Use it for luxury goods! "Why _my_ iphone arrived in Baltimore on a clean cargo ship, so yeah, ..." I am only half joking. Anything luxury of vanity related, just add the fact they've gotten to the consumer on a clean ship and you'll find some people to pay extra for it. The more expensive the better. They can brag about it to each other.
I can recall an 'artisinal' chocolate brand in Brooklyn doing this about fifteen years ago, taking cocoa from the Dominican Republic to Brooklyn via sailboat. https://ediblebrooklyn.com/2011/the-mast-brothers-live-up-to...
Considering it's a roll-on/roll-off ship, they're this close to providing a transatlantic passenger+vehicle ferry service, which would really be fun.
I’ve been looking for a reasonable way to get me and my motorcycle to Europe and back (rentals of my bike are $300/day, and I want to ride off-road occasionally, which isn’t great for rentals). I’ve also always wanted to sail the ocean. This could be a win.
Generally you pack it into a crate and fly it. You may well need a Carnet and/or other paperwork, and it only makes sense for longer trips.
Consider buying a bike in Europe instead - generally cheaper and you can get something more appropriate to the terrain.
I'd recommend a long canoe trip in Algonquin park (or somewhere similar nearby if there is something similar nearby) if offline is your goal (though obviously not entirely similar to an ocean crossing in other ways as well).
In the meantime, China is constructing nuclear cargo ships ([1], [2]) that will be able to transport 14,000 containers at full throttle (200MW) without a need to refuel for years. Obviously, it's still not done, and yet to prove to be profitable, but their reactor design does suggest that they have a chance to make it work and replace a lot of CO2 emissions. 1. Original article, but paywall: https://www.scmp.com/news…
Nuclear ship propulsion is not a new technology so I have no doubt they will succeed. But where this will and all previous attempts have (see: N.S. Savannah) failed is that ports do not want to accept such ships, because of environmental and insurance issues.
> Nuclear ship propulsion is not a new technology
Have they been used in for-profit scenarios? Military ships and ice breakers don't have to turn a profit.
In the meantime, China is constructing nuclear cargo ships ([1], [2]) that will be able to transport 14,000 containers at full throttle (200MW) without a need to refuel for years. Obviously, it's still not done, and yet to prove to be profitable, but their reactor design does suggest that they have a chance to make it work and replace a lot of CO2 emissions. 1. Original article, but paywall: https://www.scmp.com/news…
Aren't all military submarines and aircraft carriers using nuclear power already? No reason they couldn't make it work as long as regulations allow them in ports.
No reason the ships can't be built but turning a profit is another thing. US nuclear-powered aircraft carriers cost ~$10 billion, though of course they have many other requirements.
Flying to the Moon can be made to work - it's been done for 56 years. But turning a profit is trickier.
In the meantime, China is constructing nuclear cargo ships ([1], [2]) that will be able to transport 14,000 containers at full throttle (200MW) without a need to refuel for years. Obviously, it's still not done, and yet to prove to be profitable, but their reactor design does suggest that they have a chance to make it work and replace a lot of CO2 emissions. 1. Original article, but paywall: https://www.scmp.com/news…
How ironic, a huge "EMBRACING NET-ZERO FUTURE" logo on the behemoth filled with cheap plastic crap that will chill out in landfills for generations to come.
If there was a trade-off: Stop climate change but increase platics production, would you do it?
Sincere question: have you done the math? If so, this conversation would be a lot more interesting if you shared it.
How much sail area would it take to move a 20000 TEU ship at, let's say, even 12 kts? How tall would the masts have to be? Would they fit under bridges? You guys are talking about total fantasies here.
> How much sail area would it take to move a 20000 TEU ship at, let's say, even 12 kts? How tall would the masts have to be? Would they fit under bridges?
For ocean-going ships, isn't 99.x% of the trip in the open ocean? If so, what limit is there on sail dimensions? It's a genuine question; if coastal infrastructure isn't the limit, what is the next limitation.
They could lower sails, and use a motor and/or smaller sails, around coastal infrastructure.
That’s a decision we, as a civilization, need to make. I personally hope we manage to enact transnational policies that effectively price environmental and social externalities in my lifetime. Or else witness “free market” capitalism continue to degrade our planet and the lives of millions of less privileged people.
> That’s a decision we, as a civilization, need to make. I personally hope we manage to enact transnational policies that effectively price environmental and social externalities in my lifetime. Or else witness “free market” capitalism continue to degrade our planet and the lives of millions of less privileged people. Name one decision that the entire human civilization has ever consciously made
There are very many. Sovereignty of nation-states, the international passport system, international standards for airplanes/airports/flight operations, Unicode, every other IT standard, every ISO standard, outlawing aggressive warfare, the international financial system, the UN, the Law of the Sea, compact discs, time keeping (60 seconds, 60 minutes, 24 hrs, 7 days, etc.), time zones, calendar, names of celestial objects, names of elements, international science research, Enlightenment scholarship, ........
This seems to be a tiny vessel ... just 5000 tons of cargo. Most container ships carry more like 200,000 tons of cargo. Can sails scale to carry that much cargo? If not, I fear the economics will not work out for sails alone. Perhaps sails plus something else makes more sense?
You can put a helluva lot of sails on a ship. The Preußen (1902) had 73,200 sqft of sail area on a ship 482 ft long. The Very Large Container (VLC) ships that hold 200,000 tons are over 1,300 ft long. And wind is a very, very strong force (it damaged these mechanical sails!). You could definitely make a VLC ship that could be powered by sails, in theory. But wind's biggest downside, besides it sometimes being too str…
It's not one or the other; we can build vessels with sails and 'steam'.
> There's a reason everyone switched from sail to steam.
One reason was, they thought the climate impact cost zero. Also, technology was much different then.