When I was writing my second book, an idea just hit me out of nowhere; the world needs nuclear powered cruise ships and needs them now. I guess I’m a bit biased, after all, I do love nuclear power. But there are some great strategic gains to be made here, and the idea isn’t as ridiculous as it may seem on the surface (see what I did there?). Given that demand for cruises is only expected to grow, it’s imperative that we implement this change as soon as possible. So, since the cruise ship industry won’t do anything, then I’ll be the visionary founder that’ll disrupt the cruise ship space (I’m talking like a Millennial founder already!). So, for any venture capitalists that may be reading this; allow me to make my pitch.
Its an open secret that nobody really wants to talk about; cruise ships are horrible for the environment. They are horribly inefficient vessels that are powered by the world’s dirtiest fuel. The carbon footprint of cruise ships is far worse that of car traffic in most EU cities. Standing on the deck of a cruise ship is similar to standing in one of the worlds most polluted cities. However, nuclear energy side-steps these problems entirely.
Of course, the alarmists are going to sharpen their pitchforks as they vehemently oppose my workable solution. The pundit (eww…pundits) will protest What if the ship sinks? Well fear not, my knee-jerk reactionary friend, since 1943 (a useful proxy for the discovery of nuclear technology) you can count the number of cruise ship accidents on one hand worldwide once you discount obvious sabotage/insurance jobs. The same people who oppose nuclear cruise ships are the same people who love to point out that seatbelts sometimes are the cause of death in car accidents. To face facts, the odds of a cruise ship sinking are so astronomically low that it basically isn’t even worth discussing. However, I’ll bite anyways; deep underwater is the safest place for a nuclear explosion, not that these reactors behave anything like the literal strongest bomb ever made anyways. See? Not even worth discussing.
Granted, I’ll admit that the upfront cost of building a new nuclear-powered vessel isn’t cheap, however once you get past the sticker shock, the numbers become far more palatable. Using data from the Navy (since it is publicly available), it cost the Navy about $4 billion to build a nuclear aircraft carrier. I’m using an aircraft carrier as the sizes are at least comparable to cruise ships (both are described as floating cities). However, the world’s most expensive cruise ships cost $2 billion, adjusted for inflation and have a service life of 15 years before the cruise company sells the boat. Thus, the price difference isn’t all that bad, relatively speaking. A nuclear ship can last for half a century, and can go twenty years between refueling.
Speaking of refueling, let’s talk about that for a minute. It can cost up to $200,000 per day to fuel the largest cruise ships. Let’s assume a cruise ship gets two weeks of downtime per year for maintenance and repairs (cruise operators will want to minimize this time as it is lost revenue). $200,000 times 351 days equals $70.2 million. That’s per year! And remember, the nuclear cruise ship I’m proposing would be able to go two decades between refueling, saving my company/your investment over $1.4 billion in needless costs over that time span (which is close to the entire cost of a mid-size cruise ship!). Starting to see where we can make up the cost savings, my dear investor?
That $4 billion price tag also assumes that the private sector wouldn’t be able to build a comparable vessel for cheaper. This, of course, is a laughable claim to make since Elon built the Falcon 9 for $300 million while comparable NASA shuttles go for several billion. Elon didn’t need the fancier technology to pull this off either, he accomplished this via in-sourcing the production of as many of the necessary components as possible. But since you’re a savvy venture capitalist, I know for a fact that you understand basic economics than some bumbling government bureaucrat.
Truthfully, it seems I’m not the only one who has had this idea. The Department of Energy wrote an article discussing how the sipping industry interested in going nuclear. Frankly, there is no reason why the world’s oceans shouldn’t be traversed in nuclear vessels since we’ve had the technology since the 1950’s. The government is even willing to get out of the way (now if they could only do that for landmines). The real competitive moat (shout out to Warren Buffet!) is in the intellectual property; once our venture produces a working nuclear cruise ship, we can bury it under intellectual property protections, and then charge exorbitant fees to license the design out to others looking break into the nuclear cruise ship space. Diversification is key to success.
People who oppose my idea are, to quote a wise philosopher, “scared of the future while I hop in the DeLorean”.
Home Page 