REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

16 ships pollute more than all cars on Earth, oil tankers refuse to unload

POSTED BY: PIRATENEWS
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 17:04
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1314
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, November 23, 2009 3:17 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Quote:

Last week it was revealed that 54 oil tankers are anchored off the coast of Britain, refusing to unload their fuel until prices have risen.

As ships get bigger, the pollution is getting worse. The most staggering statistic of all is that just 16 of the world’s largest ships can produce as much lung-clogging sulphur pollution as all the world’s cars.

Bunker fuel is also thick with sulphur. IMO rules allow ships to burn fuel containing up to 4.5 per cent sulphur. That is 4,500 times more than is allowed in car fuel in the European Union. The sulphur comes out of ship funnels as tiny particles, and it is these that get deep into lungs.

Thanks to the IMO’s rules, the largest ships can each emit as much as 5,000 tons of sulphur in a year – the same as 50million typical cars, each emitting an average of 100 grams of sulphur a year.
With an estimated 800million cars driving around the planet, that means 16 super-ships can emit as much sulphur as the world fleet of cars.

www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1229857/How-16-ships-create-po
llution-cars-world.html



Don't Al Gore own one of those for his Occidental Petroleum Corp?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 23, 2009 6:28 PM

DREAMTROVE


Well said

...and nothing compared to power plants, which in turn aren't a drop in the bucket compared to cleared forest.

This is pretty on target, and more, there's a point:

The fastest way to sail to oceans is the same as it ever was: By clipper. There is only one reason why we have fuel burning ships, and that's capacity, and the only reason for capacity is to reduce staff. With the cost of labor plummeting, the only remaining reason could be the fuel industry itself...

...and it's not about profit, it never was. It's about control.

ETA: Obviously I knew what Tony was about to say, and my response would be "So what?" I mean, the amount of material that goes into a ship 300 times the size is pretty close to 300 times, and the earth is not short of labor. There's not a decent reason to have a fleet of a few thousand ships rather than a fleet of 15 or 20, which is common for shippers these days. In fact, in might be better, as we wouldn't need all ships to go to the same ports as they do now, a structure which supports the Walmart model.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:24 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"the only reason for capacity is to reduce staff"

Hello,

The reason for capacity is to deliver the goods desired to the place where they are desired in sufficient quantity to meet the needs of the consumer.

How many Sea Witches does it take to match the capacity of a supertanker?

Oh, about 352.

It's fine with me if you want to use some kind of alternative power, but Clipper Ships just aren't the right tool for hauling massive quantities of oil.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 10:53 AM

CAVALIER


Big ships are more fuel-efficient than small ships.

It is therefore a lot more environmentally friendly to have a few big ships, rather than a lot of little ones.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 11:12 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Don't worry, internal combustion engines will be outlawed soon.

The future of the human race:


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 11:26 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

When will I be issued my Webley-Fosbery?

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 3:57 PM

DREAMTROVE


Um, Cav, check out the fuel consumption of "cape sized vessels" then compare that to sailing ships, which is what we're talking about, and then do the math.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 4:53 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I wonder if we should factor in the cost of building 352 sailing ships as opposed to one big ship, or the resources involved in providing for their 35,200 man cumulative crew.

Is it possible to just put sails on one of the giant rigs and get the same result? Not pretty like a clipper, but it's got to be better than 352 ships to do the job of one.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 5:04 PM

FREMDFIRMA



I don't see why they do not use a Stirling-Fluidyne rather than the inefficient Otto engine for marine use, myself.

And given the large amount of flat surfacing available, I don't think a hybrid would be out of the question, ideally a hybrid solar/fluidyne able to produce energy not only from carried fuel and solar, but also from temperature differential between the sea and it's own cargo, via a neutral (and nontoxic) carrier fluid between a double hull design which would be both safer and more stable in cross-ocean routes.

It would recover investment costs very quickly, but since when have oil companies ever thought about anything beyond the next quarter, eh ?

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME