/n/ - Transportation » Thread #1226229

[118 / 29 / ?]

102KiB, 992x414, HT_cma_cgm_cargo_cruises_mL-151029_12x5_992.jpg

Electric Freighters

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 06:39:02 No.1226229 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>1226231 >>1226278 >>1226308 >>1226314 >>1226346 >>1226414 >>1226510 >>1226534 >>1226856 >>1228695 >>1229666 >>1229682 >>1230591 >>1234316

Will or when will ocean freighters become electric?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 06:40:04 No.1226231 Report

Quoted By: >>1227536

>>1226229
Most likely never. Closest you will get is them going nuclear.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 08:33:31 No.1226238 Report

Quoted By: >>1226310 >>1226416

When international regulations will demand it. Cheap heavy oil from Arab shitholes will always be cheaper than sustainable technologies.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 08:42:02 No.1226242 Report

Quoted By: >>1228627 >>1228634 >>1229682

Norway is starting bans for ICE ships in its fjords in a few years, and while that might not affect the biggest ships, a lot of big cruise liners are going to become electric then. Ships like the Queen Mary II often go on the fjords. Will be interesting to see what will happen there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 11:22:05 No.1226278 Report

Quoted By: >>1232332

>>1226229
Maybe with solar and wind power on board in the distant future.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 14:05:29 No.1226308 Report

Quoted By: >>1226345

>>1226229

LNG fueled is a thing now, so fuelcells soonish?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 14:13:32 No.1226309 Report

Quoted By:

produce locally you retards

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 14:23:12 No.1226310 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226238
>always
Within your lifetime, sure. Wait a century or two.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO picIndex03.jpg, 65KiB, 480x381

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 14:43:49 No.1226314 Report

Quoted By: >>1232707

>>1226229
depends on what you mean by electric
diesel electric will become common as soon as it is more efficient to turn generators, which turn motors, which turn screws with the diesel engine rather than just use the diesel engines to turn the screws.

if you mean fully electric
never

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fairtransport-ecoliner.jpg, 203KiB, 800x533

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 15:06:06 No.1226320 Report

Quoted By: >>1226321

Renaissance of the cargo sail ship when?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 15:07:42 No.1226321 Report

Quoted By: >>1226322

>>1226320
When fresh produce goes out of fashion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 15:09:34 No.1226322 Report

Quoted By: >>1226351 >>1226393

>>1226321
What fresh produce is carried on ships exactly? It's all crude oil and TVs and other non-consumable shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 16:09:15 No.1226345 Report

Quoted By: >>1229682

>>1226308
Fuel cells are not more efficient than large diesel engines and cost a lot more.
Realisticly E-fuels might be relevant at some point.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO NSSavannah.jpg, 151KiB, 550x346

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 16:11:43 No.1226346 Report

Quoted By: >>1226527

>>1226229

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 16:25:02 No.1226351 Report

Quoted By: >>1226372

>>1226322
Onions.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 17:39:59 No.1226372 Report

Quoted By: >>1226394

>>1226351
>not sure if word filter or actually meant onions

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 797650C1-DC14-473A-875D-ECAD43CD (...).jpg, 200KiB, 1430x805

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 18:49:14 No.1226393 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226322
Bananas. Orange juice. Grains. Cattle. Apples. Avocados. There’s a reason refrigerated containers exist and that bananas are a dollar a bunch instead of five to pay for jet fuel

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO D95B6997-6254-472F-95A0-216C7EBC (...).jpg, 48KiB, 375x500

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 18:50:25 No.1226394 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226372
You were too pure for this world, Savannah

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 19:56:58 No.1226414 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226229
Never. Fuel cells would be possible through.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Aug 2018 19:58:00 No.1226416 Report

Quoted By: >>1226535 >>1226879

>>1226238
Bullshit. Heavy oils are getting harder and harder to extract cheaply.

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_1182.jpg, 929KiB, 3810x1945

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2 Fri 17 Aug 2018 21:41:48 No.1226448 Report

Quoted By: >>1234564

glidersub,,fill balastank,,sink/glidedown,,blowtank and rise/glideup,,pause at surface to solar bask/refreshair.,
,,noprops,,nogas,,nonoise,,nostorms,,lowpirates,,, travel underice,cross thepole.,
,,,fixed,,,andimproved!

