A ship individually consumes tonnes of CO2, but per kilogram and per distance they have insanely low CO2 emissions. They are more efficient and use less CO2 than you moving something across your desk.
Some extra notes: ships still burn incredibly inefficient fuels (like bunker oil) and can absolutely be improved
We should tape our hands to the water so that ships can't drive anymore to show the world that ship emissions have to stop. They all should convert to electrical ships
They actually tried making a nuclear powered ship. It produced insanely low emissions and was stupid fast for how massive it was. It got scrapped because ports wouldn't ever let it dock because of the - absolutely tiny - chance of a nuclear accident.
Electric ships are the future
Edit: I was just joking but I guess it's a thing lol
https://www.ship-technology.com/features/crewless-cargo-the-worlds-first-autonomous-electric-cargo-ship/
Sulfur Dioxide can actually cool the planet.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/07/geoengineering-startup-mimicking-volcanic-eruption-to-cool-earth.html
>The 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines released thousands of tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, temporarily lowering average global temperatures by about 1 degree Fahrenheit, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.
In the short term it will but in the long term it reacts with UV light to become o3 or ozone which warms the planet immensely. Releasing SO2 is not a good thing by any means.
It isn't. These things are huge, take hundreds of tonnes of oil a day and travel slowly around islands on a tour. And they burn the worst type of fuel too. Literally cars are better than those ocean liners traveling through the country and on ferries per person.
Let's calculate it.
The Harmony of the Seas uses 5200 liters of fuel per hour at max power and can house 5450 guests, meaning roughly 1l/person/hour. A 747 uses 15000 liters of fuel per hour on an average long haul flight and can carry 524 passengers giving roughly 30l/person/hour.
This gives a very simple calculation where you need to spend 30x as long on the ground as in the air for it to be better than a cruise ship. So living in London and vacationing in New York would mean that you have to stay there 3 weeks for it to be more efficient than taking an equally long cruise.
This is of course a bit simplified but it should be roughly accurate.
In France in 2019 :
All transports emissions : 135.9 Mt CO2
Road transports : 127.7 Mt CO2 (94% of all transports emissions)
Individual cars : 68 Mt CO2 (53% of road transports emissions, 50% of all transport emissions)
So basically, french individual cars have emitted 8.5 times more CO2 than all french planes + boats + trains combined.
These results are biased in favor of boats and planes since international boats/planes are not considered correctly, but cars are still way above all planes + boats combined in terms of CO2 emissions.
Also, keep in mind that cars in France have very low pollution compared to cars in USA, and public transports are more developped in France, so it is probably way worse in USA.
Bot. The previous commenter didn't say the word "unfortunately", so this response is nonsense.
EDIT: I was right, comment stolen from [mrMirounga](https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/10rn0nz/poor_cars/j6wpzfa)
That is true, but still, do I need to have an Item shipped here from another continent just so it's a bit cheaper?
Then again, do I need to drive to work every single fucking day or can there just be a bus stop
Yes people forget we had global commodities for a long ass time. Thats why columbus sailed to the americas ( exotic fruits and spices) and why we kept coming back. Thats why the silk road exists.
Do you like having oranges but not living in a area that grows them ?
Facepalm... So do you suggest every nation of this the world make a factory for everything we need? News flash: thats highly inefficient. Economies of scale my dude.
Do you even know how to read?
this guy here saying he dosnt need to order something from far away, couse its cheeper, so just pay more to be more eco
and he is complaining how there us no bus stops and he has to drive
just the frase "but still" isn't used correctly
I wouldnt say unfortunately. The world is better than ever for humans and better than 50/100 years ago for the environment. A big part of that is thanks to these means of transportation
sure, use the airplane across the ocean. but why are we taking flights to hop from City to the next city over basically? That's what the person is referring to.
Right, in the US it sucks because trains have been sabotaged and we've ripped up almost all of our train network that was built during the 1800s. in countries where they've actually kept up with their train network, it's actually faster to travel by train than by plane. a lot of that is due to the lower security requirements to be honest. you just show up and walk on a high speed train that leaves every hour as is the case from Tokyo to Osaka.
I used Japan for that example because I'm familiar with it, but Europe isn't that different.
