It'll Cost $1 Billion To Dismantle America's Nuclear-Powered Aircraft Carrier (popularmechanics.com)
"Six years after decommissioning USS Enterprise, the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, the U.S. Navy is still figuring out how to safely dismantle the ship," reports Popular Mechanics. schwit1 tipped us off to their report:
The General Accounting Office estimates the cost of taking apart the vessel and sending the reactors to a nuclear waste storage facility at up to $1.5 billion, or about one-eighth the cost of a brand-new aircraft carrier.
The USS Enterprise was commissioned in 1961 to be the centerpiece of a nuclear-powered carrier task force, Task Force One, that could sail around the world without refueling.... The Navy decommissioned Enterprise in 2012 and removed the fuel from the eight Westinghouse A2W nuclear reactors in 2013. The plan was to scrap the ship and remove the reactors, transporting them by barge from Puget Sound Naval Base down the Washington Coast and up the Columbia River, then trucking them to the Department of Energy's Hanford Site for permanent storage. However, after decommissioning the cost of disposing of the 93,000-ton ship soared from an estimated $500-$750 million to more than a billion dollars. This caused the Navy to put a pause on disposal while it sought out cheaper options. Today the stripped-down hull of the Enterprise sits in Newport News, Virginia awaiting its fate.
"Although the Navy believes disposing of the reactors will be fairly straightforward, no one has dismantled a nuclear-powered carrier before...
"Whatever the Navy ends up doing, this will only be the first of many nuclear-powered carrier disposals."
The USS Enterprise was commissioned in 1961 to be the centerpiece of a nuclear-powered carrier task force, Task Force One, that could sail around the world without refueling.... The Navy decommissioned Enterprise in 2012 and removed the fuel from the eight Westinghouse A2W nuclear reactors in 2013. The plan was to scrap the ship and remove the reactors, transporting them by barge from Puget Sound Naval Base down the Washington Coast and up the Columbia River, then trucking them to the Department of Energy's Hanford Site for permanent storage. However, after decommissioning the cost of disposing of the 93,000-ton ship soared from an estimated $500-$750 million to more than a billion dollars. This caused the Navy to put a pause on disposal while it sought out cheaper options. Today the stripped-down hull of the Enterprise sits in Newport News, Virginia awaiting its fate.
"Although the Navy believes disposing of the reactors will be fairly straightforward, no one has dismantled a nuclear-powered carrier before...
"Whatever the Navy ends up doing, this will only be the first of many nuclear-powered carrier disposals."
Just goes to show how fake the quantization into money is.
How many Economists does it take to get anything done?
an infinite amount, since nothing will ever get done if you use economists.
passphrase : chirped
It costs a lot of money to decommission large military ships, nuclear or no. They're filled with all sorts of toxic stuff like asbestos and volatile organic chemicals, and many of the valuable metals are tied up in composites which make them not worth recycling. For awhile the navy was paying breakers to dismantle them, but that became so expensive they went back to using old ships as targets and sinking them. If I had to bet I'd guess with the fuel rods removed that's how Enterprise will end up as well.
Drop it on a subduction zone and watch it get pulled into the crust over the course of a few thousand years. It's a geologic time scale shredder, with all natural, organic, pesticide free, gluten free recycling!
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
The current promise is that they'll be able to do it for a billion and a half. It'd be more reasonable to say that nobody really knows what it will cost, but it's going to be more than a billion and a half.
Even if it cost, say, three billion to decommission this, it's not so bad when you amortize that cost over fifty years of service and consider it costs about a half billion dollars annually to operate one of these things, not counting all the other supporting ships in a carrier group. And we operate ten carrier groups...
The fact that people find a multi-billion dollar bill to scrap an old nuclear carrier surprising suggests to me a lot of folks don't really understand how much we spend on this kind of stuff.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Dread_ed suggested:
Drop it on a subduction zone and watch it get pulled into the crust over the course of a few thousand years. It's a geologic time scale shredder, with all natural, organic, pesticide free, gluten free recycling!
Unfortunately, I see two potentially-serious problems with that proposal: firstly keeping the exceedingly-radioactive material of the actual reactor cores (there're two of them, btw) safely contained between the time they're scuttled and the time they've been completely subducted, and are on their way to the mantle; and secondly, safely guiding them to the proper resting place(s ... ?) on the ocean floor for them to be fully subducted in as short a time as possible.
Neither problem is trivial. It may well be that the only real solution is to glassify the material of the cores and await international consensus on a location for a global high-level radioactive waste repository ...
(FWIW - even though I'm picking holes in your proposal, I modded it +1 Interesting, because it is.)
(Posting as AC only so as not to undo prior upmods in this thread.)
--
Check out my novel ...