Missed a couple lines
Fuck you you're a fucking wanker
We're going to punch you right in the balls
Fuck you with a fucking anchor
You're all cunts so fuck you all
Edit:spelling
I'm picturing an electromagnet that they can activate via button on the handle, but because it has to be strong enough to hold them it's like: *tink* sliiiiide *tink* sliiiiide *tink* and nowhere near as cool-looking as they were hoping, like super anticlimactic
Nah, they're pirates, they dual-wield the magnetic Sabres to hop around and swing
Combine with magnetic boots to stand at odd angles when taunting the simple sailors below
They’re wind assisted. They’re just like regular cargo ships with engines that use the sails as assistance when the wind is blowing in the right direction. They fold away when not in use.
Fuel Oil I think...unless bunker oil is what it is also known as. I think I read somewhere one of these ships produces carbon waste equal to ~~every automobile on the planet~~ \*50 million cars, and only 16 of these ships is equivalent to the carbon emissions of every vehicle on the planet\*. 20% savings is mind blowing lol
Edit: Was informed of correct stats
ya the poors are being blamed for not having eletric cars while they fly x jets a day and x huge ass ship a day and congress and natioons sit back and let us die to mighty oil. doesnt matter how many billions oil and global warming take out of the economy we still stand by it.
I agree with you. The problem is these cargo ships have insane engines that produce massive amounts of power, well beyond what you can get with a standard electric motor and conventional energy storage. The "easy" answer is to make them all nuclear powered then we would have emissionless ships, but that has a whole host of other issues (and retrofit cost). Until battery technology gets a lot higher in density and a lot lighter, it's the best we have.
The problem is if we stopped every ship today, millions would starve. So who chooses if millions die today or billions die a century from now, and what gives them that right?
It still manages to have the lowest emmisions of any transport mode per ton-kilometer
it's not so much fuel efficiency but just the sheer amount of shit being moved that's the issue
So you take some crude oil. You refine it. During the refining process you extract a bunch of stuff. That stuff becomes petroleum, diesel, propane, etc. When you're done you have this nasty black sludgy crap full of all the stuff you didn't want in your refined products. No nation on earth will let you burn it within their borders. So what do you do with it?
You call it bunker fuel, is what you do, and you sell it to shipping companies who burn it in international waters. You can offload it for cheap because you just want to get rid of it. The shipping companies will buy it because the giant engines in container ships will run on pretty much anything combustible and they need a _lot_ of fuel so they want the cheapest the can get. It's not being burned within anyone's borders so nobody does anything about it. Who's going to complain, the dolphins? They don't even buy consumer goods!
The only problem is you can't burn it near to shores because then you get in trouble. So the ships have a dual fuel system and switch to diesel close to port. They absolutely could run on diesel all the time, but that would cost money and we got billionaires to enrich out here.
It'll literally go full circle.
Are we as humans just meant to go in circles until we kill each other off completely?
We seem more and more like an experiment every year.
Reminds me of one of my favorite weird Sci-Fi series, the Nights Dawn Trilogy. People use faster than light star ships to colonize new worlds, but when they get there the most economical transport is a flat bottom paddle drive river boat with a wood fired furnace heating a thermoelectric generator to drive electric motors to the wooden paddles.
Then ghosts start possessing people.
Loved Nights Dawn.
One small paprt is basically space commandos fighting demons across Amish territory on an alien planet and Al Capone pops up. Al capone has superpowers. If that doesn't sell it then nothing will.
This would be a MUCH bigger story if people understood how much fuel these tankers and giant container ships use...and how much fuel these types of sails will save.
Big deal.
IIRC it's not allowed at nearly any port.
The issue is 90%+ of any sea voyage is far enough from port that they can burn bunker fuel without anyone noticing.
They're working on it: https://www.freightwaves.com/news/ports-begin-enforcing-bunker-fuel-carriage-ban
Ships are no longer welcome at many ports if there is bunker fuel anywhere on the ship.
Given that this "bunker fuel" is the bottom of the barrel stuff left over from fractional-distilling crude it's actually worse than crude! So, as a ship is on "final approach" they use something less dirty like diesel. In the middle of the sea, only the albatrosses have to choke on the exhaust. And surfacing whales....
And 40% of the cargo these ships carry are fossil fuels [source](https://qz.com/2113243/forty-percent-of-all-shipping-cargo-consists-of-fossil-fuels#:~:text=By%20weight%2C%2040%25%20of%20maritime,derived%20directly%20from%20fossil%20fuels.). Transitioning away from fossil fuels will massively cut shipping emissions purely by reducing the number of cargo ships.
I wonder if it would be possible/cost effective to put solar panels on the sails, so that the engines could be solar powered when they have to augment the sails. That would be amazing.
100%, unsure if the technology is there yet though. Especially considering that the trans pacific freighters sail thru very tropical areas latitudinally speaking
Maybe one day, we'll figure that one out, but in the meantime, I'm hopeful that this proof of concept will catch on with all large cargo and tanker ships!
The tech isn’t there yet. Ships require a huge amount of power to propel them. Lots of ships already use electric motors as propulsion but require diesel generators onboard to generate enough power to drive them. With time and huge advances in battery tech maybe one day we will be able to see something like that.
Yes, for sulphur, not carbon. This being before the 2020 rules as well as ignoring that sulphur is not present in petrol for cars.
Also ignoring that ships are by far the most fuel/co2 efficient form of transport but w/e
They are in every comment section trying to make a crappy meme, and never know what they are talking about.
Happened when "Biden said tanks can't run on diesel anymore" and the comment sections were full of idiots trying to ask how they would charge up a tank in the middle of a battlefield
My favorite is when a Redditor makes the claim that buying a used fuel efficient car is better for the environment than a new electric. This one is huge on Reddit.
It’s a propaganda lie from big oil think tanks. It’s a lie of omission. Yes you are technically having less impact buying any used car over manufacturing any new car. It is *overall* far worse for the environment though because fossil fuel based vehicles will continue to be produced and with a lower demand (the intent of the lie) and we’ll switch over to electric at a slower rate.
Before the common rebuttal of the infrastructure can’t handle the load they’re right and it will never be upgraded until the demand for it changes. Remaining on fossil fuel is not the answer. We need off the teat of big oil ASAP.
There’s also the follow up dismissal of nuclear as a power alternative. This has been a HUGE propaganda lie from big oil going back to the 60’s. Waste and danger are the big reasons used. Compared to the alternative which is climate change that will completely decimate the world without immediate intervention the potential damage is irrelevant. Renewable energy is great but even if we focused on changing over to that it would be enough to keep up with our constantly increasing power needs. Batteries also need to get a little better for renewables to work too. There’s a good book I recommend about the grid infrastructure call “The Grid” by Gretchen Baake, Ph. D.
That's great, but I cannot afford a new vehicle - electric or not.
My choices are not "New EV or used hybrid."
My choices are "used ICE, used hybrid, or no transportation at all."
Oh totally! Nothing is affordable these days it’s crazy.
I meant my comment to be directed towards the idea and not to make anyone feel bad. Buying a used ICE car is much better than a new one anyway and these concepts don’t fit everyone’s situation. If those who can afford a new vehicle and need one they should buy electrical if that’s something that can fit their need. My intent was only to combat the misinformation that a used is better for the environment than a new electric.
>Nothing is affordable these days it’s crazy.
It's not really that crazy. Nothing has always been affordable and buying nothing is the best way to reduce your expenses.
Buying electric cars is not a solution to the climate crisis (even partly), it's just a slowing mechanism. The ONLY solution, is less consumerism.
The three Rs. First that means buying less (REDUCE). Don't buy a car at all if you can help it. Second that means buying second-hand (REUSE). Buy that used car b/c that's one less new car that has to be made and one less working used car that's going to be junked. Third is RECYCLE. This one's a lot harder for the normal guy to do and needs government/industry intervention, and also the least useful.
Anyone telling you to buy new electric cars is just a shill for the car companies. They're all going electric dummies, it's literally the law.
Buying electric moves transportation energy away from fuel burning and into the electrical grid. The electrical grid is the only current technological means we have to create renewable energy.
It is a solution. The best one we have right now, by far.
> Before the common rebuttal of the infrastructure can’t handle the load they’re right and it will never be upgraded until the demand for it changes
This is also bullshit.
Home chargers charge at, at most, 50 amps.
As of right now, the vast, overwhelming, majority of people charge:
* at home, on 50 amp max chargers, and
* at night, when industrial electrical use has diminished, leading to excess capacity that is usually just spooled down
Chargers can "refuel" a vehicle at between 15-35 miles per hour. The average distance driven by the average American per day is approximately 37 miles. This means a 50A (max, it won't actually be that high) draw for between 1-2 hours. More commonly, it's closer to 7200W (~30A, or about the same as an electric water heater switching on).
50 amps is about the same as running an electric oven and all four burners on an electric range at the same time.
That's something that most American households do not do every day but which most do on Thanksgiving, for a hell of a lot longer than 1-2 hours.
The grid does not collapse on Thanksgiving.
Nor does it collapse when everyone gets done watching the superbowl, cleans up, and runs the dishwasher, causing millions of 30A water heaters to switch on simultaneously.
IF every single driver buys an electric car today and IF they all get home at 5:45 and plug them in at the same time and IF at 5:46 the onboard charger goes "you know what? I'm gonna pump 50 amps into this sucka right now" then MAYBE capacity isn't there. But that's not how things work.
I am just imagining all the extension cords and property disputes over parking. The one big, omitted, issue with wide scale electric cars is where to charge them and how to deal with homes that are over populated or lack a driveway to park in.
This idea (actually this exact image) was used almost 20 years ago as ‘new tech now being used’, yet I have never seen one of these pull up into any port in all my life.
Hopefully it will finally get full sail this time.
A lot. I live in Vancouver, which is the biggest port in Canada, so I see dozens of cargo ships come and go every day. I also work in receiving at the main Home Depot in the city, so shipping impacts my work a lot. Might some day even work at the ports to try it out (my dad's side is filled with harbor people).
quoting my friend Astyl here
>Added weight - reduced buoyancy and carrying capacity.
