Maybe in time ? Seeing these multi megawatt 10 year life zero maintenance nuke batteries looks pretty kick ass
________________________________ From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> on behalf of Ken Hohhof <khoh...@kwom.com> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 6:16:35 PM To: af@af.afmug.com <af@af.afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] solar container ships Nuclear probably beats diesel for energy density, but I presume that is not an option. ---- Original Message ---- From: "Mark Radabaugh" <m...@amplex.net> Sent: 10/7/2024 7:13:41 PM To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" <af@af.afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] solar container ships Back of the envelope calculations…. Panamax (largest container ship through the Panama Canal) burns 63,000 gal/day. 63000 gal of diesel is 2400MWH of energy. It takes roughly 10 acres to generate 1MW of power so 24,000 acres * 3 (to account for night). Call it 40 square miles…. I don’t think that’s going to work. Batteries…. The Panamax ships hold ~3M gallons of fuel or 114298 MWH of energy. A typical nuclear power plant puts out 900MWH so it’s going to take the full output for 5 days to recharge that battery. But the typical turnaround is 1-2 days to we need 5 reactors to recharge the ship by the time it’s ready to sail. Hard to beat dead dinosaurs for energy density. Mark > On Oct 7, 2024, at 5:22 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > i dont know how much batteries it would take to run one of these beasts, but > what is the fuel to batter weight ratio? like 100 tons to cross the atlantic > in fuel would require how many tons of battery with 30% sun and how many tons > of solar panels to charge them > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
