4 ms·

all in all it's gotta be cheaper to ship time-insensitive things via a vehicle that consumes no fuel. I'm curious if they can turn around and monetize their lac

all in all it's gotta be cheaper to ship time-insensitive things via a vehicle that consumes no fuel. I'm curious if they can turn around and monetize their lack of emissions thru some kind of carbon markets or whatnot

tempay 2y ago
Only if staffing and maintenance costs are low enough.
chongli 2y ago
The fuel burned by container ships is literally the sludge left at the bottom of the distillation vessel after all of the lighter petroleum fuels have been removed for sale. It is incredibly cheap fuel, extremely energy dense, but unbelievably dirty stuff. Unfortunately, these ships only burn the nasty fuel in international waters so the process of getting them to pay for emissions would have to go through international maritime law, specifically MARPOL [1]. If you want an idea of how difficult that would be, check out the implementation and enforcement section of that page. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARPOL_73/78 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARPOL_73/78
- dylan604 2y ago
  I'm envisioning a Coast Guard cutter type boat in the middle of the vast ocean trying to pull over a ship to issue a ticket. Of course, it's all in the style of a cartoon in my mind to compensate for the farcical nature of trying to police the open ocean
- dr_dshiv 2y ago
  The dirtiness of the fuel has certain environmental benefits, namely the production of low marine clouds. These were offsetting the warming impact of shipping by about a third. https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/marine-clouds-climate-change-1.7016498 https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/marine-clouds-climate-change...
toast0 2y ago
The crew consumes fuel. A large sailing vessel and a large container ship probably require a similar number of crew. Labor cost per ton will be huge.
- rmah 2y ago
  Relative to all oceangoing vessels, there are no large sailing vessels.
  - toast0 2y ago
    That's the point. A large sailing vessel takes the same crew and moves way fewer tons.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]

tempay 2y ago

Only if staffing and maintenance costs are low enough.

chongli 2y ago

The fuel burned by container ships is literally the sludge left at the bottom of the distillation vessel after all of the lighter petroleum fuels have been removed for sale. It is incredibly cheap fuel, extremely energy dense, but unbelievably dirty stuff. Unfortunately, these ships only burn the nasty fuel in international waters so the process of getting them to pay for emissions would have to go through international maritime law, specifically MARPOL [1]. If you want an idea of how difficult that would be, check out the implementation and enforcement section of that page. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARPOL_73/78 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARPOL_73/78

dylan604 2y ago
I'm envisioning a Coast Guard cutter type boat in the middle of the vast ocean trying to pull over a ship to issue a ticket. Of course, it's all in the style of a cartoon in my mind to compensate for the farcical nature of trying to police the open ocean
dr_dshiv 2y ago
The dirtiness of the fuel has certain environmental benefits, namely the production of low marine clouds. These were offsetting the warming impact of shipping by about a third. https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/marine-clouds-climate-change-1.7016498 https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/marine-clouds-climate-change...

toast0 2y ago

The crew consumes fuel. A large sailing vessel and a large container ship probably require a similar number of crew. Labor cost per ton will be huge.

rmah 2y ago
Relative to all oceangoing vessels, there are no large sailing vessels.
- toast0 2y ago
  That's the point. A large sailing vessel takes the same crew and moves way fewer tons.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]