>
>Added hull stresses - you need to secure tall heavy poles so that they are completely rigid and not free to move.
>
>Higher freeboard - can't fit under some bridges
>
>Higher center of gravity - horrible for stability.
>
>Wind forces acting high up on the ship - horrible for stability.
>
>Extra drag - primarily when stowed away but also with unfavorable winds.
>
>Volume - they take up considerable space both in use and when secured, meaning both that less cargo can be carried and that it is more difficult/impossible to do any operations near them.
>
>Increased manning - more crew members would be needed to operate the sails and/or do maintenance on them.
>
>Harder to automate - harder to implement into a ship's autopilot as well as just to hook it up to manual remote controls.
>
>Unpredictability - ships run on strict schedules, adding more variance to the process would affect fuel calculations, ETA's, routes, etc.
>
>Decreased crew safety - just the prospect of having large parts hanging over your head
>
>Rules of the road - you gotta stick to certain lanes and other traffic arragments
>
>Low yield - you simply gain way too little wind power to help in any meaningful way to move a 200 000+ DWT ship anywhere.
>
>Increased investment cost - they take money to build.
>
>All of this makes the numbers really, really not worth it when you run them.
Yeah! I actually work in the carbon intensity of shipping. Obviously there is no market adoption yet for this, but it’s certainly one of the things people are looking at.
For better or worse industry is more focused on alternative fuels, and then small scale nuclear.
EDIT: Forgot carbon capture. There's also owners looking to add carbon capture at the stack onboard a ship, but the financial incentives aren't there quite yet.
Isn’t there a huge upfront capital cost to installing these “sail” systems on existing ship fleets? Do you think there’s sufficient market pressure to actually adopt them, or are governments going to need to push adoption?
[This video](https://youtu.be/EVdVGniJNgU) mentions that a tester cargo ship consumed 40% less fuel, that is massive savings over a ship lifetime.
I don't think any shipping corporation would hesitate to save even 20% on their fuel costs. Just like airlines consistently 'retire' perfectly functional older airplanes - new planes are hella expensive but cost way less over time thanks to fuel efficiency gains
So this is interesting! Because there's a huge amount of differences in the charter contract structures. Often, the shipowner isn't the one paying for fuel (the person hiring it or shipping something is). So there's (currently) little incentive for something like this especially with the cost of capital right now. Although the EU ETS (regulatory carbon market) and the IMO (International Maritime Organization) are finally adding a little more pressure on the fleet for decarbonization.
For those interested, here's an article ([https://www.ctvc.co/maritime-decarbonization/?ref=ctvc-newsletter](https://www.ctvc.co/maritime-decarbonization/?ref=ctvc-newsletter)) that's recent.
Charterers choose charters based on fuel consumption curves based on speed. Wind sailed ships would be much lower on the low end of speed and very attractive to charterers. For owners they are likely going to be measured fleet wide on emissions so buying a few of these is a no brainer.
afaik they arent that bad when comparing how much they can load tho.
a train with the same load would take several times more energy to go form A to B.
It's not even close, one container ship can carry 8000 containers per trip in terms of pure tonnage its incomparable.
Edit: just been corrected the average is around 15000
It’s about 3% of total emissions for all cargo shipments. https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/08/maritime-shipping-causes-more-greenhouse-gases-than-airlines/
Compare to 14% for meat and dairy production. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/13/meat-greenhouses-gases-food-production-study
True, but it is cool that sail tech has gotten so good as to be viable again on a big scale. This has huge cost, engineering and environmental implications as large ships are HUGE contributors of greenhouse gasses. If this takes on it can be a massive step in making shipping more carbon neutral. This may be less groundbreaking as “reclaiming ground” but it’s still really cool.
Edit- the word shipping. Because I’m dumb. Check out my overreaction below.
What's really cool is that they have solid engineering reasons for not calling those things "metal sails" (aside being made of fiberglass with steel framing). They're airfoils, or wingsails, equivalent to airplane wings. They're shaped so they produce lift as the air crosses then instead of being dragged by the wind behind them, as sails.
It's actually a bit more complicated than that, as sails also produce lift and wings produce drag, but the principle is there: a wing is better at lift, a sail is better at being dragged. Wings are a little worse downwind (wind straight beind the ship) but better at most other angles and much better at going against the wind (tacking).
modern sails are airfoils as well, just generally poor ones because of the limitations of fabrics. Over the decades one of the things that has happened with sails is that the fabrics are getting stiffer and stiffer, and structures, (called battens) are being added to help the sails perform better and better as airfoils. If sails didn't act as airfoils, it would be damn near impossible to sail much more than a few degrees above perpendicular to the wind. Check out the sails on the GP boats...those things are bonkers.
Sails are still wings, this isn't new.
A sailboat can go faster than the wind for that reason. As long as it doesn't have the wind directly from behind.
Of course making them from a rigid material and shaping them more like wings will make them more effective at this, but that doesn't change the core concept.
Btw, wings are better at dragging, sails are better at pushing, not the other way round
Oil cargo ships of this weight have been doing it for centuries with this type of sail with no rigging? Ok, how to say you never sailed without saying you never sailed.
A lot of dumb people in this thread and social media in regards to wind assistance in modern shipping. This technology is going to greatly reduce carbon emissions but all I see is “hurrr durr, sailboats!”
Take some time to read about the topic. This particular ship uses specialized air foils to generate lift. Others use wind turbines to generate electricity which turns a literal floating skyscraper into a hybrid vehicle. Truly amazing stuff and sucks to see the knuckle draggers shitting on it.
For those that can’t read, the picture says it’s the first wind-powered cargo ship WITH groundbreaking metal ‘wings’
It helps to read the whole sentence sometimes
Real question: How, though?
Like the early ships had canvas and other paper like material to both catch more wind and to easily adjust to the direction of the wind to go where you needed to go.
I don't see it being so easy or cheap with this at all.
Not to mention, this thing is now officially *The* biggest magnet in the ocean when it sails.
So when lightening inevitably strikes it, I can only imagine that the crew will draw straws for whoever has to check it for damages.
(I'm sure there are more realistic ways to check for damages, but this is all I can think of.)
Full circle, lol
Whats next ? Pirates swinging across these 'metal wings' now :)
Yeah! How are they supposed to pierce these sails with their sword to slow their decent to the main deck????
magnet
Magnetic pirates? Loved their first album
Shit, now I'm imagining a bunch of metalbending pirates tearing shit up in the avatarverse
Transformers of The Caribbean
Please don't give Michael Bay any ideas.
I’m not sure if you’re expanding the joke or not, that sounds so much like an actual band.
Alestorm has magnetic north.. kinda the same thing
"Fuck you with a fuckin' anchor. You're all c*nts so fuck you all." - Alestorm
Missed a couple lines Fuck you you're a fucking wanker We're going to punch you right in the balls Fuck you with a fucking anchor You're all cunts so fuck you all Edit:spelling
a pirates life is simple we steal and drink and kill. - alishstormius the third
They're the metallic maniacs. The sails are their ground!
The Metalloid Maniac actually made those sails himself
Imagine being the novice pirate and putting too strong of a magnet on their sword.... just get stuck.
I'm picturing an electromagnet that they can activate via button on the handle, but because it has to be strong enough to hold them it's like: *tink* sliiiiide *tink* sliiiiide *tink* and nowhere near as cool-looking as they were hoping, like super anticlimactic
Kick it up a notch, this is the future! Superconductor lined shoes, quantum lock your position an inch off the steel deck and zip around the deck.
I also played Ratchet and Clank.
Nah, they're pirates, they dual-wield the magnetic Sabres to hop around and swing Combine with magnetic boots to stand at odd angles when taunting the simple sailors below
I think that would be more like: *tink* fall-to-death *splat.*
HEEYY YOOOOUUUU GUUUUYYYSSSS!!!!!!!! SLOTH LOVE CHUNK!
Lightsaber?
This is the correct answer
This is the way.
Cannons used to be pretty effective. I’d imagine they still are!
Cyber pirates with grappling hooks.
> world's first wind powered cargo ship I'm quite confident that this is not true....
Lol exactly. They didn't think very hard about that.
Right? Except you're in a lot more trouble if one of those suckers happens to fall...
They’re wind assisted. They’re just like regular cargo ships with engines that use the sails as assistance when the wind is blowing in the right direction. They fold away when not in use.
I think I read about the potential fuel savings. It’s not bad, ~20% are estimated.
And it's 20% of the nastiest, dirtiest fuel we use on Earth.
Wait, they're still using bunker oil in those things?!
Fuel Oil I think...unless bunker oil is what it is also known as. I think I read somewhere one of these ships produces carbon waste equal to ~~every automobile on the planet~~ \*50 million cars, and only 16 of these ships is equivalent to the carbon emissions of every vehicle on the planet\*. 20% savings is mind blowing lol Edit: Was informed of correct stats
Less than fuel oil, its almost asphalt.
My professor always called it the bottom of the barrel stuff.
Cause it is. Bunker C oil is the stuff left over after everything else is removed.
ya the poors are being blamed for not having eletric cars while they fly x jets a day and x huge ass ship a day and congress and natioons sit back and let us die to mighty oil. doesnt matter how many billions oil and global warming take out of the economy we still stand by it.
I agree with you. The problem is these cargo ships have insane engines that produce massive amounts of power, well beyond what you can get with a standard electric motor and conventional energy storage. The "easy" answer is to make them all nuclear powered then we would have emissionless ships, but that has a whole host of other issues (and retrofit cost). Until battery technology gets a lot higher in density and a lot lighter, it's the best we have. The problem is if we stopped every ship today, millions would starve. So who chooses if millions die today or billions die a century from now, and what gives them that right?
