3 ms·
It’s way more than hundreds. China has has hundreds illegally off of just Galapagos, and laughably claimed they were all operating legally. This article on that
by throwawaysea 6y ago
It’s way more than hundreds. China has has hundreds illegally off of just Galapagos, and laughably claimed they were all operating legally. This article on that incident says China has 17000 “distant fishing” boats. Maybe not all are in economic exclusive zones but I bet most operate in ways that would be illegal under US law: https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/260-chinese-boats-fish-galapagos-ecuador-alert-72086030 https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/260-chinese-b...
All avenues that aren’t violent have not worked and the UN or the international court system are too slow to respond effectively. YouTube already has many videos of military ships shooting at Chinese fishing vessels. That seems like the most expedient solution.
- beamatronic 6y ago17,000 boats. Burning fossil fuels also. Do they use bunker fuel, diesel fuel, or both?
- throwawaysea 6y agoThey most likely use diesel fuel, given that most are probably relatively smaller vessels. But some ships are “factory ships”, with onboard processing, and those would likely be large enough to hold engines that can take bunker fuel.
- petertodd 6y agoNote that bunker fuel is likely to be a bit more environmentally friendly from a long-term climate change point of view, as being less refined, less energy is used in processing it. The pollutants from it aren't a concern when far out at sea, as they're only a threat to local air quality. They're just a concern closer to shores.
- beamatronic 6y agoWhat I’m getting at is that these distant voyages are only economically possible at a certain fuel cost. If the fuel cost goes too high, these distance voyages are no longer feasible.