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

SkySails

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 46 posts

Re: SkySails

#31

Post by mks »

pinko wrote: post #6
ravar wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the technology actually works then the companies would burn less fuel, and save money in the process. That should be an effective incentive.

Read the caveats at the bottom of the article -- the ship owner who has to make the capital investment doesn't pay for the fuel, so there's a perverse disincentive to invest in this technology (assuming it works).

Maybe the SkySail could own the sail system and sell the "thrust" - basically charging a success fee for saved fuel. In a similar vein in how the airlines don't own the engines of their airplanes but rent them from manufacturer - https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/12528/jet-engin...

Of course this is an armchair thought experiment, but I am curious about your opinions.

Re: SkySails

#32

Post by Already__Taken »

sunkenvicar wrote: post #28

Nuclear could really clean up the shipping industry and provide numerous other benefits.

Figure out something we're happy to leave on a beach on a coast of africa and maybe nuclear has a potential.

That or always make it so valuable to always strip the power unit to use again.

Re: SkySails

#33

Post by amelius »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #29

They said a limitation in addition is; "There’s a structural problem slowing down the process: ship owners (who have to make the investment) often don’t pay for the fuel – that’s the charterer’s duty. The charterer on the other side doesn’t charter the ship for long enough a period to make low-carbon technologies pay back" I know bugger all about shipping but this doesn't seem logical. Wouldn't the person hiring said…

I guess a complication is that you need to know how to operate the kite. And there is the risk that kites get broken or go missing.

Re: SkySails

#34

Post by fit2rule »

skribbj wrote: post #30
Gustomaximus wrote: post #29

They said a limitation in addition is; "There’s a structural problem slowing down the process: ship owners (who have to make the investment) often don’t pay for the fuel – that’s the charterer’s duty. The charterer on the other side doesn’t charter the ship for long enough a period to make low-carbon technologies pay back" I know bugger all about shipping but this doesn't seem logical. Wouldn't the person hiring said…

Exactly. If the charterer has to pay less fuel for your ship because you put a kite on it, surely they will choose your ship over others? Is there no competition in this market or why does fundamental market principles seemingly not apply?

I guess the point is that these systems have to be retrofitted to existing ships. The ship owners don't see the benefit - it costs them to do the modification - and the ship renters don't see the benefit, because ultimately the owner passes on the modification costs to the renter, displacing the fuel cost savings.

Whats needed is for regulation to come in and say 'ships that have these systems pay less to dock in port' or whatever. But, the technology has to be proven to reduce costs and carbon footprint - so someone needs to make an investment to prove this works before governments will get behind it.

Re: SkySails

#35

Post by dmurray »

skribbj wrote: post #30
Gustomaximus wrote: post #29

They said a limitation in addition is; "There’s a structural problem slowing down the process: ship owners (who have to make the investment) often don’t pay for the fuel – that’s the charterer’s duty. The charterer on the other side doesn’t charter the ship for long enough a period to make low-carbon technologies pay back" I know bugger all about shipping but this doesn't seem logical. Wouldn't the person hiring said…

Exactly. If the charterer has to pay less fuel for your ship because you put a kite on it, surely they will choose your ship over others? Is there no competition in this market or why does fundamental market principles seemingly not apply?

It's one extra level of indirection. In the housing market, landlords do sometimes pay for upgrades to their rental properties, but they are less likely to do so than owner-occupiers.

Additionally if the ship owner was also the operator, they could benefit from some vertical integration, training their crew on the new technology.

If the effect of the kites on prices becomes large enough or the technology becomes standard, expect widespread adoption, but it's a reasonable claim that the existing market structure slows rollout when it's only marginally profitable.

Re: SkySails

#36

Post by adrianN »

sunkenvicar wrote: post #28

Nuclear could really clean up the shipping industry and provide numerous other benefits.

Until the captains figure out that selling the fuel to the highest bidder is better than delivering the actual cargo.

Re: SkySails

#37

Post by xhgdvjky »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #29

They said a limitation in addition is; "There’s a structural problem slowing down the process: ship owners (who have to make the investment) often don’t pay for the fuel – that’s the charterer’s duty. The charterer on the other side doesn’t charter the ship for long enough a period to make low-carbon technologies pay back" I know bugger all about shipping but this doesn't seem logical. Wouldn't the person hiring said…

there is an initial cost of the sky sail that is amortized over many journeys

Re: SkySails

#38

Post by rrosen326 »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #18
therein wrote: post #3

This looks like an excellent idea but does anyone have the numbers? What kind of force could one expect from these? It got me thinking all kinds of electronic control systems to deploy/undeploy these.

"Totally computer operated by an automatic pod to maximise wind benefits, this kite is believed to generate a propulsion power of more than 2,000 kW (approx. 2,700 HP)" 2 megawatts. Tremendous amount of force.

Wow - that’s amazing. Look how tiny that is compared to the load it is pulling. It looks like it would hardly make a difference. (I’m a kiteboarder and my kites are way bigger than I am.)

Re: SkySails

#39

Post by heavenlyblue »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #29

They said a limitation in addition is; "There’s a structural problem slowing down the process: ship owners (who have to make the investment) often don’t pay for the fuel – that’s the charterer’s duty. The charterer on the other side doesn’t charter the ship for long enough a period to make low-carbon technologies pay back" I know bugger all about shipping but this doesn't seem logical. Wouldn't the person hiring said…

I think this was replaced with Rotor Sails (which have indeed been installed on Maersk ships): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_ship
Post reply on HN