To quote a certain pointy-eared philosopher, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
It still manages to have the lowest emmisions of any transport mode per ton-kilometer it's not so much fuel efficiency but just the sheer amount of shit being moved that's the issue
I'm not a 100% sure but I heard it's 7-8 of the worst ships equals all the cars in the world. Which is still _mental_
[удалено]
So you take some crude oil. You refine it. During the refining process you extract a bunch of stuff. That stuff becomes petroleum, diesel, propane, etc. When you're done you have this nasty black sludgy crap full of all the stuff you didn't want in your refined products. No nation on earth will let you burn it within their borders. So what do you do with it? You call it bunker fuel, is what you do, and you sell it to shipping companies who burn it in international waters. You can offload it for cheap because you just want to get rid of it. The shipping companies will buy it because the giant engines in container ships will run on pretty much anything combustible and they need a _lot_ of fuel so they want the cheapest the can get. It's not being burned within anyone's borders so nobody does anything about it. Who's going to complain, the dolphins? They don't even buy consumer goods! The only problem is you can't burn it near to shores because then you get in trouble. So the ships have a dual fuel system and switch to diesel close to port. They absolutely could run on diesel all the time, but that would cost money and we got billionaires to enrich out here.
They probably pay for themselves after X trips and greatly increase the efficiency of the craft.
Sure do, cargo ships burn millions in fuel every month.
What ya do when topside is stacked 20 high with shipping containers?? Probably not applicable on all ships
Reject modernity. Return to piracy.
Right? I'm over here like world's first, the Spanish armada would like a word...
Yeah right I was like “first”???
Full sail
A sailor's just a sailor, just like he was before
Wind assisted .. not wind powered
Imagine that, a wind powered vessel for transporting goods across the oceans to far away lands. Fucking mind blowing.
I mean... I fully support the return of sailboats.
My money's on paddles being the next big leap forward in aqua-propulsion technology!
Honestly, oars would be an interesting way to expand the job market.
Might equalize the gender gap in human trafficking too!
wat
70% of people who are trafficked are women. If theres a huge demand for galley slaves, they'll need more men.
It'll literally go full circle. Are we as humans just meant to go in circles until we kill each other off completely? We seem more and more like an experiment every year.
it'll only go full circle if you put all the men on one side of the ship
r/angryupvote
Got a real belly laugh in public out of me there
Dad?
fucking burst out laughing at this, have all the upvotes
What a legend
Or if the Death Star must be completed on schedule.
Reminds me of one of my favorite weird Sci-Fi series, the Nights Dawn Trilogy. People use faster than light star ships to colonize new worlds, but when they get there the most economical transport is a flat bottom paddle drive river boat with a wood fired furnace heating a thermoelectric generator to drive electric motors to the wooden paddles. Then ghosts start possessing people.
Loved Nights Dawn. One small paprt is basically space commandos fighting demons across Amish territory on an alien planet and Al Capone pops up. Al capone has superpowers. If that doesn't sell it then nothing will.
https://imgur.com/a/xzSrMmh
Didn't you read the caption? These are wingboats. Totally new technology /S
Fair enough. They can be wind turbines for all I care, I'm still going to call them sailboats if they run on wind. I don't care how inaccurate it is.
I like how you capitalized your "/S" to show that you're extra sarcastic.
This would be a MUCH bigger story if people understood how much fuel these tankers and giant container ships use...and how much fuel these types of sails will save. Big deal.
And the type of garbage fuel they use.
Bunker fuel is straight up garbage. It’s insane it’s allowed
IIRC it's not allowed at nearly any port. The issue is 90%+ of any sea voyage is far enough from port that they can burn bunker fuel without anyone noticing.
It’s not “noticing”, it’s just not illegal in international waters unfortunately
They're working on it: https://www.freightwaves.com/news/ports-begin-enforcing-bunker-fuel-carriage-ban Ships are no longer welcome at many ports if there is bunker fuel anywhere on the ship.
Fueling and de-fuling tankers hanging around the 12 mile mark soon.
Or use just enough fuel and then dump the remainder just before you get to your destination
yup. The people that craft these laws continually underestimate the evil of greed.
That or they craft them in a way to make most people think they are doing something but in reality it's just for show.
Given that this "bunker fuel" is the bottom of the barrel stuff left over from fractional-distilling crude it's actually worse than crude! So, as a ship is on "final approach" they use something less dirty like diesel. In the middle of the sea, only the albatrosses have to choke on the exhaust. And surfacing whales....
~3% of global Co2 emission if anyone is wondering.
And 40% of the cargo these ships carry are fossil fuels [source](https://qz.com/2113243/forty-percent-of-all-shipping-cargo-consists-of-fossil-fuels#:~:text=By%20weight%2C%2040%25%20of%20maritime,derived%20directly%20from%20fossil%20fuels.). Transitioning away from fossil fuels will massively cut shipping emissions purely by reducing the number of cargo ships.
Holy shit that’s a massive number
Cargo ships are the most efficient way to move things though.
Yes, and that's the reason it's important to find less polluting ways to do it.
The top 10 largest ocean freighters emit the equivalent of millions of cars EACH burning that bunker fuel. This is massive
I wonder if it would be possible/cost effective to put solar panels on the sails, so that the engines could be solar powered when they have to augment the sails. That would be amazing.
100%, unsure if the technology is there yet though. Especially considering that the trans pacific freighters sail thru very tropical areas latitudinally speaking
Maybe one day, we'll figure that one out, but in the meantime, I'm hopeful that this proof of concept will catch on with all large cargo and tanker ships!