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_1183.jpg, 70KiB, 960x517

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2 Fri 17 Aug 2018 21:53:36 No.1226449 Report

Quoted By: >>1234564

Orjust,gosmall,,personal.,
,,rentabot,,fill withstuff,,program andsend!!,
,C orperations will be Pissed!,,howdareyou!!,

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 00:15:41 No.1226510 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226229
They are already electric. That means it will be quite easy to retrofit, if good battery technology will appear.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 00:45:16 No.1226527 Report

Quoted By: >>1226535 >>1226772 >>1226794

>>1226346
A design disaster. Half passenger ship and half cargo.

Problem with nuclear, is it us too expensive. Shipping companies want ships that can be run by 5 westerners and 40 Filipinos. Run hard and maintained minimally until the hull gives out in 49 years. At which point the dump the ship for scrap in africa or India.

A nuclear ship would require dozens of expensive educated westerners or east asians. As they would be needed to run and maintain the power plant. Even in port the nukes would need to crewed.

Fuel oil would have to go up in price dramatically. While a nuclear cargo ship would need to run faster and cheaper.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 01:06:17 No.1226534 Report

Quoted By: >>1229687

>>1226229
As soon as you can pull into port, recharge as quickly as it takes to refuel and have the same range as a fuel powered ship. A lot of modern ships are already diesel electric so the conversion would be easy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 01:08:15 No.1226535 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226416
Oil from the Gulf states is generally lighter. IIRC North Sea and West Texas Intermediate are the highest quality crude oil; light with a low sulfur content.

Tar sands in Canada and Venezuelan oil are heavier with much more sulfur IIRC. I don't know the composition of oil from shale formations off the top of my head. Some shale gas formations produce very light liquids that are $$$ because of the ease of processing into plastics and other petrochemicals.

Heavier oils are cheaper because more processing needs to be done to make gasoline and diesel from it compared to lighter oils.

>>1226527
Nuclear ships are dead in the water outside of military applications. You hit most of the reasons for the lack of adoption.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 01:32:55 No.1226542 Report

Quoted By: >>1226547 >>1229687

When electric batteries are at least 10-20 times as efficient.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 02:01:01 No.1226547 Report

Quoted By: >>1226548 >>1229687

>>1226542
Batteries are 80-90% efficient. They are just too heavy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 02:03:14 No.1226548 Report

Quoted By: >>1229687

>>1226547
He's probably talking energy density, as thats pretty important on a vehicle thats got to displace its own weight.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 15:30:34 No.1226772 Report

Quoted By: >>1227532

>>1226527
>A design disaster. Half passenger ship and half cargo.
It was a proof of concept. Never intended to make a profit without a subsidy.

>Problem with nuclear, is it us too expensive.
They mothballed the Savannah just a few years before oil prices jumped and made it price competitive. Not just nuclear, but the Savannah itself, which was never optimized for economy.

>Fuel oil would have to go up in price dramatically.
What were the 1970s?

>A nuclear ship would require dozens of expensive educated westerners or east asians.
This was one problem the Savannah ran into. Labor unrest due to the higher pay of the operating engineers compared to the rest of the crew. Not that it really affected the ship's economics. But the grunts manning the mooring lines didn't like the deal.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 16:12:41 No.1226794 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226527
The Savannah was not made to be economical. It was just a fun thing,

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 19:32:07 No.1226856 Report

Quoted By: >>1226859

>>1226229
we got nuclear warships and subs, it's a pity we can't have nuclear freighters

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 19:38:22 No.1226859 Report

Quoted By: >>1226861 >>1227430 >>1229393 >>1232365

>>1226856
Ships are scrapped after 20 years which wouldn't make a reactor economical. Warships are kept longer. Do you really want nuclear freighters being scrapped in india?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 19:44:57 No.1226861 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226859
>Do you really want nuclear freighters being scrapped in india?
Absolutely.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Aug 2018 21:15:48 No.1226879 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226416
By heavy oil I meant the residues from processing the raw oil to petrol, diesel etc., these residues are cheap because they are of bad quality. and extremely pollutant and nobody has a use for it besides burning the shit in these enormous, family houses sized ship engines:

https://www.bomin.com/en/news-info/glossary/details/term/heavy-fuel-oil-hfo.html

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 Aug 2018 01:30:10 No.1227430 Report

Quoted By: >>1228752

>>1226859
Modular reactors. Lift out of ship and tow the rest away for scrapping.

Small modular reactors are in R&D for utility use. No reason a propulsion version couldn't be designed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 Aug 2018 08:21:32 No.1227532 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226772
>grunts unhappy
should've become nuclear engineers instead of hauling lines. smfh. only (western) ratings are that stupid. imagine a mailroom worker at a law firm bitching about what the partners' make.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO umi no otoko wa snaku.jpg, 80KiB, 1080x632

Anonymous Mon 20 Aug 2018 08:33:30 No.1227536 Report

Quoted By: >>1233967

>>1226231
>going nuclear

SHIPPING

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 13:52:04 No.1228624 Report

Quoted By: >>1228728

ITT:

>Having thousands of little Fukushimas/Tshernobyls swimming around on the oceancs in addition to all the other shit is surely a great idea.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 13:56:38 No.1228627 Report

Quoted By: >>1232708

>>1226242
Somebody saw the writing on the wall and realized crude oil costed 8-10 with subsidiaries, and batteries costed 2-3 for the same distance.
This is basically how Norway started its way towards electric ferries: cheap conversions.

For long distance freight it will take even longer, mostly because extremely crude oil is very very under subsidiaries to keep global shipping running. Because crude oil is primarly sold to shipping for less than premium.
But it will only take a subsidiary drop for gigantic battery bays to become common.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 14:11:15 No.1228634 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226242
There have been some experiments with hydrogen fuel cell boats and ships of varying sizes in the past, weirdly most of them based out of Germany. Give it a couple more years and it'll be a viable propulsion method in areas that call for it. The biggest hurdle as of now isn't the technology, it's simply the lack of refueling stations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 17:18:28 No.1228695 Report

Quoted By: >>1229682

>>1226229
It's not as crazy as it sounds. Electric freighters already exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=-IpB9PYU-fk

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 18:13:14 No.1228728 Report

Quoted By: >>1228737

>>1228624
>nuclear reactors that failed due to insufficient coolant will surely be worse in the middle of the ocean

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 18:52:53 No.1228737 Report

Quoted By: >>1228742

>>1228728
Not particularly, but seeing how some third world registered ships are maintained and then sail to western ports makes me rather worried about onboard nuclear reactors, also ships are known to sink from time to time, also we still don't know what to do with nuclear waste really other than put it in barrels and hope they won't leak.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 19:09:47 No.1228742 Report

Quoted By:

>>1228737
Water, when irradiated, turns into tritiated water. Tratiated water is largely harmless to organic life, especially when it's going to be diluted with a stupid amount of seawater. Relax yourself, the only place safer for a nuke reactor than on a ship is one already submerged.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 19:45:55 No.1228752 Report

Quoted By: >>1228761

>>1227430
Modern navy reactors are designed to last the life of the ship. So they dont have to dry dock and cut ships open to refuel.

You could make life of ship reactors, for civilian maritime purposes. Then plan and prepare for economical decommissioning. The fuel gets recycled. The reactor gets buried. The other low grade waste gets spread out and recycled into new metals.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Aug 2018 20:10:41 No.1228761 Report

Quoted By: >>1229229

>>1228752
This has been tried. Back in the days when everybody was super optimistic about atomic power. Did not work well for a freighter because it was way more expensive then diesel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Hahn_(ship)

Today no harbour would let you dock. No nation would let you in.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Aug 2018 02:22:32 No.1229229 Report

Quoted By: >>1229344

>>1228761
>Today no harbour would let you dock. No nation would let you in.

Do you want to eat? Once these become the norm, they'll come in. We'll put dummy smoke stacks on them and light smudge pots just to keep the hippies happy.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 118057481.jpg, 165KiB, 630x447

Anonymous Fri 24 Aug 2018 11:06:01 No.1229344 Report

Quoted By: >>1229345 >>1231789

>>1229229
I'll dumb it down for you.
A ship with a diesel engine is much cheaper. diesel fuel is much cheaper. No freight company will ever use it. Only military will ever use atomic power because they don't care. They can just burn taxpayer money.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Aug 2018 11:14:50 No.1229345 Report

Quoted By: >>1229366

>>1229344
Thats a terrible way to view long term costs anon.
Army wants it because fuck refueling.
Soviets wants it because past some scale, its economical, even more so for large scale ice breaking.

