Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Shoo posted some hard figures, but I'd like to add that intercontinental product transport by boat is incredibly efficient.


Efficient in what terms? AFAIK, not in ecological terms, due to the use of low-grade ship bunker fuel: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/apr/09/shipping...


That's something I could never reconcile. On the one hand, I hear that container ships are the most energy-efficient way we have of moving cargo across long distances. On the other hand, we have those issues with crappy fuel.

I wonder:

- What's the total ecological impact of container ships vs. alternative forms of transport using better fuel?

- Would container ships be a Good Thing if we could somehow make them use clean energy? (I just imagined a dream future of fully autonomous, nuclear-powered container ships.)

- If so, why are they still using that shit fuel?


> I just imagined a dream future of fully autonomous, nuclear-powered container ships.

You might want to read about these then:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Hahn_(ship)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutsu_(nuclear_ship)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NS_Savannah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sevmorput


It's probably simply a question of the "lawless" open seas permitting absurdly excessive tragedy of the commons-style tradeoffs.

You don't need to go all the way to nuke-carriers; plain old combustion can be much, much cleaner than some ships at negligible (but non-zero) cost - witness similar engines/powerplants on land. But in an extremely competitive market, what sane operator would do that?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: