4 ms·

Ok, thanks. So that particular solution is not cost effective for the CA market, but what about a different market? Or perhaps a different mechanism of transpor

by joshuak 10y ago

Ok, thanks. So that particular solution is not cost effective for the CA market, but what about a different market? Or perhaps a different mechanism of transportation?

mojomark 10y ago
> but what about a different market? Or perhaps a different mechanism of transportation? I'm not sure what you mean by 'a different market', but I can address the latter: Generally, commercial shipping will yield the greatest economies of scale for bulk cargo transport of any mode of transport (except perhaps pipeline - I'm not sure). You could use a larger tanker ( https://www.google.com/amp/s/oilandgaslogistics.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/types-of-tankers/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/oilandgaslogistics.wordpress.co...), like a ULCC that has 4X the displacement (cargo carrying capacity) as the handy size tanker we assessed. However, that would perhaps yield a ~50% cost reduction - far short of the ~99% reduction needed. https://project-firefly.com/node/19396 https://project-firefly.com/node/19396 - this depicts containersips, but the exponential decay scale/cost relationship is similar for tankers.
- joshuak 10y ago
  Markets other than California. Mechanisms that might be possible with water but not other shipped products, like towing icebergs, floating large bladders, pipelines etc. The economics of commercial shipping has a lot of implied context that may not be relevant to moving fresh water. But in any case, thanks helping me understand.
  - mojomark 10y ago
    NP. This did get me thinking about the idea again. If, like you say, you could identify a market with a much higher cost/gal of water AND you find a way to significantly reduce chartering and operating costs, you might be able to turn a profit at scale. Reducing Opex can be done by chartering a foreign flag vessel (i.e. much cheaper than US flag - although you won't be able to trade H20 between US ports due to the Jones Act (1). Here's a crazy idea for reducing fuel costs (the biggest Opex). You could employ H2 fuel cells + motor propulsion on your ship vice diesel engines. You might think that H2 fuel would be hazardous/infeasible to carry, which is correct. However, you could possibly skirt that issue employing an aluminum H2 generation system that generates H2 fuel on demand directly from water (sea or cargo) (2). This process oxidizes the aluminum until it is depleted, however, to refuel you could offload the containerized depleted Al ashore and load fresh Al. On shore, the depleted Al can be reconditioned (de-oxydized) via a solar or wind powered reconditioning plant (basically melt the Al to liberate the O2). Thus, while a solar-cells generally don't have the necessary energy density to power a ship at typical transit speeds, this is one way to build a very clean solar/wind (albeit indirectly) powered fleet. The Capex might be a little high, but it's doable. (1) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 (2) https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/aluminium_water_hydrogen.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjbs9DduanRAhXMTSYKHfszBboQFggfMAA&usg=AFQjCNFpKlkQ1rQpIS1E0TkmjR7HpvRbRA&sig2=08DiICbpE0nMU50YpnbH2w https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...

by joshuak 10y ago

Ok, thanks. So that particular solution is not cost effective for the CA market, but what about a different market? Or perhaps a different mechanism of transportation?

mojomark 10y ago

> but what about a different market? Or perhaps a different mechanism of transportation? I'm not sure what you mean by 'a different market', but I can address the latter: Generally, commercial shipping will yield the greatest economies of scale for bulk cargo transport of any mode of transport (except perhaps pipeline - I'm not sure). You could use a larger tanker ( https://www.google.com/amp/s/oilandgaslogistics.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/types-of-tankers/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/oilandgaslogistics.wordpress.co...), like a ULCC that has 4X the displacement (cargo carrying capacity) as the handy size tanker we assessed. However, that would perhaps yield a ~50% cost reduction - far short of the ~99% reduction needed. https://project-firefly.com/node/19396 https://project-firefly.com/node/19396 - this depicts containersips, but the exponential decay scale/cost relationship is similar for tankers.

joshuak 10y ago
Markets other than California. Mechanisms that might be possible with water but not other shipped products, like towing icebergs, floating large bladders, pipelines etc. The economics of commercial shipping has a lot of implied context that may not be relevant to moving fresh water. But in any case, thanks helping me understand.
- mojomark 10y ago
  NP. This did get me thinking about the idea again. If, like you say, you could identify a market with a much higher cost/gal of water AND you find a way to significantly reduce chartering and operating costs, you might be able to turn a profit at scale. Reducing Opex can be done by chartering a foreign flag vessel (i.e. much cheaper than US flag - although you won't be able to trade H20 between US ports due to the Jones Act (1). Here's a crazy idea for reducing fuel costs (the biggest Opex). You could employ H2 fuel cells + motor propulsion on your ship vice diesel engines. You might think that H2 fuel would be hazardous/infeasible to carry, which is correct. However, you could possibly skirt that issue employing an aluminum H2 generation system that generates H2 fuel on demand directly from water (sea or cargo) (2). This process oxidizes the aluminum until it is depleted, however, to refuel you could offload the containerized depleted Al ashore and load fresh Al. On shore, the depleted Al can be reconditioned (de-oxydized) via a solar or wind powered reconditioning plant (basically melt the Al to liberate the O2). Thus, while a solar-cells generally don't have the necessary energy density to power a ship at typical transit speeds, this is one way to build a very clean solar/wind (albeit indirectly) powered fleet. The Capex might be a little high, but it's doable. (1) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 (2) https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/aluminium_water_hydrogen.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjbs9DduanRAhXMTSYKHfszBboQFggfMAA&usg=AFQjCNFpKlkQ1rQpIS1E0TkmjR7HpvRbRA&sig2=08DiICbpE0nMU50YpnbH2w https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...