- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Kites could pull cargo ships across seas to lower carbon emissions
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:02 am to Cenlabration
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:02 am to Cenlabration
quote:
US Navy 2030....
We made some badass frigates back during the day, and could do so again.
0
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:09 am to lnomm34
well, i guess i’m at a crossroads like many of you. i’m not sure if what will happen but i’m tired of the twitter pic problem. i’m not signing up but i’m also tired of these threads where a link is being used. my TD days could be numbered.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:11 am to Alt26
quote:
Progressives “progressing” western society back 200 years.
Its guilt caused by success. Progs want to reduce successful people so that tribal folks will not have hurt feelings.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:25 am to Roll Tide Ravens
Our great grandchildren crossing the seas….
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:30 am to bobBoxer
The comments in this thread are about what you expect but these systems have been in development for years. Their initial purpose was to extend range and reduce fuel costs. There are smaller versions in use on yachts. Now someone is just trying to piggyback on the carbon emission hoopla to get some free press/marketing.
The system will live or die based on fuel costs. If the fuel savings are greater than operating costs why not use it?
The system will live or die based on fuel costs. If the fuel savings are greater than operating costs why not use it?
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:35 am to bobBoxer
I think we have this thing called sail boats.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:36 am to bbap
quote:
I don't think people actually read the article.
No one does.
Sails are already being designed and in production for current vessels. This has been going on for years.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:43 am to Gulf Coast Tiger
quote:
I think we have this thing called sail boats.
I was drinking tequila when I read this thread last night, and I ended up boat shopping. Man, if you really want to waste some money, get a sailboat. A new Flying Scot is something like $29,900 and up.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:49 am to X123F45
quote:
There have been tests with adding large sails to supercarriers.
Don't quote me but I think it increased fuel efficiency by like 15%
If it increased fuel efficiency by 15% there wouldn't be a cargo hauler built without then.
The average is likely SIGNIFICANTLY lower.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 9:49 am to bobBoxer
To think what Columbus could have accomplished had he known about this.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 10:03 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
If it increased fuel efficiency by 15% there wouldn't be a cargo hauler built without then.
The average is likely SIGNIFICANTLY lower.
This is from the article
quote:
That’s the basic idea behind the Seawing, a technology being developed by French company Airseas, which it says could help cargo ships reduce their fuel consumption, and cut their carbon emissions by an average of 20%.
Wouldn't it follow that the fuel use reduction would be the same as carbon emissions(20%). How else would a sail reduce carbon emissions other than reducing fuel use?
Posted on 7/2/23 at 10:08 am to bobBoxer
Let’s go backwards… 
Posted on 7/2/23 at 10:23 am to SpartanSoul
No that's exactly it, he's just saying that stat is likely BS.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 10:23 am to WylieTiger
quote:
Sexton
Sextant
Posted on 7/2/23 at 10:34 am to bbap
quote:
No that's exactly it, he's just saying that stat is likely BS.
Maybe BS, maybe not.
I have talked to a guy who had one of the smaller ones by Skysail on his catamaran(somewhere in the 60ft range) and he loved it. said it greatly increased his range and reduced his fuel costs by "almost half". Granted he was willing to lower his transit speed to save fuel costs but he was emphatically positive about the system.
I'm not sure how well it would translate to a larger cargo ship but the concept has promise. As we know from hurricane season the winds at 900ft will be much more powerful than at sea-level.
As I posted above the economics of the system will determine whether it achieves mass adoption.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 11:01 am to bobBoxer
Sails have never worked for across the ocean travel. Everybody knows that.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 11:49 am to X123F45
quote:
There have been tests with adding large sails to supercarriers.
Don't quote me but I think it increased fuel efficiency by like 15%
I mean, lower operating costs are a good thing to me
Well, it won't lower the cost as much as you think considering the cost of kites and the upkeep. As well as additional personnel labor costs to operate the system. Surely they don't have people standing around doing nothing currently.
And that 15% you speak of... was that with the wind at your back the entire time of the study? What about when the wind changes direction? Does the ship have to stop to retrieve the kite that fell into the ocean? How long does that take? Whats the additional labor cost when the trip takes 10x as long due to stopping all the time.
They'd be better off running on electricity and have a bunch of charging stations in the ocean. Plus they could make the sails with solar panels.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 11:54 am to Geaux Tahel
quote:
As well as additional personnel labor costs to operate the system. Surely they don't have people standing around doing nothing currently.
The current crew will do it. And yes,out at sea,there's a lot of doing nothing.
quote:
What about when the wind changes direction? Does the ship have to stop to retrieve the kite that fell into the ocean? How long does that take? Whats the additional labor cost when the trip takes 10x as long due to stopping all the time
Wtf are you talking about? The wind changes direction and the sail just falls off?
None of that quoted post makes sense
Posted on 7/2/23 at 12:07 pm to Geaux Tahel
quote:
Well, it won't lower the cost as much as you think considering the cost of kites and the upkeep. As well as additional personnel labor costs to operate the system. Surely they don't have people standing around doing nothing currently.
And that 15% you speak of... was that with the wind at your back the entire time of the study? What about when the wind changes direction? Does the ship have to stop to retrieve the kite that fell into the ocean? How long does that take? Whats the additional labor cost when the trip takes 10x as long due to stopping all the time.
They'd be better off running on electricity and have a bunch of charging stations in the ocean. Plus they could make the sails with solar panels.
LOL Damn dude did some sail maker frick your dog or run over your old lady?
The system is mostly automated and doesn't require much crew to operate.
And as to the wind direction etc.
quote:
The Seawing can’t be used when sailing directly into the wind, and to function it needs there to be at least some wind blowing, but Bernatets says it could offer enormous benefits on cross-Pacific and Atlantic routes and any north-south routes — cutting fuel use by 20% for “70 to 80% of the world’s shipping trade.”
But feel free to rant about something you have done no research on.
Posted on 7/2/23 at 12:11 pm to Deactived
quote:
The wind changes direction and the sail just falls off?
I said Kite as that's what the story said. So ya, any Kite I flew would fall when the wind died down or changed direction.
That doesn't make sense to you?
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News