Going back in time to sails

[Captain Caveman]

Sail-powered cargo ship 'shows potential of wind' - BBC News

Using sails reduced ship's fuel use and carbon dioxide emissions, company data indicates.

www.bbc.co.uk

Retrofitting giant, rigid sails to a cargo ship has effectively cut its fuel use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, shipping firm data shows.
The Pyxis Ocean tested the British-designed WindWings for six months.
Cargill says the data "underscores the potential" of wind to reduce the shipping industry's carbon footprint.
Experts describe the results as "very encouraging", but say, at present, only a tiny volume of the international shipping fleet is using the technology.
Sails have powered boats for millennia - but the type of sails trialled on the Pyxis Ocean are different to those normally seen on wind-powered vessels.

Move over Horario Nelson, were coming back for your sails. Ships could be going backwards with technology here, and worse still, modern sails are made of the same dreadful stuff as wind turbine blades, disastrous. The amount of co2 they claim the saving is apparently "a drop in the ocean", but they omitted the created co2 for sail production.

Wind is unreliable, so the ships will still need a diesel engine, so the sails are just an added cost to the cargo. Now ships pump out 837 million tonnes of CO2 annually, or 2.1% of total global emissions. What percentage of that is down to transporting fruit and veg!!

 

[Magnus]

Sail-powered cargo ship 'shows potential of wind' - BBC News

Using sails reduced ship's fuel use and carbon dioxide emissions, company data indicates.

www.bbc.co.uk

Retrofitting giant, rigid sails to a cargo ship has effectively cut its fuel use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, shipping firm data shows.
The Pyxis Ocean tested the British-designed WindWings for six months.
Cargill says the data "underscores the potential" of wind to reduce the shipping industry's carbon footprint.
Experts describe the results as "very encouraging", but say, at present, only a tiny volume of the international shipping fleet is using the technology.
Sails have powered boats for millennia - but the type of sails trialled on the Pyxis Ocean are different to those normally seen on wind-powered vessels.

Move over Horario Nelson, were coming back for your sails. Ships could be going backwards with technology here, and worse still, modern sails are made of the same dreadful stuff as wind turbine blades, disastrous. The amount of co2 they claim the saving is apparently "a drop in the ocean", but they omitted the created co2 for sail production.

Wind is unreliable, so the ships will still need a diesel engine, so the sails are just an added cost to the cargo. Now ships pump out 837 million tonnes of CO2 annually, or 2.1% of total global emissions. What percentage of that is down to transporting fruit and veg!!

Looks like the article you linked to, answered your question. So, what exactly is your issue?

Cargill says the ship spent half a year sailing the Indian and Pacific Oceans and the North and South Atlantic, during which time it used on average three tonnes less fuel each day.

That equates to 11.2 tonnes of C02 emissions saved for each day the sails were up. If replicated over a year, it would amount to the equivalent of removing 480 cars from the roads, Cargill calculates.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Looks like the article you linked to, answered your question. So, what exactly is your issue?

Cargill says the ship spent half a year sailing the Indian and Pacific Oceans and the North and South Atlantic, during which time it used on average three tonnes less fuel each day.

That equates to 11.2 tonnes of C02 emissions saved for each day the sails were up. If replicated over a year, it would amount to the equivalent of removing 480 cars from the roads, Cargill calculates.

The issue is in the op.

 

[Magnus]

The issue is in the op.

In other words, you wrote it without reading your own link? Yeah, usual retard behavior. Thanks for being consistent.

 

[Captain Caveman]

In other words, you wrote it without reading your own link? Yeah, usual retard behavior. Thanks for being consistent.

For the retards, I've highlighted the areas in red.

The concerns are - backwards in technology (Same as EV's are on vehicles), dreadful wind turbine technology being used, price added to cargo, how co2 is belched out shipping fruit and veg about because freaks don't like farting cows.

If you still struggle, please ask your carer or parent.

 

[Magnus]

For the retards, I've highlighted the areas in red.

The concerns are - backwards in technology (Same as EV's are on vehicles), dreadful wind turbine technology being used, price added to cargo, how co2 is belched out shipping fruit and veg about because freaks don't like farting cows.

If you still struggle, please ask your carer or parent.

Yeah, all of which was answered in the link.

Next time, don’t just copy and paste. Learn to read. One way to avoid staying a retard.

 

[TNHarley]

So they think its good idea to do all this work and shit, for the equivalent of getting 480 cars off the road? Thats half of a small town
When will this AGW green shit begin to make sense?

 

[Captain Caveman]

So they think its good idea to do all this work and shit, for the equivalent of getting 480 cars off the road? Thats half of a small town
When will this AGW green shit begin to make sense?

It won't, Western governments just want to drag countries backwards whilst 3rd world and developing nations just continue to belch out pollution etc .

 

[Captain Caveman]

Yeah, all of which was answered in the link.

Next time, don’t just copy and paste. Learn to read. One way to avoid staying a retard.

For example, can you copy and paste where it addresses the cost to cargo increasing for fruit and veg?

 

[Magnus]

For example, can you copy and paste where it addresses the cost to cargo increasing for fruit and veg?

Who the fuck cares? Are you so much of a retard that you think a giant company like Cargil is going to invest in a technology that does not profit its bottom line?

The essence of a retard. You see an article that clearly states that this is a venture to test potential savings and you ask silly questions like the cost of fruits and vegetables?

You think that is the only thing that Cargil transports? Try iron ore, coal, bauxite, corn, wheat, soybeans, steel, sugar etc etc.

Fucking retard.

 

[JoeB131]

Here's the thing.

Eventually, fossil fuels ARE going to run out.

Wind is one of many alternatives. So are Solar, Nuclear, Geo-thermal, biomass, hydropower, etc.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Here's the thing.

Eventually, fossil fuels ARE going to run out.

Wind is one of many alternatives. So are Solar, Nuclear, Geo-thermal, biomass, hydropower, etc.

I'v always been a proponent of the abiotic oil theory.

I don't believe the whole fossil thing.

 

[Oddball]

Here's the thing.

Eventually, fossil fuels ARE going to run out.

 

[JoeB131]

View attachment 917281

No, that's actually the opinion of the oil industry.

When will we run out of fossil fuels? | FairPlanet

The danger of fossil fuel depletion is imminent. What can we do about it?

www.fairplanet.org

 

[Oddball]

No, that's actually the opinion of the oil industry.

When will we run out of fossil fuels? | FairPlanet

The danger of fossil fuel depletion is imminent. What can we do about it?

www.fairplanet.org

No, that's the opinion of a neo-Marxist moonbat envirowhack site.

Been listening to you doom-and-gloomer dweebs mewl and wring your hands, about how environmental/energy/population Armageddon is on our doorstep, only for time to prove you wrong time and time and time and time again.

Go peddle your Malthusian bullshit somewhere else.

 

[JoeB131]

No, that's the opinion of a neo-Marxist moonbat envirowhack site.

Been listening to you doom-and-gloomer dweebs mewl and wring your hands, about how environmental/energy/population Armageddon is on our doorstep, only for time to prove you wrong time and time and time and time again.

Go peddle your Malthusian bullshit somewhere else.

You do realize that fossile fuels ARE a finite resource that doesn't renew itself, right? That they've taken millions of years to create and we've burned most of them off in the last 200 years.

I mean, you can do simple math, right?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

how co2 is belched out shipping fruit and veg about because freaks don't like farting cows.

interesting that you think that people who eat fruits and vegies do not like meat.

 

[elektra]

Here's the thing.

Eventually, fossil fuels ARE going to run out.

Wind is one of many alternatives. So are Solar, Nuclear, Geo-thermal, biomass, hydropower, etc.

hahahaha, here is the thing, it takes more fossil fuels to make the less efficient wind, solar, geo-thermal energies, hence your idea depletes fossil fuels faster.

Solar, wind, and geothermal all have extremely short lifespans, hence need constant replacing. How will you do that with no fossil fuels? You wont.

The real kicker in your ignorance, is hydropower, that can not be expanded. All the good rivers are damned. Any nation relying on Hydropower, like Venezuela and Brazil are third world suffering from repeated black-outs.

Green Energy is not an alternative, it is a failed technology that wastes 100's of trillions in natural resources. Green Energy is largely a product of the Oil Industry.

 

[JoeB131]

hahahaha, here is the thing, it takes more fossil fuels to make the less efficient wind, solar, geo-thermal energies, hence your idea depletes fossil fuels faster.

Except once you've made a solar panel or a windmill, it keeps generating power for years, as opposed to a fossil fuel, which burns up and it's done.

Solar, wind, and geothermal all have extremely short lifespans, hence need constant replacing. How will you do that with no fossil fuels? You wont.

Not sure where you get that from. I passed by some windmill farms that have been running for years.

 

[Oddball]

You do realize that fossile fuels ARE a finite resource that doesn't renew itself, right? That they've taken millions of years to create and we've burned most of them off in the last 200 years.

I mean, you can do simple math, right?

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the false claim you made about the enviroloon goofball source you cited.

You do realize that oceans of hydrocarbons have been found on other planets and moons, where no organic anything has ever existed, right?