Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

mailonsunday.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#11

Post by greendestiny »

mahmud wrote: post #7
jrockway wrote: post #2

It is worth noting that just one cup of tea causes me to produce more urine than all the cars in the world. (Just thought I would point out how "useful" comparisons like this are. Less useful than an entire Library of Congress...)

If one cup of tea made you produce as much urine as half of all the people on earth, then yes, we should grab you by the collar and confiscate your ungodly cup of tea.

Yes but that's not what the analogy jrockway used is pointing out. Cars put out plenty of pollutants, but that doesn't mean that car sized engines have the same problems with sulphur.

Basically its dishonest because it relies on people understanding cars as polluters - which they are, just not of sulphur - to imply that tankers are unbelievably polluting.

None of this means that I think sulphur emissions aren't a problem.

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#12

Post by m_eiman »

akamaka wrote: post #6

Now isn't the nicest time to be going after shipping companies, with the way their profits have collapsed over the last year. The recession has been pretty hard for airlines, but the drop in shipping prices is shocking by comparison: more than a 10x drop. http://investmenttools.com/futures/bdi_baltic_dry_index.htm

In other words, now is the perfect time for them to put their ships in the docks and perform maintenance and upgrades without losing money from missed shipments.

Ships already beat (most?) other forms of transport on oil-per-tonnage-mile, why not fix the last few wrinkles that make them look bad?

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#13

Post by illumen »

cperciva wrote: post #5
Daishiman wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that this one, um, is. They mention explicitly that tanker fuel has half the allowable maximum of sulpur on average, but it's still a travesty and can be cut down substantially if proper measures are applied. It's unfortunate that environmental policy is dictated in terms of sensationalism rather than actual impact. Rational policy outlook should have certainly looked at shipping as one of the first causes of…

Rational policy outlook should have certainly looked at shipping as one of the first causes of airborne pollution. Rational policy outlook should have started by looking at the adverse effects of airborne pollution. What are the adverse effects of releasing SO2 into the atmosphere over the middle of the ocean? What and where matter just as much as how much .

Air moves. Pollution from one country /half way around the world/ can float to where you live. Most ships are closer than /halfway around the world/ to pieces of land as they travel from one side of the world to the other.

Where do you think all of the sulphur and CO2(also mentioned in the article) goes? It doesn't float off into space.

In London, I'd be way more worried about the air in the subway system. The London subway has some of the most filthiest air you will ever experience. It has that tar sulphur smell to it.

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#14

Post by aw3c2 »

akamaka wrote: post #6

Now isn't the nicest time to be going after shipping companies, with the way their profits have collapsed over the last year. The recession has been pretty hard for airlines, but the drop in shipping prices is shocking by comparison: more than a 10x drop. http://investmenttools.com/futures/bdi_baltic_dry_index.htm

Seeing those graphs I just see things going to previous years stats. Am I not reading properly or are they just sad that infinite growth has once again shown not to exist?

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#15

Post by cperciva »

illumen wrote: post #13
cperciva wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rational policy outlook should have certainly looked at shipping as one of the first causes of airborne pollution. Rational policy outlook should have started by looking at the adverse effects of airborne pollution. What are the adverse effects of releasing SO2 into the atmosphere over the middle of the ocean? What and where matter just as much as how much .

Air moves. Pollution from one country /half way around the world/ can float to where you live. Most ships are closer than /halfway around the world/ to pieces of land as they travel from one side of the world to the other. Where do you think all of the sulphur and CO2(also mentioned in the article) goes? It doesn't float off into space. In London, I'd be way more worried about the air in the subway system. The London…

Air moves

Yes, but it moves slowly.

Where do you think all of the sulphur and CO2 goes?

The lifetime of SO2 in the atmosphere is no more than a few days; before it can reach land, most of it is converted to (SO4)^{2-}.

I agree with you where CO2 is concerned, because CO2 is not rapidly eliminated from the atmosphere -- but the article isn't talking about CO2.

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#16

Post by slance »

I can't believe that HN is linking to the Daily Mail... I can guarantee that everything said in this article is completely or partly untrue.

It's part of the daily mail's online strategy I think, increase traffic by using overseas social media whose users may not be fully aware of how utterly horrible and untruthful the paper is.

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#17

Post by cwan »

m_eiman wrote: post #12
akamaka wrote: post #6

Now isn't the nicest time to be going after shipping companies, with the way their profits have collapsed over the last year. The recession has been pretty hard for airlines, but the drop in shipping prices is shocking by comparison: more than a 10x drop. http://investmenttools.com/futures/bdi_baltic_dry_index.htm

In other words, now is the perfect time for them to put their ships in the docks and perform maintenance and upgrades without losing money from missed shipments. Ships already beat (most?) other forms of transport on oil-per-tonnage-mile, why not fix the last few wrinkles that make them look bad?

This is already happening with smaller and more inefficient ships being scrapped. From one article: http://www.zawya.com/Story.cfm/sidZAWYA20091014053222

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#18

Post by vixen99 »

slance wrote: post #16

I can't believe that HN is linking to the Daily Mail... I can guarantee that everything said in this article is completely or partly untrue. It's part of the daily mail's online strategy I think, increase traffic by using overseas social media whose users may not be fully aware of how utterly horrible and untruthful the paper is.

You can't guarantee anything of the sort. Nobody with any sense uses the Daily Mail as a prime source of informed news because its role is entertainment mostly via hot gossip which people, though clearly not you, enjoy. Please list major news stories where the Mail as reported lies and include a comparison with the record of the broadsheets in the UK.

As to this particular new item, the Guardian doesn't take your view. “One giant container ship can emit almost the same amount of cancer and asthma-causing chemicals as 50m cars, study finds” http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/apr/09/shipping-p... and can we see your authoritative links showing that these ships are fine examples of excellent emission control with regard to toxic gases.

Best not to be bigoted and simply remain wary regarding all news items wherever they’re to be found. And no, I don't work for the Daily Mail.

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#19

Post by slance »

vixen99 wrote: post #18
slance wrote: post #16

I can't believe that HN is linking to the Daily Mail... I can guarantee that everything said in this article is completely or partly untrue. It's part of the daily mail's online strategy I think, increase traffic by using overseas social media whose users may not be fully aware of how utterly horrible and untruthful the paper is.

You can't guarantee anything of the sort. Nobody with any sense uses the Daily Mail as a prime source of informed news because its role is entertainment mostly via hot gossip which people, though clearly not you, enjoy. Please list major news stories where the Mail as reported lies and include a comparison with the record of the broadsheets in the UK. As to this particular new item, the Guardian doesn't take your vie…

A lot of people use the daily mail as their primary source of news (I'm not sure what informed news means).

Hacker news is a site full of smart coder/developer types, but I think most of them are not UK based so won't know what an unpleasant paper the Daily Mail is.

Re: How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

#20

Post by bumblebird »

bdfh42 wrote: post #10

I am aghast to log in to HN on a Sunday morning and find the "top topic" to be a post from the MailOnSunday site. This august institution of lies, half truths and mostly made up stuff is a British byword for scientific reporting - in every negative way possible. Without doing any fact checking or research of my own part (just bitter experience) I declare this "absolute tosh".

Dismissing things based purely on their source makes you pretty much as bad as they are.

If there's real evidence that proves this story is false, it'd be cool to see it.

I think it's in the spirit of HN to discuss content rather than source.

Post reply on HN