But i don't think you understand the cost constraints the army is in. They are simply willing to go all the way in cost, to reduce maintenance and refueling, to have longer missions.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Aug 2018 12:35:41 No.1229351 Report

Quoted By:

I just looked into that a little:
Even a 1509 tdw ferry has 4*9100 kW = 36400 kW in dieselmechanic engines.
Assuming they run full power and the ferry needs one hour from island to island you would need 36400 kWh of electricity stored in a battery.
Since you can't discharge Li-Ion cells to 0% and charge to 100% all the time, you need 40% to spare and some reserves for the degrading over time, so about 50% of the rates capacity are left unused.

This means you would need roughly 72800 kWh worth of Li-Ion cells for a one hour trip from island to island and charge it up with 36400 kWh every time.

(totaly ignoring the required charging infrastructure and the effect of a sudden load that large on the grid)

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Aug 2018 13:20:55 No.1229366 Report

Quoted By: >>1229367

>>1229345
ships are navy, not army

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Aug 2018 13:23:46 No.1229367 Report

Quoted By: >>1229402

>>1229366
And navy is a part of the army
Hence army is the navy.
And splitting sematics hairs isn't worth it. Especially when you realize things like permanent nuclear aircrafts where not a thing due impracticalities in construction and use. One could say it was a huge roadblock due small size of plane versus reactor, in the 60s.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Aug 2018 14:47:22 No.1229393 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226859
Well the stink isn't killing them so this is our last hope

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Aug 2018 15:57:55 No.1229402 Report

Quoted By:

>>1229367
navy is part of the armed forces, alongside army and air force.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 25 Aug 2018 08:55:17 No.1229666 Report

Quoted By: >>1229678

>>1226229
why not hydrogen?
i mean they can find a way to desalinate->brake down the h2o->burn it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 25 Aug 2018 10:05:02 No.1229678 Report

Quoted By:

>>1229666
> find a way to desalinate->brake down the h2o
Where does this power come from?
Do you understand the concept of hydrogen as an energy carrier?
How do you make up for the <1 EROEI in underway in-situ extraction?
If you want fuel cell, LNG solid oxide fuel cell sounds a more sound concept. Reforming hydrogen seems an unnecessary solution.
> burn it
How is this worth the effort? Hydrogen combustion is usually discussed as an addictive to diesel engine.
Do you want to convert existing transmission to diesel-electric first?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 25 Aug 2018 10:21:56 No.1229682 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226229
I assume you refer to "electric" including fuel cell not the retarded mainstream "battery electric" meaning only.

>>1228695
This is a riverine freight ship. OP is looking for electric ocean freighter. Battery could make sense for short distance applications like barges (crossing ferries
/ water taxi for passenger)

>>1226242
> become electric
If you want to comply with regulation, hybrid electric is all that's needed, not all-electric.

>>1226345
To me, (thermo-)chemical and nuclear produced synthetic fuels are more plausible than hydrocarbon e-fuels. Biofuels more so, as always.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 25 Aug 2018 10:36:15 No.1229687 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226542
> space efficiency
>>1226547
> heavy
>>1226548
>>1226548
> energy density
> weight
The accurate term is specific energy. Let's not confuse volume and mass here.

>>1226534
> recharge as quickly
Good thing dwell time is long...
Wonder if this thread considered metal-air cells.
> A lot of modern ships are already diesel electric
First we can supply the easier shore-based electricity.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Ancap.png, 307KiB, 562x459

Anonymous Mon 27 Aug 2018 23:50:34 No.1230591 Report

Quoted By: >>1232333 >>1232477

>>1226229

How many slaves pedaling a generator would it take to power that behemoth?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Aug 2018 00:26:43 No.1231789 Report

Quoted By: >>1232395

>>1229344
>A ship with a diesel engine is much cheaper. diesel fuel is much cheaper.

Absolutely no. Ships use bunker oil. Which now is more expensive then nuclear. Diesel is even more expensive than bunker oil.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 12:20:51 No.1232332 Report

Quoted By: >>1233511

>>1226278
>solar and wind power
lmao can you imagine a superfreighter that's 98% solar panels and turbines by weight and carries like two bicycles.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 12:24:30 No.1232333 Report

Quoted By:

>>1230591
Why don't they just pedal a big propulsion wheel

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 14:52:06 No.1232365 Report

Quoted By: >>1232391

>>1226859
>Do you really want nuclear freighters being scrapped in india?

