from our dependence on fossil fuels for energy.

Unlike oil, coal, or gas,

generating nuclear power emits no CO2.

Though, it must be said

that it does create radioactive waste,

some of which has to be stored securely

for thousands of years.

And unlike wind or solar,

it can produce energy on demand.

So a few countries are aggressively pursuing nuclear power

and some have even designed ships

with reactors to serve as mobile power plants.

Is this idea ingenious or a disaster waiting to happen?

China is reportedly starting construction

on a floating nuclear power station

said to be sea-worthy by 2021.

While Russia has already a built a barge

with two 35 megawatt reactors.

It's expected to be hooked up to the grid

in the far northeast region of Chukotka

by December of 2019.

Now, I know there are some keywords in there

that set off alarm bells for some of you.

Particularly, the words: Russia and nuclear power.

One of the biggest disasters

in the history of nuclear energy occurred

in the former Soviet Union in 1986

when a reactor in Chernobyl exploded.

For some, this forever tainted nuclear energy

and critics of the floating power plant

have dubbed it Chernobyl on Ice.

But nuclear power at sea

actually has some advantages.

Land-based power plants need to be built

by sources of water for cooling

which can be valuable real estate.

Building on land can also require

a lengthy construction process

and face backlash from locals.

And of course, once the plant is built,

it can't go anywhere.

A floating reactor can be tugged to a new location

to supply power if the need arises

or it can bring power to remote parts of the world.

Of course, putting a reactor on a boat

is not without its own challenges.

First and most obvious is the motion of the ocean.

The cooling system has to be designed

to keep the reactor temperatures at safe levels

even as the whole system pitches and rolls around.

There's also the problem of containment.

Land-based reactors can be built

with heavy concrete containment vessels over them

to prevent radioactive material from escaping

in the event of a major pipe break.

On a floating vessel, experts say

solving the containment issue makes the ship heavier,

meaning the ship would have to be larger

to support the weight.

It's either that or saving weight

at the expense of robust containment.

The good news for anyone losing sleep over this

is we have a lot of experience with atomic power at sea.

The first nuclear power vessel,

the submarine, USS Nautilus, launched in 1954.

Since then, militaries around the world

have built hundreds of nuclear-powered submarines

and surface vessels.

The U.S. Navy has a stellar safety record

with over 50 years of operation

and no radiological accidents.

The Russian Navy, on the other hand,

had some teething issues

and a number of serious accidents resulted

in over 20 radiation deaths.

Since the late 1970s though, safety and reliability

became a priority, and their track record improved.

There are also several Russian operated icebreakers

that rely on nuclear power that are in service right now.

So with modern naval reactor design

and years of accumulated experience in mind,

some experts like the former head

of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Dale Klein,

think fears about a floating Chernobyl are overblown.

If the design proves safe and effective,

maybe it will lead to more offshore reactor designs.

MIT even floated their own idea for one back in 2015,

and yes, the pun was intended.

Their concept was to combine a nuclear reactor

with the same kind of cylindrical platforms

we use for some floating oil rigs.

Think of those chlorine dispensers

you see bobbing in a backyard pool,

only, giant and with a nuclear reactor inside.

The MIT researchers believe they could be mass produced

and deployed easily, making them much less costly

than current land-based plants,

and putting them over deep water

and at least 13 kilometers offshore

can reduce the threat from tsunamis or earthquakes.

They're still looking into the idea

and hope the first ones are operational by 2030.

If they live up to expectations,

offshore nuclear power could one day be a huge contributor

to the fight against climate change.

And one more fact before you go,

while nuclear power is one way to reduce CO2 emissions

and dependency on fossil fuels,

the Russian floating nuclear power unit

is being sent to a remote area of Russia

to power the extraction of fossil fuels.

Oh, the irony.

If you like this video, check out this one

on how nuclear modular reactors could change

the future of energy.

Make sure to subscribe

and I'll see you next time on Seeker.