You got the first one right, and then you went totally off of the rails.
“2. The current reactors are basically a sub reactor converted to land use.”
Depends, there are two basic types of light water reactor, the PWR and the BWR. No subs were or are powered by BWRs.
And sub reactors use fuel that is more enriched than commercial power plants use.
This is just freaking bonzo wrong on so many levels
“3. Water cooling isn’t a problem in sub reactor because if worst comes to worst you can flood the reactor with water that is frequently under more pressure than the reactor.”
For one, the seawater pressure at crush depth is less than 1000 psi and reactor coolant pressure is about twice that.
If you had an accident where you needed to flood the reactor cooling system cause it was leaking, best idea would be to hit the “chicken switches” and head for home on the diesel.
The reason the water in a PWR is at high pressure is because low pressure steam turbines are gihugic (I just made that word up) while high pressure turbines are sorta smallish, and heat transfer reasons.
“9. All the negative consequences of a reactor issue are due to high pressure and the dissociation (into hydrogen and oxygen) during an overheat which must be released – typically into the reactor building.”
Nope, not even close
The main issue during an overheat is this reaction
Zr + 2 H2O –> ZrO2 + 2 H2
Which caused the negative consequences at Fukishima.
Speaking of Fukishima and “Further the “lessons learned” from Fukushima are going to increase construction costs”
I though the lessons learned from Fukishima was to put you diesel generators behind 3 foot of concrete like IP did at the one nuclear power plant I was working at. As well as installing hydrogen recombiners, which were installed at a US BWR6 and not refitted at Fukishima.
The lessons from Fukishima were that the lessons learned from TMI were not put in place there.
I am in favor of Advance Boiling water reactors, Simplified BWRs and even the AP1000.