There is a real need for floating power especially in South Africa as the first winter hits the shores. Power outage of up to 3 days is all ready being reported in suburbs around the Cape. The national power supplier simply cant keep up with the growth, and with the Soccer World Cup coming up in 2010 even more pressure is being placed on the national grid. This ship can be send around the world to emergency zones etc. without needing local resources. Great idea but would be nice to see an international effort to ensure standards are maintained. How about putting Green Peace in charge?

Johan Ehlers, Saldanha, South Africa

Is it possible that there is so much interest in nuclear energy (of all stripes), because there has been a huge amount of financial investment in its potential? Investors want to make certain they get their projected profits. Investment stategists in this country have predicted nuclear stocks will be THE money making stock that replaces coal and oil investments. Well, look where investing in those two commodities got us?

Cian, Richmond, U.S. A.

Every time there are plans to build nucear plants I would like to see a compulsory report accompanying the plans on how the waste is going to be dealt with.
It is always my first reaction when I see any new projects involving nuclear material. Russia has an horrendous reputation for dealing with all forms of waste material, be it industrial or nuclear.
I haven't seen any plans for dealing with the waste from this sailing nuclear plant - whats to stop anyone throwing it overboard!!!

Maureen Childs, Kableshkovo, Bulgaria

Currently there are nuclear ice breakers. Nothing has happened with them. Surely if US was behind this, there would be less critique. With careful planning, this should be rather safe, but I do agree selling to "unreliable" countries might not be the best action. However, I find it rather funny that so much focus goes on criticizing a project that hasn't even taken place yet. There are a lot more "current" problems that need our atention.

Laura, Helsinki, Finland

Irrational fear over nuclear power is one of the greatest threats to civilisation at the moment - sounds a meladramatic statement, but this fear prevents us moving to a safe, carbon free energy source. Having worked on nuclear sites in a variety of countries, these are orders of magnitude safer than other industrial facilities.

Peter, London, Uk

Nuclear reactors on ships? Why not!

We have came a long way since NS Savannah and realisticly, how many accidents have you heard about from ships - caused by the on board reactor(s)?!

The US rely on Rickovers legacy but be adviced, the Russians are ahead of the western reactor technology regarding miniature nuclear power plants for satellites as well as having an excellent experience from submarines and other marine vessels with nuclear power plants.

The problem is the Russian tendency to mess up the maintenance and safety procedures.

And what about terrorists? Well, You shoulds be able to secure a boat almost as well as the unsecured land based power plants...

Dan Andersson, Hull, UK

I'd like to point out to Ian that nuclear aircraft carriers and submarines are highly guarded, fortress-like military platforms. The likelihood that these power stations would have as much protection is rather less likely I would have thought..

Ben, London,

I think this is not a bad idea, at least it's fresh idea. Russian is not careless as described in novels or films, they did make some good stuff. Let's look back to first nuclear submarine, who can guarantee the safety of it? No one could but we still built it for national safety, dissociable?

Jacky, BJ, China

"And what happens if there's a giant storm in the Arctic?"

The comment above illustrates the difficulties of the uneducated public appraising complicated technical issues.

Giant storms (often referred to as hurricanes) originate from air rising over warm oceans and their winds receive their force from the coriolis effect due to the earth's rotation. As the Arctic doesn't actually have warm oceans and, being so close to the Pole, the coriolis effect is negligible the best it can achieve in storms are the normal, more moderate ones.
Actually, from a safety & security point of view putting a reactor on a floating platform, providing it is suitably constructed, seems an excellent option.

PJ, London, England

Why when Russia tries to do something we find so many critics of its action?

Tomo, Tokyo, Japan

Fellow Ian, I disagree heavily.
Bad enough that Shipcarriers are parked near big towns with all the danger they carry.
But at least they have got a whole Army to protect them right away. And they are being maintained by trustworthy countries.

It is a completely different thing to send a nuke-plant into the remote areas of russian backlands. Or worst of all even selling them to unreliable countries. The control of nuklear power might easily slip out of control.

Jonathan, frank, Germany

thank God for INTERNATIONAL RESCUE!!!

allan, auckland, newzealan

People need to get over their fears of nuclear power safety. Nuclear power has been used on ships for many years and they dock near city centres around the world. The ships are aircraft carriers(USA) and submarines (Russia, UK, France, China and the USA). If a utility company planned to build a nuclear power station in a city centre, everyone would go nuts. So get over! Nuclear power is safe with many thousands of safe operating hours in service. Convention power stations have safety problems and industrial plants as well. I say that this proposal is a "good idea" and Russia should be congratulated for trying to bring energy supplies to remote areas.

Ian Robinson, Grangemouth, scotland

Why not find a small deserted Island somwhere

John, Salford, England

I think that this idea is not the best. But at list this is solution of the problem of shortage in east regions of my country. I am glad that our government decided to do anything)))And I am sure that it is safe the only thing that make make me worry is that at the time when they build this vessel probably there will be noone to use all this electricity.

Denis, Izhevsk, Russia

Wow, the Russians have, yet again, proved that they do not understand the first thing about safety. They are putting nuclear reactors, let alone Russian nuclear reactors, on ships? You must be kidding me. The Russians have holes in the walls surrounding facilities that hold nuclear weapons, and hte world is supposed to assume that they will be able to keep a floating nuclear reactor safe? And what happens if there's a giant storm in the Arctic? If one of these ships sink? And what about a nuclear meltdown? This is just a bad idea, especially if supplied to countries such as Indonesia and Algeria, who may use the ships to start up a mini-nuke program. But who knows? I just hope the worst doesn't happen first.

Rye, Palo Alto, California

Russia can do what ever they want. Europe needs their oil, and is willing to look away at anything they do. Germany and Western Europe has already sold out Eastern members of the EU to get cheap energy.They do not even care that Putin has eliminated democracy. So to Russia, do what you want, just keep the oil coming.

NIck KNight, Gdynia, Poland