3 ms·
We can get similar speed from a conventionally powered ship if we have to. There isn't much motive at the moment, so cruise ships do about 20-25 knots. If we re
by tengwar2 4y ago
We can get similar speed from a conventionally powered ship if we have to. There isn't much motive at the moment, so cruise ships do about 20-25 knots. If we revived the liner, we could go substantially faster. The record was set in 1952 by the SS United States, at 34.5kn average speed and a crossing time of three and a half days. CO2 is an issue which is already being looked at, with designs based on hydrogen and on ammonia - I suspect that the latter will win out as being easier to store.
- janef0421 4y agoYou can, but it results in non-linear increases in fuel consumption. A nuclear reactor can be run at a high power output continuously without substantial reductions in efficiency. It also allows for infinite range and reduces cost and turnaround time caused by refuelling. Using Ammonia would have none of these benefits, require expensive infrastructure, and involve enormous energy losses.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y agoHard to believe we'd be pushing that idea at the very moment we're trying to encourage shipping vessels to slow down by 10% because of the dramatic reduction in fuel consumption that provides. I've taken the Queen Mary II (the only current ocean liner) between NYC and Southampton. I thought it was a very, very nice way to cross the Atlantic, even though the carbon and general pollution footprint could be dramatically improved.