Synthetic Sebum Makes Slippery Sailboats
sonnejw0 writes "Sea-faring vessels are a major contributor of greenhouse gas production due to a deficit in international laws and inherent inefficiencies at sea, such as barnacle build-up on hulls. Many marine animals avoid the build-up of drag-inducing barnacles through secreting oily residues from their pores or through the nano-molecular arrangement of their skin. Sailors regularly defoul their hulls, removing the barnacles at dry-dock, which requires them to reduce the amount of time they have at sea. Some synthetic chemicals in paints have been used to prevent barnacle build-up but have been found to be toxic to marine animals and thus outlawed by several nations. Now, engineers are trying to replicate the skin of marine animals to produce a slippery hull to which marine bacteria cannot attach, saving fuel costs and improving speeds."
Sunlight is said to help ... so hop to it, the basement stairs are right there at the end of the room.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
So why the hell is a third- or tenth-order minor benefit listed described as the prime reason behind this research?
If you can make ships more efficient in the water, making ships that run on renewable sources becomes more possible. Steam- and diesel-powered vessels were invented to improve speed (and capacity) in the water. The more you can improve the efficiency, the more speed you can get out of less and less energy. Which makes things like wind power (sails) or solar power (electricity) more and more of a possibility.
True, but that's still a second-order benefit at best because shipowners ALREADY wanted more efficient ships long before any environmental concerns ever arose because such ships have always been cheaper to run.
Look at the changes in ships between 1850 and 1950. Do you really think environmental concerns drove those changes? Do you really think the owners of Liberian-flagged and Filipino-and-others-crewed vessels really care one whit about the environment? Yet even those ships have become more efficient and therefore more environment-friendly over the decades.
And that's only because when large ocean-going vessels are involved, the profit motive aligns pretty nicely with environmental concerns.
That vessel, the Emma Maersk and her sisters, save 1200 metric tons of fuel a year with environmentally friendly silicone paint used up to the high water line. 1200mt * $300/mt = $360,000 * 8 ships = 2.88 million a year. The fuel savings is a little over 1% of yearly operation. 1% is serious business. It is in their best interest to chase fuel efficiency, and they do so with millions in R&D.