Another question is do you want these types of vessels to fall into the hands of pirates, like those off the coast of Somalia or the Strait of Malacca?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 16:07:24 No.1232391 Report

Quoted By: >>1232406

>>1232365
Fuck are they going to do, radiate themselves?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 16:25:51 No.1232395 Report

Quoted By:

>>1231789
>Ships use bunker oil. Which now is more expensive then nuclear.
This isn't even remotely fucking close to true.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 16:35:49 No.1232397 Report

Quoted By: >>1232452 >>1234314

Yara Birkeland is an autonomous container ship that is under construction and due to be launched in 2019.
Tonnage: 3,200 DWT
Installed power: Batteries 7.0–9.0MWh
Propulsion: Electric motors driving 2 azimuth pods and 2 tunnel thrusters
Speed:

6 knots (11 km/h) service
12 knots (22 km/h) maximum

Capacity: 120 TEU
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Yara_Birkeland

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 16:57:14 No.1232406 Report

Quoted By: >>1232413 >>1232448

>>1232391
sell it to Iran, they use it to build nukes and bomb your country

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 17:16:25 No.1232413 Report

Quoted By: >>1232720

>>1232406
the amount of effort it takes to turn nuclear-reactor level fuel into weapons-grade fuel is about the same as it takes to turn unrefined uranium into weapons grade material. It really is a massive difference.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 18:13:23 No.1232448 Report

Quoted By:

>>1232406
>muh iran
yes, good goy, iran is evil, saudi arabia are your freinds

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO ThoraBirch.jpg, 133KiB, 1312x2000

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 18:19:29 No.1232452 Report

Quoted By: >>1232521

>>1232397
>12 knots (22 km/h) maximum
ahahahahahah
how many watts is that?
this ship sounds like a fucking leglet

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Can'tSmotherTheRothbard.png, 553KiB, 855x613

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 20:13:30 No.1232477 Report

Quoted By: >>1232483

>>1230591
>ancapball

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 20:42:15 No.1232483 Report

Quoted By: >>1232485

>>1232477
I think that "can't mothball the Rothbard" would actually be a better rhyme.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 20:49:45 No.1232485 Report

Quoted By:

>>1232483
Thanks for that.
I only knew I wanted something with Rothbard but couldn't come up with something better than smother.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO penis_god.jpg, 24KiB, 400x400

Anonymous Sat 01 Sep 2018 23:01:35 No.1232521 Report

Quoted By:

>>1232452

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Sep 2018 14:40:48 No.1232707 Report

Quoted By: >>1232744 >>1233514

>>1226314
>More efficient to introduce more thing that can squander energy.

Wut. Lets say your diesels are 28% efficient and your electric motors are 95% efficient and your gearboxes are 99% efficient.

Direct diesel with gearbox is 27.7% efficient
Diesel electric with gearbox is 26.3%
Diese electric without gearbox is 26.6%

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Sep 2018 14:47:28 No.1232708 Report

Quoted By: >>1232746

>>1228627
Batteries in their current state will never be able to power a cargo ship. If you want environmentally friendly cargo ships large windjammers are probably your best bet. Steel hulled and masted ships with motorised winches. If you had to build them now you could probably improve it with lighter hull construction, improved sails and computerised sail control

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windjammer

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Sep 2018 15:52:53 No.1232720 Report

Quoted By:

>>1232413
Unlike North Korea Iran got no functioning nuclear reactor. If you would get one they would be super happy. A reactor on a civilian vessel is also an super easy target for terrorists.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Sep 2018 17:18:37 No.1232744 Report

Quoted By: >>1233514

>>1232707
Isn't the reality that diesel electrics are more efficient because the engine can be engineered for a single rpm mode instead of an rpm range? I mean, just compare diesel cars and diesel generators. They're not just car engines with a generator strapped to it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Schooner_'Thomas_W._Lawson'_1902 (...).jpg, 32KiB, 650x480

Anonymous Sun 02 Sep 2018 17:35:36 No.1232746 Report

Quoted By:

>>1232708
I know people lively remember windjammers and clippers because they dominated global trade, but haven't fore and aft rigs like schooners made square sails obsolete later on?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Collapsing-Electric-Markets-elec (...).jpg, 228KiB, 700x470

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 01:36:18 No.1233498 Report

Quoted By: >>1233500 >>1233524

Maybe a photovoltaic tarp can be unrolled over the top of the containers once big diesel-electric container ships enter production

