 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: MortimerMortimer Date: Oct 19, 2007 02:48
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052037.stm says "Global emissions of
carbon dioxide from shipping are twice the level of aviation, one of the
maritime industry's key bodies has said."
So maybe it's more environmentally friendly if you're going to import food
or to travel abroad to do so by plane than by ship.
How long before we see green protestors protesting at shipping ports in the
same way that they have been doing at airports?
|
| |
|
| | 23 Comments |
|
|
Author: gazzafieldgazzafield Date: Oct 19, 2007 03:00
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052037.stm says "Global emissions of
> carbon dioxide from shipping are twice the level of aviation, one of the
> maritime industry's key bodies has said."
>
> So maybe it's more environmentally friendly if you're going to import food
> or to travel abroad to do so by plane than by ship.
>
> How long before we see green protestors protesting at shipping ports in
> the same way that they have been doing at airports?
Try reading what has already been posted, there's a good chap.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: MortimerMortimer Date: Oct 19, 2007 03:12
"gazzafield" wrote in
message news:ON-dna4UOZrKHYXaRVnyuQA@pipex.net...>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052037.stm says "Global emissions of
>> carbon dioxide from shipping are twice the level of aviation, one of the
>> maritime industry's key bodies has said."
>>
>> So maybe it's more environmentally friendly if you're going to import
>> food or to travel abroad to do so by plane than by ship.
>>
>> How long before we see green protestors protesting at shipping ports in
>> the same way that they have been doing at airports? >
> Try reading what has already been posted, there's a good chap.
I don't see any other threads about this. What thread titles should I be
looking for?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Roger ThorpeRoger Thorpe Date: Oct 19, 2007 03:30
Mortimer wrote:
> "gazzafield" wrote in
> message news:ON-dna4UOZrKHYXaRVnyuQA@pipex.net...
> >>"Mortimer" privacy.net> wrote in message
>>news:13hgvd0b9dcjree@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052037.stm says "Global emissions of
>>>carbon dioxide from shipping are twice the level of aviation, one of the
>>>maritime industry's key bodies has said."
>>>
>>>So maybe it's more environmentally friendly if you're going to import
>>>food or to travel abroad to do so by plane than by ship.
>>>
>>>How long before we see green protestors protesting at shipping ports in
>>>the same way that they have been doing at airports? >>
>>Try reading what has already been posted, there's a good chap.
>
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.00Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MortimerMortimer Date: Oct 19, 2007 04:19
> Mortimer wrote:
>> "gazzafield" wrote in
>> message news:ON-dna4UOZrKHYXaRVnyuQA@pipex.net...
>>>>>"Mortimer" privacy.net> wrote in message
>>>news:13hgvd0b9dcjree@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052037.stm says "Global emissions
>>>>of carbon dioxide from shipping are twice the level of aviation, one of
>>>>the maritime industry's key bodies has said."
>>>>
>>>>So maybe it's more environmentally friendly if you're going to import
>>>>food or to travel abroad to do so by plane than by ship.
>>>>
>>>>How long before we see green protestors protesting at shipping ports in
>>>>the same way that they have been doing at airports? >>>
>>>Try reading what has already been posted, there's a good chap. ...
|
| Show full article (1.27Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: furnessvalefurnessvale Date: Oct 19, 2007 09:13
On 19 Oct, 10:48, "Mortimer" privacy.net> wrote:> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052037.stmsays "Global emissions of
> carbon dioxide from shipping are twice the level of aviation, one of the
> maritime industry's key bodies has said."
>
> So maybe it's more environmentally friendly if you're going to import food
> or to travel abroad to do so by plane than by ship.
Are they talking total emissions or per tonne of freight? If the
latter it seems incredible, given that shipping is four time more fuel
efficient than road.
George
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Graham HarvestGraham Harvest Date: Oct 19, 2007 09:18
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052037.stm says "Global emissions of
> carbon dioxide from shipping are twice the level of aviation, one of the
> maritime industry's key bodies has said."
>
> So maybe it's more environmentally friendly if you're going to import food
> or to travel abroad to do so by plane than by ship.
>
> How long before we see green protestors protesting at shipping ports in
> the same way that they have been doing at airports?
But lb for lb comparision of cargo, transport by ship uses less energy. Its
just another of those narrow statistics that tries to make black look white.
Ship uses more energy because its moving much more cargo.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MortimerMortimer Date: Oct 19, 2007 09:18
> On 19 Oct, 10:48, "Mortimer" privacy.net> wrote:>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052037.stmsays "Global emissions of
>> carbon dioxide from shipping are twice the level of aviation, one of the
>> maritime industry's key bodies has said."
>>
>> So maybe it's more environmentally friendly if you're going to import
>> food
>> or to travel abroad to do so by plane than by ship. >
> Are they talking total emissions or per tonne of freight? If the
> latter it seems incredible, given that shipping is four time more fuel
> efficient than road.
I'd have thought that the lack physical contact that you get between tyres
and road, and the greater resistance of hull through water than lorry
through air would have made ships very inefficient - but that this is
outweighed by the economy of scale due to the much larger carrying capacity
of a ship.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: GeoffCGeoffC Date: Oct 19, 2007 12:42
Mortimer privacy.net> wrote:>
> I'd have thought that the lack physical contact that you get between
> tyres and road, and the greater resistance of hull through water than
> lorry through air would have made ships very inefficient - .
You cannot be serious??
> but that
> this is outweighed by the economy of scale due to the much larger
> carrying capacity of a ship.
--
Geoff
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: MortimerMortimer Date: Oct 19, 2007 13:00
"GeoffC" home.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:47190887$0$24135$dbd41001@news.wanadoo.nl...> Mortimer privacy.net> wrote:>>
>> I'd have thought that the lack physical contact that you get between
>> tyres and road, and the greater resistance of hull through water than
>> lorry through air would have made ships very inefficient - .
>
> You cannot be serious??
How much energy does it take to propel a boat by propeller compared with by
some form of "hard" linkage such as a chain drive like is used for some
cross-river ferries? A propeller produces a lot of slip and therefore loss
of energy as heating the water.
A boat is moving through a fairly viscous fluid (viscous compared with air);
a lorry is moving through a less viscous fluid. On the other hand, a boat is
streamlined whereas a lorry is much less so. I'm not sure which of those two
factors dominates.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