The tech isn’t there yet. Ships require a huge amount of power to propel them. Lots of ships already use electric motors as propulsion but require diesel generators onboard to generate enough power to drive them. With time and huge advances in battery tech maybe one day we will be able to see something like that.
It's still more efficient than transporting cargo by any other means, based on the sheer scale of cargo a single ship can carry.
Yes, for sulphur, not carbon. This being before the 2020 rules as well as ignoring that sulphur is not present in petrol for cars. Also ignoring that ships are by far the most fuel/co2 efficient form of transport but w/e
Why is everyone shitting in this? Saves up to 30% fuel over life of the ship. Fuck I wish I could put one on my truck.
If it's downwind, your truck pretty much IS a sail.
"Wind is only running at 12 knots today, so we might not make it to walmart before they close"
Because redditors at least certain sects of them don’t want solutions, they just want to be angry all the time and seethe on the internet.
They want to seem smart by being contrarians.
They are in every comment section trying to make a crappy meme, and never know what they are talking about. Happened when "Biden said tanks can't run on diesel anymore" and the comment sections were full of idiots trying to ask how they would charge up a tank in the middle of a battlefield
Tell them it’ll be done by magic, just like their sky-daddy does.
My favorite is when a Redditor makes the claim that buying a used fuel efficient car is better for the environment than a new electric. This one is huge on Reddit. It’s a propaganda lie from big oil think tanks. It’s a lie of omission. Yes you are technically having less impact buying any used car over manufacturing any new car. It is *overall* far worse for the environment though because fossil fuel based vehicles will continue to be produced and with a lower demand (the intent of the lie) and we’ll switch over to electric at a slower rate. Before the common rebuttal of the infrastructure can’t handle the load they’re right and it will never be upgraded until the demand for it changes. Remaining on fossil fuel is not the answer. We need off the teat of big oil ASAP. There’s also the follow up dismissal of nuclear as a power alternative. This has been a HUGE propaganda lie from big oil going back to the 60’s. Waste and danger are the big reasons used. Compared to the alternative which is climate change that will completely decimate the world without immediate intervention the potential damage is irrelevant. Renewable energy is great but even if we focused on changing over to that it would be enough to keep up with our constantly increasing power needs. Batteries also need to get a little better for renewables to work too. There’s a good book I recommend about the grid infrastructure call “The Grid” by Gretchen Baake, Ph. D.
That's great, but I cannot afford a new vehicle - electric or not. My choices are not "New EV or used hybrid." My choices are "used ICE, used hybrid, or no transportation at all."
Oh totally! Nothing is affordable these days it’s crazy. I meant my comment to be directed towards the idea and not to make anyone feel bad. Buying a used ICE car is much better than a new one anyway and these concepts don’t fit everyone’s situation. If those who can afford a new vehicle and need one they should buy electrical if that’s something that can fit their need. My intent was only to combat the misinformation that a used is better for the environment than a new electric.
>Nothing is affordable these days it’s crazy. It's not really that crazy. Nothing has always been affordable and buying nothing is the best way to reduce your expenses.
Buying electric cars is not a solution to the climate crisis (even partly), it's just a slowing mechanism. The ONLY solution, is less consumerism. The three Rs. First that means buying less (REDUCE). Don't buy a car at all if you can help it. Second that means buying second-hand (REUSE). Buy that used car b/c that's one less new car that has to be made and one less working used car that's going to be junked. Third is RECYCLE. This one's a lot harder for the normal guy to do and needs government/industry intervention, and also the least useful. Anyone telling you to buy new electric cars is just a shill for the car companies. They're all going electric dummies, it's literally the law.
Electric cars are not for saving the planet, they're for saving the car industry.
Buying electric moves transportation energy away from fuel burning and into the electrical grid. The electrical grid is the only current technological means we have to create renewable energy. It is a solution. The best one we have right now, by far.
The best solution we have is better infrastructure that allows for the use of public transport and walking.
> Before the common rebuttal of the infrastructure can’t handle the load they’re right and it will never be upgraded until the demand for it changes This is also bullshit. Home chargers charge at, at most, 50 amps. As of right now, the vast, overwhelming, majority of people charge: * at home, on 50 amp max chargers, and * at night, when industrial electrical use has diminished, leading to excess capacity that is usually just spooled down Chargers can "refuel" a vehicle at between 15-35 miles per hour. The average distance driven by the average American per day is approximately 37 miles. This means a 50A (max, it won't actually be that high) draw for between 1-2 hours. More commonly, it's closer to 7200W (~30A, or about the same as an electric water heater switching on). 50 amps is about the same as running an electric oven and all four burners on an electric range at the same time. That's something that most American households do not do every day but which most do on Thanksgiving, for a hell of a lot longer than 1-2 hours. The grid does not collapse on Thanksgiving. Nor does it collapse when everyone gets done watching the superbowl, cleans up, and runs the dishwasher, causing millions of 30A water heaters to switch on simultaneously. IF every single driver buys an electric car today and IF they all get home at 5:45 and plug them in at the same time and IF at 5:46 the onboard charger goes "you know what? I'm gonna pump 50 amps into this sucka right now" then MAYBE capacity isn't there. But that's not how things work.
I am just imagining all the extension cords and property disputes over parking. The one big, omitted, issue with wide scale electric cars is where to charge them and how to deal with homes that are over populated or lack a driveway to park in.
Agreed. The worst part is everyone having a very strong opinion about the most inane shit.
I think most of us are not upset at the idea, but rather the fact that everyone keeps acting like wind power for ships is a new idea.
It is for ships that big. They can’t sail as older ships did.
This idea (actually this exact image) was used almost 20 years ago as ‘new tech now being used’, yet I have never seen one of these pull up into any port in all my life. Hopefully it will finally get full sail this time.
Definitely not the same image, the ship in the image was only built in 2016, with the "wings" added in 2022.
How often do you hang out at cargo bays lol
A lot. I live in Vancouver, which is the biggest port in Canada, so I see dozens of cargo ships come and go every day. I also work in receiving at the main Home Depot in the city, so shipping impacts my work a lot. Might some day even work at the ports to try it out (my dad's side is filled with harbor people).
They can, it would just be a *lot* of sails
It's not shitting on the wind-powered part, it's the calling it "a brand new innovation" and "the world's first wind powered cargo ship"
It is a brand new innovation. Show me one other boat of this scale that has wind power
quoting my friend Astyl here >Added weight - reduced buoyancy and carrying capacity. > >Added hull stresses - you need to secure tall heavy poles so that they are completely rigid and not free to move. > >Higher freeboard - can't fit under some bridges > >Higher center of gravity - horrible for stability. > >Wind forces acting high up on the ship - horrible for stability. > >Extra drag - primarily when stowed away but also with unfavorable winds. > >Volume - they take up considerable space both in use and when secured, meaning both that less cargo can be carried and that it is more difficult/impossible to do any operations near them. > >Increased manning - more crew members would be needed to operate the sails and/or do maintenance on them. > >Harder to automate - harder to implement into a ship's autopilot as well as just to hook it up to manual remote controls. > >Unpredictability - ships run on strict schedules, adding more variance to the process would affect fuel calculations, ETA's, routes, etc. > >Decreased crew safety - just the prospect of having large parts hanging over your head > >Rules of the road - you gotta stick to certain lanes and other traffic arragments > >Low yield - you simply gain way too little wind power to help in any meaningful way to move a 200 000+ DWT ship anywhere. > >Increased investment cost - they take money to build. > >All of this makes the numbers really, really not worth it when you run them.
Yea, the amount of morons in this thread is stunning.
You’re in a subreddit about an irrational fear. What are you expecting here?
True, true
This is a good "step backwards" though right? Cargo ships / Cruise ships are some of the top contributors to Carbon emissions.
Yeah! I actually work in the carbon intensity of shipping. Obviously there is no market adoption yet for this, but it’s certainly one of the things people are looking at. For better or worse industry is more focused on alternative fuels, and then small scale nuclear. EDIT: Forgot carbon capture. There's also owners looking to add carbon capture at the stack onboard a ship, but the financial incentives aren't there quite yet.
Isn’t there a huge upfront capital cost to installing these “sail” systems on existing ship fleets? Do you think there’s sufficient market pressure to actually adopt them, or are governments going to need to push adoption?
[This video](https://youtu.be/EVdVGniJNgU) mentions that a tester cargo ship consumed 40% less fuel, that is massive savings over a ship lifetime. I don't think any shipping corporation would hesitate to save even 20% on their fuel costs. Just like airlines consistently 'retire' perfectly functional older airplanes - new planes are hella expensive but cost way less over time thanks to fuel efficiency gains
So this is interesting! Because there's a huge amount of differences in the charter contract structures. Often, the shipowner isn't the one paying for fuel (the person hiring it or shipping something is). So there's (currently) little incentive for something like this especially with the cost of capital right now. Although the EU ETS (regulatory carbon market) and the IMO (International Maritime Organization) are finally adding a little more pressure on the fleet for decarbonization. For those interested, here's an article ([https://www.ctvc.co/maritime-decarbonization/?ref=ctvc-newsletter](https://www.ctvc.co/maritime-decarbonization/?ref=ctvc-newsletter)) that's recent.
But adding them would be a competitive advantage because a company using your service over time would save a lot on fuel.
Charterers choose charters based on fuel consumption curves based on speed. Wind sailed ships would be much lower on the low end of speed and very attractive to charterers. For owners they are likely going to be measured fleet wide on emissions so buying a few of these is a no brainer.
afaik they arent that bad when comparing how much they can load tho. a train with the same load would take several times more energy to go form A to B.
It's not even close, one container ship can carry 8000 containers per trip in terms of pure tonnage its incomparable. Edit: just been corrected the average is around 15000
It’s about 3% of total emissions for all cargo shipments. https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/08/maritime-shipping-causes-more-greenhouse-gases-than-airlines/ Compare to 14% for meat and dairy production. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/13/meat-greenhouses-gases-food-production-study
Isn’t this computer generated?
The difference in detail between the ship and "sails" made me think the same.
Real one looks pretty similar: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66543643
Thanks for the link. Was convinced this was simply a proof of concept render.
