Why have you got a problem with it? It is phenomanally simple.

Turns out I can't be arsed to draw a picture but google can provide some useful ones. The reactor is continuously heating water (called primary coolant), this water is pumped into the steam generators. The energy is tranferred from the primary coolant into the steam generator water (called secondary coolant) which is boiled. This reduces the temperature of the primary coolant which is then sent back into the reactor to be heated up again, ready to repreat the process again. The secondary coolant is boiled and turned into steam, it is a high pressure steam. This high pressure steam is transferred to the turbines, where it is forced through spinning them round. The turbines go on to either generate electricity from the motor generators or power the engines from the main gearbox. This process extracts all the useful energy from the steam and leaves low pressure steam. The low pressure steam then flows into the condenser. Cold Sea water is pumped into the condenser and is warmed up when the steam condenses. Warm sea water is then pumped out of the submarine. The steam that has been condensed is then returned to the steam generator to be turned into steam again. Here is the same diagram but for a power station. Notice that the only difference is the cooling tower instead of sea water. No steam is vented from either system. This whole process is described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rankine_cycle Wolfy I trust you will now recreate these in crayon for Gemmill as you promised earlier.

Wolfy. It doesn't ever have to be vented. I will draw you a nice diagram showin the whole process when I get home from work. Some heat is put into the environment as an output from the condenser. At no point is working steam vented.

Ok. The steam generator makes High pressure steam. This steam flows through a pipe to the turbine. The steam enters the turbine at high pressure. The steam loses pressure (energy) turning the turbine and low pressure steam exits the turbine. This low pressure steam is condensed inside the pipe and fed back to the steam generator. At no point does it come into contact with oxygen. The 'venting' as you call it is done when the steam passes through the turbine. Inside your pressure cooker there is water. You apply heat and some of the water turns into steam inside it causing the pressure to rise. If the pressure rises too much the relief valve will lift releasing the steam inside. This drops the pressure and the temperature inside the cooker drops too. The valve will then reseat and the pressure will rise again. The steam is made inside the cooker in the absence of oxygen.

Against. Death isn't a punishment it's a cop out. Would you rather be dead or locked in dank cell with no contact for the rest of your life? True punishment is being forced to live for the rest of your natural life with guilt and remorse. Or if you are heartless sociopath then its being totally isolated and being frustrated by no one listening too or caring about you. To my mind death penalty only works if you have a strong religious faith where god punishes you in the afterlife but as I don't believe that it's a cop out.

Yes now on the sub you substitute air for water. You pump that cold water into the sub. Use it to cool the pipe containing the steam thats come out the turbine. This condenses the steam inside the pipe which is then pumped back to the steam generator to become steam again. The sea water which has been heated by cooling the pipe is then pumped out to sea again. This process is happening continuously while the the sub is running. Power stations do the exact same thing. You had it right in your previous post.

Point 1 - you don't need oxygen to make steam. Just need water and heat. The amount of heat depends on the pressure the water is under nothing else. Point 2 - if you then added a pipe that collects all the steam that's come out your radiator and through your turbine and run the pipe in the outside air for a bit to condense it again and feed it back to the radiator you will be fine again as your filling it with water as fast as you are removing it! You're fuel economy won't be so good anymore though because you are using energy from the fuel to heat the radiator to make the steam to turn the turbine.

Yes.

Steam trains use a simpler less efficient open loop system so just dump the steam. It's one of the reasons they aren't used any more. Electrics and diesels are cheaper to build and run. Power stations and subs used a closed loop system and hence are still being used. The towers are huge on power plants as air is a very poor heat transfer medium (1000x worse then water) and they produce a lot more power then a submarine core does. Although if you look at the current crop of uk nuclear power stations none have these cooling towers. They all use sea water. If you want more read up on the rankine cycle.

Edit to fix formatting. Forgot the codes and am writing this on my phone.

To refuel a sub is a process that takes nearly 2 years. It's done by cutting a hole in the casing and pressure hull then taking the lid off the reactor. A bottom opening shielded container is bolted on top of it and a fuel module is raised into it. The container is then closed with spent fuel inside. Repeat until all fuel is removed. The submarine fuel lasts so much longer as it has a high enrichment whereas civil reactor fuel has low enrichment.

1. Some Russian subs have 2 reactors. The UK ones don't. I am fairly certain the USA and French ones don't either. I could guess why the Russians went for two but I can't say definitively as I don't know. Its probably down to redundancy or if they have multiple propellers/propulsors it may be for more speed. There are a number of reasons why you may want 2 over 1. On a side note US air craft carriers have 2 reactors on them and that's done as one core doesn't produce enough power for such a large boat. The US carriers are basically floating cities though, so it may be as simple as that for the russian subs. 2. When a sub comes into port it will still generate steam which is used to turn the electric generators to power the lights, air, computers etc etc The reactor on a submarine powers everything from the toilets to moving the whole boat. To shut the core down for repair work or refuelling you insert the control rods all the way in which stops all the nuclear fissions. You then have the decay heat to deal with which is initially pretty high at about 7% of full power but drops down to under 1% full power in a few days. When you want to refuel you have to wait until the decay heat is less then the natural heat losses from the reactor, this can take 3-6 months to occur. The steam generators are used to do this if the boat is in the water. If its in dry dock they have an alternative cooling supply attached instead. 3. They use the sea as a heat sink instead of a cooling tower.

