Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Ships and boats  (Read 31306 times)


  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1163
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: Ships and boats
« Reply #200 on: October 06, 2019, 09:09:30 PM »
Shipping companies have a history of being pretty nasty capitalists, doing pretty much anything to save money, so them "cheating" on low sulphur fuel requirements does not surprise me.

The reduction in airborne sulphur emissions from ships will actually increase the rate of climate change by reducing the albedo. Those sulphur particles turn into SO2 in the atmosphere, which reflect sunlight away from Earth. In the relative pristine air of the oceans even small amounts of SO2 can make a big difference to albedo. It has even been proposed that ships should burn dirtier fossil fuel mixes to increase the albedo effect.

Maritime shipping and emissions: A three-layered, damage-based approach (In Ocean Engineering


Policy emphasis in ship design must be shifted away from global and idealized towards regional based and realistic vessel operating conditions. The present approach to reducing shipping emissions through technical standards tends to neglect how damages and abatement opportunities vary according to location and operational conditions. Since environmental policy originates in damages relating to ecosystems and jurisdictions, a three-layered approach to vessel emissions is intuitive and practical. Here, we suggest associating damages and policies with ports, coastal areas possibly defined as Emission Control Areas (ECA) as in the North Sea and the Baltic, and open seas globally. This approach offers important practical opportunities: in ports, clean fuels or even electrification is possible; in ECAs, cleaner fuels and penalties for damaging fuels are important, but so is vessel handling, such as speeds and utilization. Globally we argue that it may be desirable to allow burning very dirty fuels at high seas, due to the cost advantages, the climate cooling benefits, and the limited ecosystem impacts. We quantify the benefits and cost savings from reforming current IMO and other approaches towards environmental management with a three-layered approach, and argue it is feasible and worth considering.


  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1647
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 113
Re: Ships and boats
« Reply #201 on: October 13, 2019, 12:24:01 AM »
Why Lightning Strikes Twice as Often Over Shipping Lanes

Thunderstorms directly above two of the world’s busiest shipping lanes are significantly more powerful than storms in areas of the ocean where ships don’t travel, according to new University of Washington research.

... Under normal conditions, microscopic water droplets in the air grab onto “cloud condensation nuclei,” which are aerosol particles bigger than 50 nanometers, like a bit of dust, or sulphur dioxide. When few particles are present, each one picks up more droplets, and they coalesce into relatively short clouds at low altitudes. Those make rain. When a lot of aerosol particles are present, each one gets fewer droplets and can float high enough into the atmosphere to freeze. In the resulting tall clouds, those bits of ice and slush run into each other and transfer electric charges. The differences in charge creates an electric field, which results in lightning.

The official term for this is “aerosol convective invigoration.” Thornton also calls it “catalyzing lightning.” You just need to know that more particles means more lightning, and burning fossil fuels is a reliable way to make those particles. Ships are especially culpable because they use bunker fuel to get from port to port. Made from the dark, viscous stuff that’s left at the bottom of the barrel after the comparatively ethereal gasoline, jet fuel, and kerosene have been distilled off, it contains about 3,500 times as much sulphur as automotive diesel. The world’s fleet burns some 3.3 million barrels of it daily. (At least until December 31—more on that in a flash.)

For the 2017 study, Thornton and his coauthors pulled data on 1.5 × 10^9 individual strokes (aka discharges) between 2005 and 2016 from the World Wide Lightning Location Network. They compared that to data from the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research, which makes detailed estimates on how much pollution ships create based on real-time info. Then, in 2018, University of Washington researchers Peter Blossey and Christopher Bretherton followed up by using a computer simulation to measure the effect of ship emissions in the Indian Ocean on cloud creation, in response to the 2017 study. With support from Thronton and Virts (now at NASA), they found effects on thunderstorms that lined up with the original study.


Thousands of Ships Fitted With “Cheat Devices” to Divert Poisonous Pollution Into Sea

Diagram showing an open-loop Marine Exhaust Gas Cleaning System that removes sulfur and nitrogen compounds from a ship’s engine exhaust and dumps them into the surrounding water. Graphic: Tritech Engineers

... “In the North Sea and some parts of the Channel, the water quality has already been heavily degraded”
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late


  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 772
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 285
  • Likes Given: 336
Re: Ships and boats
« Reply #202 on: October 13, 2019, 09:02:32 PM »
Interesting part about the lightning.

We clearly need some new global standards for shipping.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.


  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15695
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 225
Re: Ships and boats
« Reply #203 on: October 15, 2019, 09:21:36 PM »
“Here’s a question for you: why did the US Office of Fossil Energy tweet out a Happy Columbus Day message on Columbus Day? Who knows! Whatever the motive, they did remind everybody that Columbus traveled across the seas, which doesn’t have much to do with fossil energy. However, the topic of seacraft does call to mind that fossil energy is on the verge of losing its grip on the global cargo shipping sector, partly because a new wind power renaissance is taking hold.”

Wind Power Returns To Oceangoing Cargo Ships, Finally
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.


  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5279
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 448
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Ships and boats
« Reply #204 on: October 15, 2019, 09:51:51 PM »
Why did the US Office of Fossil Fuel Energy tweet out a Happy Columbus Day message on Columbus Day?

They'd have been laughed at if they tweeted out a Happy New Years message on Columbus Day.
They'd have been ridiculed if they tweeted out a Happy Columbus Day on Christmas Day.

Because no one remembers Vespucci?
'Cause no one admits that the Vikings got there first?
No one in the office can pronounce Zheng.
Otherwise they'd need to explain the Welsh speaking Indian tribes.
Because the Phoenicians Came First is a conspiracy theory.

Otherwise Ohio might succeed.

So many answers, so little time.
Terry ;)