• voxel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    96
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    btw cargo ships are already incredibly efficient tho.
    even if they produce a ton of co2, when divided by actual amount of goods delivered, they are hundreds of times more efficient than trucks

      • SARGEx117@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        1,000x efficiency is good

        100,000x efficiency is better.

        Besides, now is the best time to do all the r&d for when fossil fuels are non-existant. Better to figure out how to mixmax wind while you have other options than when you have no choice.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My company makes sustainable packaging, and the primary way we compete as a sustainable bag product for our food grade division is eliminating the CO2 costs associated with shipping overseas (most reusable grocery bags are made in China).

      As a result, it takes around 600 of our paper bags to be as bad for the environment as one reusable bag.

      While overseas shipping is necessary and as efficient as it can be (so far!), it is still a major greenhouse factor (so far!)

      Also everything that touches a container ship ends up on a truck at some point, so there’s not really any savings there.

      Fingers crossed for the Golden Age of Sail Part 2: Wind Boogaloo, even if it hurts our bag division a bit. The net gain is too good to ignore

        • eeleech@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe, but nuclear cargo ships were tried before (e.g. NS Savannah, Otto Hahn) and failed because they were too expensive.)

    • kautau@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah but in the future Arasaka is going to lay a ton of AI controlled mines all over the ocean and lose control of them and ocean travel will be impossible. Oh wait, that’s just a ttrpg and a video game. A corporation would never do something like that in today’s world…

    • Damdy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      They also use the fuel we can’t use elsewhere and many do in fact use wind power in the form of giant kites when the wind is appropriate.

      • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Use fuel we can’t use elsewhere? They use this refuse fuel because countries literally have laws banning their use within their maritime boundaries, because they’re just that awful to burn. This shit fuel is used in international waters precisely because there are no international laws banning this.

        Many use kites? The ship with the kites were a proof of concept, not a widely adopted maritime practice.

      • WldFyre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure! What trains deliver goods across oceans? Or between distant continents?

        • optissima@possumpat.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh are we not just measuring distance? Because I don’t see any trucks crossing the ocean either.

      • Digitalprimate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        They beat trains. In fact all forms of goods tranports exponentially.

        Doesn’t mean they don’t pollute, but …at least you get something out of it? When American stop buying cheap Chinese shit and Chinese stop buying cheap oil from the Gulf, and when everyone stops buying produce out of season locally …you see where I’m going with this.