Slashdot Mirror
Wind Powered Freighters Return
thatoneguyfromphoeni writes "It appears that sails could return to the ocean's freighters soon. Newsweek is reporting on a technology to assist with cross-ocean travel. From the article: 'SkySails' system consists of an enormous towing kite and navigation software that can map the best route between two points for maximum wind efficiency. In development for more than four years, the system costs from roughly $380,000 to $3.2 million, depending on the size of the ship it's pulling. SkySails claims it will save one third of fuel costs.'"
Maybe, but the real reason sailing ships went out of use wasn't the cost of transporting the cargo. Remember that sailing ships didn't need space for engines or fuel; and, by the end of the 19th century they were sailed by very small crews. They were always the cheapest way to get cargo from one point to another. What killed them was the unreliability of their passage times: In order to gurarantee a steady supply of a commodity you had to have big wharehouses at each end. Steamships eliminated the wharehouses so the end-to-end cost was less. Just in time inventory anybody?
Not all cheap labour is slave labour. In fact, "slave labour" as you call it, is vastly in the minority. Most shipping just takes advantages economic differences between countries. (ie cheap to make in one country, expensive to make in another.) "Slave labour" is the boogeyman people drag out to frighten people when they are against international trade for whatever reason.
While deplorable, it's hardly the standard.
Wasteful? If it's cheaper to make a good elsewhere and then ship it than to make it locally, it's more wasteful to produce that good locally.
Economics classes should be required to graduate high school.
'Waste' doesn't necessarily equate with price or cost. For instance, it is profoundly wasteful that, for instance, in the US we have non-refillable containers for just about every food product we purchase. This is very inexpensive, but is very wasteful - there is no technical reason why a store could not have a sanitary 2-liter filling station where you just take the same bottle over and over to obtain your beverage of choice. This would actually be less expensive in the long run, but it would cost people who make bottles their jobs, etc. etc.
Again, remember that cost does not necessarily match with waste. In fact, generally less expensive alternatives cost less than their less-wasteful alternatives - at the initial investment stage. However, the long-term costs are always lower with less waste.
"There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
there is no technical reason why a store could not have a sanitary 2-liter filling station where you just take the same bottle over and over to obtain your beverage of choice. This would actually be less expensive in the long run, but it would cost people who make bottles their jobs, etc. etc.
Actually there is. Well, it's not a technical reason, but a sanitary reason. Heath codes/standards, especially with concerns about people possibly deliberatly tainting stuff, rose to the point that the required cleaning/powerwashing/sterilizing to reuse containters costs more energy than the oil that that utterly cheap containers we use today. There are some places where you can refill filtered water though. It wouldn't be an unworkable idea to refill all your milk/soda/tea/juices at the store, but even if you had everyone bring their own containers, you'd have to worry about rotating, cleaning&sanitizing the various taps.
Again, remember that cost does not necessarily match with waste. In fact, generally less expensive alternatives cost less than their less-wasteful alternatives - at the initial investment stage. However, the long-term costs are always lower with less waste.
It can depend, actually. Sometimes the capital costs of a 'less wastefull solution' are such that you'll never make back the investment.
I don't read AC A human right
I'd just have to wonder about the incredible tension the kite's main lead would be under. We're talking HUGE forces here. One of those "if it snaps, someone's gonna die" kind of tensions.
can't be much different to towing the ship with a tug - which is pretty common.
forces on anchor cables and mooring lines are also likely to be pretty similar.
you are right on the "someone's gonna die" level on tension (well known with eg. mooring lines), but it's going to be a manageable risk because it is already managed with ships of this size.
Actually, US manufacturing could be a hell of a lot cheaper than it is now while maintaining our good standards of living. Sadly, our labor unions don't support increased automation, so we are forced to rely on cheap foreign drudge-labor, often in countries that aren't our friends.
-b.