Nuclear Ice Breaker

General maritime and engineering discussion occurs on this board. Feel free to post newsbits, comments, ask questions about maritime matters and post your opinions.
Post Reply
User avatar
D Winsor
Superintendent
Posts: 360
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 8:23 am
Currently located: Dartmouth

Nuclear Ice Breaker

Post by D Winsor »

It is interesting in an effort to reduce the amount of green house gasses from diesel powered Ice Breakers there has been renewed calls for a Nuclear Ice Breaker.
What happened to the plans for a Nuclear Powered "Louis S. Saint Laurent" or the "Polar 10" from the 1970's designed to remain in the Arctic 12 months of the year?

User avatar
JK
Enduring Contributor
Posts: 2978
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:29 am
Currently located: East Coast, Canada

Post by JK »

I think you will see those plans pulled out, dusted off and modernized. They had a breaker stay up over the last winter- the Amundson.
But, do we need another ship the size of the Louis for Arctic icebreaking with global warming?

User avatar
TxMarEng
Officer of the Watch
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:48 am
Currently located: Albuquerque New Mexico
Contact:

Nuke Ice Breakers

Post by TxMarEng »

The Russians have operated nuke ice breakers for years. They even carry tourists on one of them. Nukes in all aspects of the shipping industry are becoming more attractive.

User avatar
The Dieselduck
Administrator
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:41 pm
Currently located: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada (West Coast of Canada)

The Polar Eight

Post by The Dieselduck »

That is a bit of a sore point in the shipbuilding circles, especially on the west coast. Seems allot of the government work was deferred in the 80 and 90s to the east coast yards under the guise that the west coast yards were going to build the pearl of the Canadian arctic, the Polar Eight icebreakers. Like all shipbuilding decisions from the government, the project dragged on the drawing board and was finally canceled. Meanwhile the shipbuilding industry on the west coast dwindle to scraps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_8

In a related topic to this discussion, check out this post in the Monitor (http://dieselduck.blogspot.com/search/l ... ear%20Ship) regarding Russia's recent newbuild launch of their well proven Arktica Class nuclear icebreakers.
Martin Leduc
Certified Marine Engineer and Webmaster
Martin's Marine Engineering Page
http://www.dieselduck.net

Wyatt
Officer of the Watch
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:12 am
Currently located: Victoria

Post by Wyatt »

Oh Dieselduck, you are SO right in what you said. And so are you JK. The government is far too fickle a commodity to entrust in such a project, for we all know we need this Ship, even to you Global Warming believers. I have worked in the arctic for 30 years, and if you ask me, everything is cyclic. We are having a very bad year for ice, and it is only July! I believe the ice will return, and if it doesn't, haven't we been having global warming from the last ice age?
Cheers
Wyatt

User avatar
JK
Enduring Contributor
Posts: 2978
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:29 am
Currently located: East Coast, Canada

Post by JK »

Martin, the Henry Larsen was built on the west coast to the tune of 120 million in the late 80's. I think your statement is a little wrong (respectfully).
The 1100s were built in Quebec and the East Coast. Maybe one on the West Coast?
The Government building program is a joke. They have let the ship replacement program slide bad enough that yards have closed, knowledge is lost and the government ships are operating on a wing and a prayer.
I have been hearing that the Government civil servants are pushing to have a building program that replaces ship in 20 years as does commercial industry.
What a joke.
As long as the government fleet is prey to the whim of politicians, you will not see ships replaced in 20 years. They might as well admit that as a fact and build the ships to last 40 years, since that is how long they seem to be operated.

As for a nuclear ship, can you imagine trying to deal with TC and the Atomic Energy Board. My God what a nightmare that would be!!

Wyatt, that is a interesting tidbit about the Arctic ice season. The Canadian government is frantically trying to survey the continental shelf in the Beaufort for UNCLOS. Going to be tough to drag a air gun behind an icebreaker in heavy or even moderate ice.


ETA: I checked Wikpedia and see that it was announced that the nuclear icebreaker will be based in Nfld. Nice bit of pork belly politicking by the DFO minister Hearns whose riding just happens to be Nfld. :roll:

User avatar
The Dieselduck
Administrator
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:41 pm
Currently located: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada (West Coast of Canada)

Post by The Dieselduck »

Dont forget I like to make sweeping generalizations, ehehee. Yes, Larsen was probably built here, and I believe the Martha Black was the 1100 built in Victoria, but it seems that the bigger contracts went east, like the frigate program.

Yes I do believe the government is living in la la land some days. 20 years replacement, ehehehe, thats pretty funny. I wonder how long the Navy's replenishing ships have been on the drawing board... not to mention the artic stuff. ehehehe. And yeah to go nuclear, omg, that would be incredibly tied down by red tape, i think planning to hold talks about planning the possible idea of a nuclear coast guard ship would be tied up by dramatic government red tape. ehehehe
Martin Leduc
Certified Marine Engineer and Webmaster
Martin's Marine Engineering Page
http://www.dieselduck.net

User avatar
JK
Enduring Contributor
Posts: 2978
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:29 am
Currently located: East Coast, Canada

Post by JK »

Government planning is an oxymoron, you know.

It would be hard to plan when the Masters change every couple of years and have their own agendas. Plus the porkbelly politics.

Post Reply