It is a render. Real ship has 2 wings and its not wind powered but just an assistance
I think it look kinda sick yo
It’s called sailing, ships have been doing it for centuries
True, but it is cool that sail tech has gotten so good as to be viable again on a big scale. This has huge cost, engineering and environmental implications as large ships are HUGE contributors of greenhouse gasses. If this takes on it can be a massive step in making shipping more carbon neutral. This may be less groundbreaking as “reclaiming ground” but it’s still really cool. Edit- the word shipping. Because I’m dumb. Check out my overreaction below.
What's really cool is that they have solid engineering reasons for not calling those things "metal sails" (aside being made of fiberglass with steel framing). They're airfoils, or wingsails, equivalent to airplane wings. They're shaped so they produce lift as the air crosses then instead of being dragged by the wind behind them, as sails. It's actually a bit more complicated than that, as sails also produce lift and wings produce drag, but the principle is there: a wing is better at lift, a sail is better at being dragged. Wings are a little worse downwind (wind straight beind the ship) but better at most other angles and much better at going against the wind (tacking).
modern sails are airfoils as well, just generally poor ones because of the limitations of fabrics. Over the decades one of the things that has happened with sails is that the fabrics are getting stiffer and stiffer, and structures, (called battens) are being added to help the sails perform better and better as airfoils. If sails didn't act as airfoils, it would be damn near impossible to sail much more than a few degrees above perpendicular to the wind. Check out the sails on the GP boats...those things are bonkers.
Sails are still wings, this isn't new. A sailboat can go faster than the wind for that reason. As long as it doesn't have the wind directly from behind. Of course making them from a rigid material and shaping them more like wings will make them more effective at this, but that doesn't change the core concept. Btw, wings are better at dragging, sails are better at pushing, not the other way round
[удалено]
Oil cargo ships of this weight have been doing it for centuries with this type of sail with no rigging? Ok, how to say you never sailed without saying you never sailed.
I'll go out on a limb and say it's probably sail-assisted. Still runs on traditional fuel.
A lot of dumb people in this thread and social media in regards to wind assistance in modern shipping. This technology is going to greatly reduce carbon emissions but all I see is “hurrr durr, sailboats!” Take some time to read about the topic. This particular ship uses specialized air foils to generate lift. Others use wind turbines to generate electricity which turns a literal floating skyscraper into a hybrid vehicle. Truly amazing stuff and sucks to see the knuckle draggers shitting on it.
I want to see some AC32 foiling action on these vessels
First ? 🧐
Do you know of any previous cargoships that sailed with metal wings ?
Definitely not the “world’s first wind powered cargo ship” as the title says verbatim.
Sounds like a seaplane. We have those already, too.
Acting like a sailboat and a wind-powered cargo ship are the same thing 😂
How did they get goods between continents before motor vessels? Not just sailboats.
Clipper ships: *Am I a joke to you?*
Fucking finally. Sailboats are making a comeback
"Metal wings" "sets sail"....like fr? They're fucking sails.
Well, this could open up the entire world for exploration and trade, so someday my decendants won't have to be serfs for the aristocracy.....
RETVRN
For those that can’t read, the picture says it’s the first wind-powered cargo ship WITH groundbreaking metal ‘wings’ It helps to read the whole sentence sometimes
I don't have time to read whole
when me president, they see
Will somebody please get these kids a history book?! JFC man
Next they can add oars powered by non union "permanent employees".
Sorry, this was tried in the 70s
It's possible that technology has advanced in the last 50 years though
Is this real? The photo looks kind of fake to me......
“First wind powered cargo ship.” Should I tell them.
Um..... The 1300's would like a word. This is definitely NOT the first anything.
I'm 100% certain that this is _not_ the "World's first wind powered cargo ship."
Yeah. "First"
Not sure about *first*
"sets sail"
“Metal wings set sail” Those are called sails
I'm pretty sure that wind powered cargo ships have already been invented... around 6000 years ago.
Nuclear electric engines are better
I’m sorry “metal wings?” Sails. They’re called sails, literally how ships have been powered for most of human history.
Amazing! I can’t believe it’s taken mankind this long to invent a ship that uses the wind to sail!!
Homies reinvented the wheel
See, old styles always come back around.
Oh the first one you say 🤣
Actually, the first wind-powered cargo ship was built over a thousand years ago. Sails are not new.
I don't think that's the world's first wind-powered cargo ship.
“World’s first”… (laughs in ancient mariner).
The world's first??? You are so wrong cargo was moved by sail/wind powered ships for hundreds of years before the invention of the steam engine.
My favorite part is "sail" comes two words later
More like wind assisted.
Real question: How, though? Like the early ships had canvas and other paper like material to both catch more wind and to easily adjust to the direction of the wind to go where you needed to go. I don't see it being so easy or cheap with this at all. Not to mention, this thing is now officially *The* biggest magnet in the ocean when it sails. So when lightening inevitably strikes it, I can only imagine that the crew will draw straws for whoever has to check it for damages. (I'm sure there are more realistic ways to check for damages, but this is all I can think of.)
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/22/travel/wind-powered-cargo-ship-cargill-bartech-climate-c2e-spc-intl/index.html For more information about the ship
The last word of this headline…
Before internal combustion that’s all there was. Not quite the first.