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image-20150731-17158-r5iv1d.jpg, 158KiB, 1600x788

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 01:39:42 No.1233500 Report

Quoted By: >>1233502

>>1233498
Bulk carriers could double up with photovoltaic sails on masts anchored to the bulkheads in-between holds
maybe mount cranes on them, too

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO electric_ferry_jposl.jpg, 42KiB, 600x347

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 01:40:58 No.1233502 Report

Quoted By:

>>1233500
Most people-movers are wide enough to sport a decent panel farm-even if it's not enough for propulsion, it would be a nice boost to the HVAC energy budget

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 01:54:10 No.1233511 Report

Quoted By:

>>1232332
Imagine assisting a diesel-powered freighter with sails.
>worst case
needs to carry a few tonns more.
>best case
can save a fuel by throttling/shutting down some engines when the wind is right

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 02:06:26 No.1233514 Report

Quoted By: >>1234006

>>1232707
this >>1232744
the diesel engine is connected to generators always running at it's peak range where a direct diesel will have to go through a range and run at less than it's most efficient range

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 02:55:34 No.1233524 Report

Quoted By:

>>1233498
The most powerful container ship diesel makes 80,100 kilowatts.

A square meter of good solar panel will get you 300 watts of energy under ideal conditions.

You would need 270,000 square meters of panel to match the diesel.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Ferry_Ampere_Sognefjord.jpg, 4MiB, 4928x3264

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 12:56:58 No.1233642 Report

Quoted By: >>1233662 >>1233703

electric propulsion works for ferries

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 14:25:00 No.1233662 Report

Quoted By:

>>1233642
It works because that ferry covers a distance of three whole nautic miles between its ferrying ports, and spends about as much time docked as it does underway.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Strausberg_Strausseefähre.jpg, 2MiB, 3660x2250

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 16:05:46 No.1233703 Report

Quoted By: >>1233768

>>1233642
Electric ferries are not even new, Berlin got an electric ferry since the 1960's. Powered by overhead. I wonder why nobody does this for freighters.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Sep 2018 19:27:24 No.1233768 Report

Quoted By: >>1234011

>>1233703

Transoceanic catenary? Yes that seems like Avery simple and not impossible engineering challenge

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_1263.jpg, 613KiB, 2025x1127

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2 Wed 05 Sep 2018 20:53:46 No.1233803 Report

Quoted By:

Transoceanicable,,is 700 yearsold!, cableyear=dogyear.,
,, modern tech=towcables!!,
,,,just like skigondolas,,but underwater cable.,
,,solarpower onshore motors,,endless capacity.,less crew.
,,,,,,,
,sowhat?,,doigethe patent?

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.jpg, 2MiB, 4032x3024

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2 Wed 05 Sep 2018 21:14:39 No.1233817 Report

Quoted By: >>1233956

Neutral buoyancy,,400 fishsdeep.,
,grabsub on tether has clutch grip for startup to speed.

Tugfag

Tugfag Thu 06 Sep 2018 03:07:02 No.1233956 Report

Quoted By:

>>1233817
Mother of god, he’s on to something.

Get the engineers from Blimptrain™ in here and working on this project, STAT

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 03:28:50 No.1233967 Report

Quoted By: >>1234005

>>1227536
West Germany had an experimental small reactor-driven commercial shipping vessel. Fuel cost was excellent, but too many ports felt unsafe about letting it dock, and it quickly became obvious there are too many logistical and political problems, including the ship getting hijacked then having its nuclear fuel stolen by pirates.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 06:16:22 No.1234005 Report

Quoted By:

>>1233967
Molten Salt Thorium

The reactor would be useless to bad guys. Even remote safe capable.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 06:18:14 No.1234006 Report

Quoted By:

>>1233514

Big ship engines spend like 80% of their life either operating at max efficiency point or shut down. Diesel electric is only efficient for short operations like ferries. And even there variable pitch props can be better.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO SOAXX20091223-12_300dpi.jpg, 2MiB, 2126x1535

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 06:38:44 No.1234011 Report

Quoted By: >>1234266 >>1234276 >>1234323 >>1234681 >>1236377

>>1233768
I have a cunning plan. We build a row of wind turbines to generate power and use them as support for catenary.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 21:36:29 No.1234266 Report

Quoted By:

