A potential $1.5 Billion pricetag to recycle the USS Enterprise (CVN-65)

[Safiel]

@Krandor

@Safiel

I think I could put a group of Kindergartner’s in charge of disposing the Enterprise and they likely could make a better and faster decision than the government.

I have no issues with nuclear powered naval ships but honestly shouldn’t how you are going to dispose of them be something you think about when you build them to start with?

That is the stupidest thing actually.

They have known since the Enterprise was commissioned the year that it would be decommissioned. They should have been planning this YEARS ago. But no planning was done at all until the Enterprise was actually deactivated, de-fueled and decommissioned. Now that the time is upon them, they begin to try to figure things out.

[Krandor]

@Safiel

That is the stupidest thing actually.

They have known since the Enterprise was commissioned the year that it would be decommissioned. They should have been planning this YEARS ago. But no planning was done at all until the Enterprise was actually deactivated, de-fueled and decommissioned. Now that the time is upon them, they begin to try to figure things out.

I’m an engineer and that just seems like something you should plan for and not something that waits 5 years after the ship is decommissioned. That boggeles my mind.

[Samson_Corwell]

@Safiel

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/the-growing-global-threat-of-radioactive-scrap-metal/

This story from 2012 illustrates a potential issue. Bed, Bath and Beyond had to recall tissue boxes in January of 2012, due to contamination with Cobalt-60. That means every bit of the scrap emanating from the reactor area has to be scanned for radiation prior to going to the smelters. A relatively small amount of radioactive scrap could potentially render many tons of recycled metal useless.

Oh, wow. 

[hindsight]

@WorldWatcher

.>

Of course we could just park it near the capital and rename it Rivet City.

(Extra points to those that get the reference without Google.)

.>>>>

Hannity forum.

Hannity forum never changes…

[Samm]

@Safiel

If the government wanted to do it on the cheap, just tow the whole damn thing over the Mariana Trench and pump it full of torpedoes.

That was going to be my question as I read through the OP. Recycling only makes sense if it’s to save valuable resources (such as rare metals and other elements) and to save money over disposal at sea. The the ship would make a terrific dive tourist attraction in shallow water, but if it’s dangerous due to irradiated steel, they don’t need to tow it to the Marianas. There is very deep water just off Puerto Rico.

[TheRedComet]

Fallout!!!

[TheRedComet]

Wouldn’t that be even more catastrophically expensive than the break up procedure?

That would be funding that would have be taken from somewhere. And considering how stretched thin the Navy is with new construction (Columbia class ballistic subs, new flights of Arleigh Burke destroyers, the Ford class, and the Virginia class) is there even enough money to run a refurbished Enterprise?

Plus like Safiel said the first of the Nimitz class boats will start retiring in the late 2020s. Better we learn the lesson on how to scrap these types of ships now because those are going to be even more difficult and expensive.

[Samm]

@Krandor

@Safiel

That is the stupidest thing actually.

They have known since the Enterprise was commissioned the year that it would be decommissioned. They should have been planning this YEARS ago. But no planning was done at all until the Enterprise was actually deactivated, de-fueled and decommissioned. Now that the time is upon them, they begin to try to figure things out.

I’m an engineer and that just seems like something you should plan for and not something that waits 5 years after the ship is decommissioned. That boggeles my mind.

You are right. A few months before North Slope crude started flowing down the Trans Alaska Pipeline to Valdez, I worked with a team of engineers at Michael Baker developing a plan and cost estimate to remove all above ground facilities once the pipeline had no further use and was decommissioned. And while that as in 1977 and the line is expected to be operated for at least another 20 years, they are required to refresh the plan and reestimate the cost every 5-10 years.

But I can see how this doesn’t happen with the Pentagon and the AEC … too many big egos and no one really in charge of the whole shebang.