So you think nuclear power and weapons are simple, but those pesky scientists deliberately make it complicated to intimidate the general public. Rather then it just actually being complicated. Care to explain why they do this? What's their motive? Extorting money from the government? Or is it the government in on it and using it to extort tax money from the general public? What do they spend this extra money on? Is the fact its bullshit why the USA, UK, France and the other so called nuclear powers are desperate to prevent Iran getting it? Because Iran is in fact the saviour of us all and will expose the truth (whilst brutally opressing everyone who lives there). Also why hasn't the likes of North Korea exposed it as bollocks as they have successfully developed nuclear bombs? Are they in on it too?

In other words, you have no reason to believe what you do. You just think that what others, each a specialist in their field, say is the truth is too complicated to be true? Yet you have no idea how any of it actually works and are unable to provide any credible solution as to how technology we have and use everyday actually works. So you prefer to believe in numerous massive conspiracy theories which are without doubt more complicated and reject the universally accepted solutions because in your words "well why not". Would you say that is a fair summary of your position?

Already answered most of those questions so I don't see the need to repeat myself. The fuel rods you have look like those used in a light water reactor, either a PWR or a BWR. The fuel used in them is pretty similar so I can't tell you which it is. There is lots of protective equipment in the photo. There is the integrity of the fuel cladding, the ventilation system, the lack of a moderator (this slows the neutrons) etc etc PPE (personal protective equipment) is the last resort for protecting people. When you go into an active area you basically wear the same outfit as the man behind the deli counter at morrisons and that's only there to stop you getting contaminated. If you go in an area with no contamination then you don't need any protective gear as in the picture above. You seem to be confusing spent nuclear fuel with weapons material. The stuff used in weapons has no spent fuel with it so is not highly active as I said earlier. In summary: New unused fuel: Essentially Not Active Used Fuel: Highly Active Weapons material: Contains no used fuel so is not active. Weapons grade uranium is for all intense purposes pure Uranium 235 it contains no Plutonium. Weapons grade Plutonium is for all intense purposes pure Pu239 it contains no uranium. You use one or the other. Not both. The scientific meaning of the word volatile means turns to a gas easily. Uranium and Plutonium, weapons grade or otherwise, is not volatile. It is fissile or fissionable depending on the specific isotope. If nuclear energy doesn't generate electricity what does? Wasted electric? To generate the amount of steam made in the nuclear reactors in the uk by electricity would take more electricity then the UK generates. Also how do the submarines work? Since there is no wasted electricity that can get to you if you are at the bottom of the ocean. In answer to the other question I am a Nuclear Engineer. I've designed facilities at Sellafield, refuelled reactors, written the safety justification for numerous parts of nuclear process plants and operated test systems.

100%.

The facilities used to make them get massively contaminated in the purification and manufacturing stages. So they are very challenging to decommission, but the hardest thing to decommission is stuff at Sellafield, where reprocessing takes place. Far more active and far far far more of it. The missiles just need extreme caution in handling the plutonium or uranium so as to not get a criticality accident. This then needs disposed off and has been turned into reactor fuel and burnt up there instead. Its expensive as the kit being decommissioned wasn't designed to be taken apart, the modern buildings will be a lot faster then the 1950s legacy stuff. Its expensive as the government emptied the fund set aside for nuclear decommssioning in the 1990s to build Drax Coal Power station.

Upright position. They are about 10m tall and 3m wide, they take up most of the height of the submarine. They are launched in a compressed gas bubble, then when they reach the surface of the water the rocket engine fires.

The UK has no silos, all our nuclear bombs are mounted on trident missiles and launched from submarines (whilst underwater) (you can watch a launch of one here ). At about 1 minute in you see the missile silos on the submarine. This was done to ensure 'second strike' capability and was arguably the thing that stopped any nuclear wars from starting. As the first thing you target in a nuclear attack is the other sides nuclear silos, but if the silo is hidden underwater and could be anywhere you can't hit it. Only the UK, Russia, USA and France have this capability. The materials that typically make one up are a fission trigger (either uranium 235 or plutonium 239) then a 'gas boost' which is provided by fusing deuterium, tritium or lithium 6. Out of these only uranium, plutonium and tritium are radioactive. Plutonium and uranium are long half life alpha emitters so as long as you dont eat them they are harmless. Alpha radiation cannot penetrate a single sheet of paper so the maintainers are safe. Tritium is a very very weak Beta emitter and the energy given off cannot penetrate human skin. The tritium needs replaced quite regularly as its only got a half life of about 12 years, the plutonium half life of 24,200 years so is good for ages and the uranium is good for about 700million years. I did some sums on the uranium and for 100kg of it you will get about 1 decay every 5 seconds. So in short the bombs aren't very active until they get set off. They just sit there fat dumb and happy until its detonated. Dangerous levels Radiation is only really given off by things with short half lifes that have strong gamma rays. Alpha and Beta are only dangerous if they get inside you. The biggest worries in the nuclear industry are Cs137 and Co60.