| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kirjava
Lothian Quay Industries
Zzz
   |
Posted - 2008.01.24 11:43:00 -
[1]
Here it seems a ship has decided to take a step backwards and use a kite as part of it's propulsion system.
Kudos to the people for realising that wind could be used to move ships on a body of water....
~Nyron
 Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
But poor victimized Ulf...I weep lavender scented tears for you.
|
Kirjava
Lothian Quay Industries
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.01.24 11:43:00 -
[2]
Here it seems a ship has decided to take a step backwards and use a kite as part of it's propulsion system.
Kudos to the people for realising that wind could be used to move ships on a body of water....
~Nyron
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
But poor victimized Ulf...I weep lavender scented tears for you.
|
Rawr Cristina
Caldari
Cult of Rawr
|
Posted - 2008.01.24 12:10:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Rawr Cristina on 24/01/2008 12:11:11
It does seem odd that in our technologically advanced state we're still incredibly inefficient in our ways. We could have abolished the Petrol Car years ago if we really wanted to (but really, who does?)
|
Calderio
Caldari
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.24 12:44:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Rawr Cristina
(but really, who does?)
Not me.
Its great that some shipping companies are going retro and looking at older cheaper and cleaner technologies.
Click The Power Of BOB Compells you |
Sister Impotentata
Elite Angels Of Death
|
Posted - 2008.01.24 13:02:00 -
[5]
Spinnakers for the win!
Originally by: Article
After all, it is no secret that when it comes to greenhouse gases, commercial shipping is normally the villain of the transport world. Of all the CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere today, 4% comes from ships.
In fact, shipping produces more emissions than the aviation industry.
But I wouldn't be surprised to learn that shipped tonnage exceeds aviation tonnage by several orders of magnitude. Additionally, the ratio of cargo:transport is better with a large ship than with an aircraft. I think.
Besides, most container ships are powered by Big ol' two-stroke Diesels. Awesome no doubt, but I don't understand why we haven't moved to turbine (steam or gas) power yet.
-----
TANSTAAFL
Originally by: Professor Falken
What you see here on these screens is a fantasy, a computer-enhanced hallucination! Those blips are not real missiles, they're phantoms!
|
Bob Stuart
Federation Fleet
Chaos Incarnate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.24 13:27:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Sister Impotentata
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that shipped tonnage exceeds aviation tonnage by several orders of magnitude. Additionally, the ratio of cargo:transport is better with a large ship than with an aircraft. I think.
Besides, most container ships are powered by Big ol' two-stroke Diesels. Awesome no doubt, but I don't understand why we haven't moved to turbine (steam or gas) power yet.
For the UK anyway, something like 97-98% by tonnage of freight goes by sea. Worldwide, it's probably not quite that high, but I'd be surprised if it's less than 90% by tonnage by sea.
Ships are more fuel efficient than aircraft by a great deal, and rail by a smaller amount, but still enough to make it worthwhile.
Most ships used to be steam turbines, but now ship powerplants are mostly diesels for several reasons, one of which is machinery space. The diesel engine takes up less space than a steam powerplant, and is considerably less complex. This makes the diesel cheaper to install and maintain, making it cheaper over the life of the ship than a steam plant. More volume of the ship can be used for cargo in a diesel ship.
Don't really know about gas turbines, except they're far more common in naval vessels, where power output is needed most.
That's what I recall from a conversation a few years ago with a girl who studied Naval Architecture at university anyway. Some of it may just have been lies to try and seduce me though.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |