4 ms·
Just by reading the article the impression is that it's both faster and should be cheaper (?). I get that only some type of cargo would fit or would make sense
by playingalong 2y ago
Just by reading the article the impression is that it's both faster and should be cheaper (?). I get that only some type of cargo would fit or would make sense to load like this. What are the downsides?
- moffkalast 2y agoMargins in the shipping industry are typically rather low and it's offset by scaling well with container ships of proportions only limited by the canals they must traverse. This ship is positively microscopic in comparison. I would imagine it's only cost effective for very specific types of cargo. There are hybrid options with flettner rotors and deployable kite sails for partial fuel savings on specific routes, but it's all rather experimental.
- inetknght 2y ago> I would imagine it's only cost effective for very specific types of cargo I imagine you're close to correct, but that some people might be willing to pay a premium for types of cargo that normally would not turn a profit. "Fine goods", as my local Specs puts it.
- fsckboy 2y agothe French could keep shipping mass produced crappy cars economically on big ships, and then small numbers of cars de luxe on these bougie ships, and advertise the... "car bon offsets".
- yawpitch 2y agoDoldrums. Hurricanes. Impulsively murdered albatrosses. Kraken. Also pirates, undead and otherwise. Really the list goes on.
- spudlyo 2y agoRum, sodomy, and the lash.
- dylan604 2y agoI can't believe scurvy has yet to be mentioned.
- wolfram74 2y agoWell we have juice boxes for that now. Krakens are still a problem though.
- dylan604 2y agoHa! I can see a kid's commercial for a juice box with pirates sipping on a juice box while sword fighting a Kraken attacking their ship. "While sailing the high seas, we no longer have to worry about scurvy thanks to Hi-C's vitamin C fortified juice boxes. We do still have to fight the Kraken though!" narrator voice kicks in
- selimthegrim 2y agoPlease don’t tell Sora.
- christkv 2y agoPressgangs and veneral disease
- yawpitch 2y agoOh yeah definitely the venereal disease. Any port in a storm isn’t a good motto for a long life.
- thejohnconway 2y agoScale and throughput. Ships used to have cranes on deck and unload this way (look at pretty much any ocean liner, they had cranes on the forded for cargo). Containerisation improved throughput considerably, but added to latency. There is no way this is cheaper. Way more crew per tonne, the ship itself is almost certainly way more expensive for it capacity, and so on. Not that I don’t think sailing is a bad way to move cargo, but I suspect if it does work, it won’t be small boats with crew.
- krisoft 2y ago> Containerisation improved throughput considerably, but added to latency. I doubt the “added latency” part. How long do you think it takes to unload 11,000 twenty-foot container from a ship? Do you think anyone would move the contained stuff faster if it were just in a loose pile?
- thejohnconway 2y agoThat used crates, but yes I think it way quicker per ship, because ocean liners in particular wanted fast turnaround times. A lot more labour was involved, obviously.
- krisoft 2y ago> yes I think it way quicker per ship, because ocean liners in particular wanted fast turnaround times But container ships also want fast turnaround times. This is not a convincing argument.
- Quarrel 2y agoIt doesn't carry even a 10th of the cargo of the big windjammers of the 19th century (5000-8000 tons!). Of course, setting aside the value of zero emissions which is their obvious selling point, it would otherwise be competing against big container ships (up to 200,000 tons!). I assume that until they scale it for a few more generations that it'll be more a gimmick for low tonnage luxury items that just want the zero emission marketing claim. Even after scaling, I assume it couldn't be competitive for most bulk things.
- Gare 2y agoUse wind power to produce methane, then use methane to power huge container ships. Sailing by proxy.
- hagbard_c 2y agoYou'll be emitting nitrous oxides when burning that methane. Use wind to produce hydrogen, use that in fuel cells. Electric propulsion units are already in use, what remains to be solved is the megawatt-sized fuel cells needed for this application at a price which makes the whole scheme feasible.
- azernik 2y agoHow are you emitting nitrous oxides from a synthetically produced (ie very pure) fuel that contains no nitrogen?
- durundal 2y agoYou’re burning it in air which has lots of nitrogen.
- Gare 2y agoLong term, I agree. But we already have methane and methanol powered huge container ships. Much better than burning bunker fuel.