>>1234011

Mind blown.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 21:54:48 No.1234276 Report

Quoted By: >>1234312

>>1234011
You know you can't put wind turbines in very deep water, right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 23:25:59 No.1234312 Report

Quoted By: >>1234317

>>1234276
> What is floating wind turbines
Why don't you simply question its cost?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 23:27:05 No.1234314 Report

Quoted By:

>>1232397
> Yara Birkeland will sail on two routes, between Heroya and Brevik (~7 nautical miles (13 km)) and between Heroya and Larvik (~30 nautical miles (56 km)),[1] carrying chemicals and fertiliser.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 23:33:27 No.1234316 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226229
Put wind turbine on ship.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 23:35:05 No.1234317 Report

Quoted By: >>1234323 >>1234444

>>1234312
Floating wind turbines have depth limits too you fucking idiot. Do 5 seconds of research before posting something so factually wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Sep 2018 23:59:07 No.1234323 Report

Quoted By:

>>1234011
How about airborne wind turbines?

>>1234317
The 1st poster doesn't specify depth nor timeframe. Does this depth limit apply to current designs which no demand exist for deeper waters? What fact are you talking about, smartass?
How is fixture over ocean bed more difficult than a submerged floating tunnel?

Tugfag

Tugfag Fri 07 Sep 2018 07:36:12 No.1234444 Report

Quoted By:

>>1234317
If you’re saying they have depth limits due to anchors you’re an idiot who clearly has never worked in this industry

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Flettner rotor.jpg, 1MiB, 1713x1229

Anonymous Fri 07 Sep 2018 16:02:18 No.1234547 Report

Quoted By: >>1234554

just leaving this here

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Sky Sails.png, 2MiB, 1339x749

Anonymous Fri 07 Sep 2018 16:21:38 No.1234554 Report

Quoted By: >>1234556

>>1234547

and this

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Sep 2018 16:24:43 No.1234556 Report

Quoted By: >>1234584 >>1234648

>>1234554
Does this actually provide any meaningful power to reduce fuel consumption for several thousand tonnes of ship?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1524649273059.jpg, 68KiB, 603x587

Anonymous Fri 07 Sep 2018 16:35:58 No.1234564 Report

Quoted By:

>>1226449
>>1226448
You typed so much, but haven't said anything.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Sep 2018 17:42:53 No.1234584 Report

Quoted By:

>>1234556
yes, not a lot, but it pays itself off in fuel savings fairly quickly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Sep 2018 21:51:32 No.1234648 Report

Quoted By:

>>1234556

Estimates vary from 5%-35% in fuel savings, depending on source and size of the kite in relation to the size of the vessel and also depending on the winds on the route the vessel is on.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Sep 2018 23:08:28 No.1234681 Report

Quoted By: >>1234700 >>1234728

>>1234011
And how are you going to put wind turbines in 30,000 foot deep water?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 08 Sep 2018 00:50:52 No.1234700 Report

Quoted By:

>>1234681
Where the hell except for tektonic subduction trenches is it even nearly that deep?

Tugfag

Tugfag Sat 08 Sep 2018 01:54:12 No.1234728 Report

Quoted By:

>>1234681
>what is dynamic positioning

Stupid idiot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 08 Sep 2018 21:23:16 No.1234987 Report

Quoted By:

>electrocutes all of the fish and swimmers
GREAT idea, retard.

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_1324.jpg, 827KiB, 2215x1079

BaconRider !yuA7eZE8l2 Sun 09 Sep 2018 00:48:03 No.1235062 Report

Quoted By:

Haaaaa aYa!,, sotrue,,redart!!,
lame, spaztic,,LOOSER!,
,,iwin!, its towcabes!, only need oneside in sunlight.,,Chinapulls, Oregon sleeps.,
,,, itwill prove flatearth., pullitight.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Vaxholm_2017-09-08_13.27.57.jpg, 2MiB, 3264x1836

Anonymous Wed 12 Sep 2018 11:37:47 No.1236377 Report

Quoted By: >>1237834

>>1234011
why not just use a power cable?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1200px-Schleppschiff_Teltow.gif, 717KiB, 1200x659

Anonymous Sun 16 Sep 2018 12:55:39 No.1237834 Report

Quoted By:

>>1236377

Nothing wrong with that, just not on the ground but with pantographs like a train/tram.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Electric Freighters