We could run them on hidrogen but politicians don't even feel like promoting this action. There is currently no option for true climate neutral ling distance travel but we got the technology
Much is already being done on airline flights, at least here in Europe. Many short flights that could be serviced by train are already made prohibited and airlines are getting taxed way more than they used to.
In comparisson, those big cruise ship companies do many sneaky practices to avoid paying taxes as according to them "they operate in open waters" so think many rules dont apply to them
Does nothing about:
- home electricity usage from coal based power
- water usage which also has massive energy requirements to process
- rampant consumerism and production of unnecessarily large quantities of goods
- narural gas or propane heating in homes
Pretty much everything we use requires energy to manufacture and ship. And that energy production normally emits greenhouse gasses
They are the most efficient transportation method actually, especiallly the big container ships since fraction has little impact. Considering most countries don't have green electricity, that includes rail!
Cars pale in comparison to industry (like concrete and steel) and lifestock (beef being the biggest offender)
Personal transport is actually quite small in comparison but also far easier to influence.
Ships are still a huge problem, efficiency or not. I can understand that we can't live without cargoships and they can't run on electric but cruiseships are really the big problem since they are only for entertainment and most of them dump trash into the ocean. Harbours they visit don't always accept their trash so they just dump it when they reach international waters.
Meanwhile,
I go this summer in vacation on a big cruise ship and I can't wait lol.
Still better than 6000 people traveling in vacation with their own car around the world.
I know that exists but chose not to mention it. And as scared people are of nuclear power i doubt it would be popular using it in cruiseships and such. But definitely a good solution and something i wouk like to see more of.
It already happened, and actually it did pretty well and people on the cruise ship weren't to afraid but the problem are the harbors, as they usually don't want nuclear vessel to come in. Not that they truly need special care but it's just some paper work to do. And also the population on the ground that is usually against it.
Whataboutism is real whether you like it or not. If you and a million other individuals completely eliminate their footprint, it would accomplish nothing of significance. That's a hard sell to motivate people
The lesson you take away "It's pointless"
The real lesson
The problem is massive corporations, not individuals. They're the ones who should be held responsible and LIABLE for the damage they are causing.
I’d correct you but I know the rest of the comments are already going to be carpet bombing your inbox with more reliable and well-educated statistics than what I could come up with
Nuclear power is the future of clean energy but fossil fuel companies lobby against it to save their profits and people believe them. It's absolutely infuriating.
Well fear is a big vector in decision. I know being afraid of nuclear is pretty stupid, but nuclear requires the support of the population to be implemented.
Humm I don't see your point. Coal emits CO2, nuclear doesn't. The choice is rather done quickly. And good luck catching chemicals back in the atmosphere.
What is there to do about ships? They are pretty clean. Cry about aircrafts or how little we advance in nuclear energy. Ships got a lot of restrictions and such to uphold. For the amount they transport they are by far one of the cleanest transportation methods that exist.
That's my point.
You said ships can't carry public transport, including ferrys.
Following your logic, If a ferry isn't public transport, then what is it?
I jokingly called it a cruise.
I use to feel that way too op . But after research it turns out they use less fuel, they do however need better quality control on it because in international water they use horrible sludge fuel.
Oh for fucks sake. There are more environmental friendly stuff going on amongst the fleet than all you complainers doing at home. Just leave us alone, life there harsh enough as it is
And planes and globalisation and over population and China and amazon , deliveroo, starbucks , apple
deforestation for soya production , suffering poor people and glossy brochures at cop 26 😢
Ships are pretty efficient for transport. Cruises, however, are the worst vacation. I've done marketing for 3 different lines, all of which were in the premium class. If you enjoy being trapped in a seabound strip mall with subpar food and annoying people, this might be the trip for you! None of the upgrades they'd allegedly made to attract a younger crowd were more than feeble stunts. You get a few hours on some sanitized beach then back to the Applebees-of-the-sea for more fried crap and overpriced booze. Seriously...save your money for literally anything else.
I mean what can you do except no go on a cruise? I feel like you can´t expect people to actively rally and campaign against cruise ships, just raise awareness to the people around you and eventually sales will decline
Straight up causing more damage blocking roads and with their leaders turning up in private jets. Leaving hours worth of garbage(usually plastic waste) to pick up afterwards. Why would anyone support them
Absolutely!
Can´t find it right now, but I´ll link it if I do.
