[Rebelbase]

Tear out the propulsion unit and make the rest of her a reef.

[RandallFlagg]

Admiral Kirk did it in sixty seconds.....MARK!

[Pocketdoor]

It’s cheaper to keep her...

[cuban leaf]

Meh. Just nuke it ‘till it glows. Is’nt that Bikini Atoll still around?

[NormsRevenge]

Turn it into a bed and breakfast and anchor it at Cape Cod.

[BBQToadRibs]

*cough* Marianas trench *cough* *cough*

[SeeSharp]

Why don’t they just tow it to Murmansk and beach it?

[Lurkina.n.Learnin]

Park it off of Los Angeles. Instant homeless community and $1.5 billion to lavish them.

[blueunicorn6]

Maybe she could be repurposed.

The big thing now in cruising is extreme sports.

Climbing walls.....rope courses.....wind tunnel flying.....botulism....

Imagine putting seats on the catapults and shooting teenagers into the sea!

I’d pay good money to watch this!

[roadcat]

Sell it to the Chinese for $10 billion as part of trade deficit negotiations. Then use the money for us to build a new one. They already got our secrets (thanks to dems), and it’s old tech. If scrapped, it would end up as Chinese cars. If sold to them, it’s their problem to clean it up (cheaper by them as they don’t care about environmental and safety concerns).

[CodeJockey]

I'll bet these guys could do it for a lot less.

[Billthedrill]

Decommissioning ships takes money, which is why so many were left to float and rot after WWII, which only served to stretch the expense out. You obviously can't do that when nuclear power plants are involved. This is a good thing to keep in mind when proggies demand that we "slash" defense spending by cutting the number of carrier battle groups. It won't be cheap to "save" all that money.

Large-ticket items such as aircraft carriers are (very roughly) thirty-year investments, with construction costs, operating and maintenance costs, and shutdown costs all a necessary part of the overall project. If this wasn't budgeted in from the beginning, somebody was cheating.

[PeterPrinciple]

Ultimately, according to the GAO, it may take Congress to make a decision.

---

from the article.

[JohnnyP]

I read somewhere that the construction method of a carrier, making it hard to sink, is a trade secret.

[PeterPrinciple]

Whatever the Navy ends up doing, this will only be the first of many nuclear-powered carrier disposals. USS Nimitz is set to retire within the next ten years, and there are ten ships in the class. These will age out every four or five years for the next forty years, and each has two reactors. The Navy must get Enterprise’s teardown right, because the orders are going to start stacking up.

---

From the article.

[Fido969]

Start by doubling the estimates to get closer to what the real cost will be.

[Balding_Eagle]

Throw out OSHA and the EPA.

Then let Private Industry have at it, it will be safely done by the end of 2019.

Or, keep OSHA involved, and watch the dangerous working conditions injure a bunch of people.

[CodeToad]

EPA. Send it to Mexico and those guys will have it stripped and torn down in a matter of weeks!

[LukeL]

I would think a private company could remove the core for 25% of the government cost. Then tow it out to see and use to for torpedo practice.

[PeterPrinciple]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NS_Savannah

Here is what we did with the Savannah. Reactor still in place?

[Tenacious 1]

What?

Scuttle her over the Marianas Trench.

Is it any surprise that THAT ship refuses to be destroyed? The name alone speaks of a heritage that says, “Bring it, Bro!”