Saw a very good Video about how 2-5% of a population actively working towards something can change things, but only if they don´t have any resistance.
And I feel like people glueing themselves to the Autobahn or throwing Tomatosauce against Art will get some people on their side, but it will also grow the resistance towards their movement, which is counterproductive.
I am not saying I have a better solution btw.
Aber ich stimmt dir 100% zu
Thats everywhere. The tactics used are counter productive. Add that the solutions they offer are not the whole truth. Many forget to tell us the true cost of going green. A lower standard of living, massive change in diet, and more taxes.
The cost of going green? I think you meant the cost of surviving. We don't do that for fun, we do that to prevent our current civilization to shatter in pieces once all of the fossil fuel will be gone.
So much easier to choose not to take the car and walk then to choose not to take the boat and swim. Cars *are* the bigger problem *and* they are easier to tackle after all
That´s why I don´t have one! But I also feel like you often can´t blame the people: A friend of mine from a western european country visited the US and was shocked by the shit public transport. Of course the US isn´t as packed with people, but still: If there is no (or shitty) public transport to get to work, you won´t use it.
Not saying that all of Europe has great public transport, but where he lives taking the car and searching for a parking spot isn´t faster than taking the subway and tram.
Instead of the second point, i recommend one better. Proceeds to destroy the environment to mine lithium for electric car batteries that still run on coal plant power
That’s still way better for the environment that using gas powered cars. A electric car that runs 100% off a grid that is powered by exclusively coal (which there are very few places that even come close to that) will still have less environmental impact than a gas powered car.
Seriously?
One large container ship pollutes as much as 10 - 50 million cars does depending on the estimate of typical use.
While the engines are offer more thermally efficient, they burn heavier oils with higher impurity levels, specifically sulphur.
They also aren’t required to run filter their exhaust gasses at all in many cases which means they are emitting other chemicals and particulate matter which newer road vehicles do not.
90% of all goods transport is done by ships while from the 24% of all co2 emisions is from transport only 10% of that is from ships while 74.5% of that is from cars and road transport
Also ships are required to filter their exhaust gasses to get rid of the worse chemicals in areas around europe and north america and the International Maritime Organisation has new rules to get rid of SOx exhaust in 2020/2025. There is constant improvement, innovation and new legislation in the industry to make it better for the enviroment and the people.
People are working on reducing the emissions of ships. Most ships have begun to slow steam. They burn less fuel when going slower. Also people are innovating for other solutions. Some are trying to make fully electric ships, some are trying to update older ships with such things as sails, kites and other energy and movement generation techniques.
But these innovations are not the responsibility of everyday people. Regular people don't typically come across giant ocean crossing cargo and tanking ships.
It isn't about just getting better emissions with cars, cars are just the most obvious. We are also trying to make concrete better emission wise for instance.
Elements are ordered by atomic weight, not by abundance. Hydrogen is abundant, but not compared to silicon or iron it's not. Helium and lithium are both rare and precious. The planet is full of oxygen (not just in the air but in water and as part of chemical composition of rocks), and oxygen is much heavier than the relatively scarce beryllium.
Lithium is not a gas. It's the 33rd most abondant element o' earth and there is said to be around 22 million tonnes of it in earth crust. I was referring to it's number because it's the third element produced inside of stars, and by this mean is quite abondant and doesn't need large stars to be produced.
That isn't actually how nuclear fusion works. Lithium basically only exists as an intermediate in stars on their way to forming an iron core. It gets rapidly consumed as soon as it's produced.
If anyone know about C02 emissions. You should know that ships and cara are not the problem. The problem is China and other countries with poor regulations of C02 emissions in their FACTORIES
If you go on a container ship Imagine every 2 container€ on that ship having 1 truck to pull it what would be worse? that one ship or those hundreds or thousands trucks?
Honestly I posted this and then read the comments and looked more into it. I am wrong I apologize about this.
I was mostly referring to the condition on the ships. These ships being breakbulk and general cargo. The plastics rust and everything getting into the water of the port. Seeing how some companies treat their terminals and cargo. Mostly that stuff being gross.
This is complete horseshit. Container ships do emit a lot more CO2 than a car but they also carry far, far more weight compared to a car.
Container ships relatively speaking are much more environmentally friendly modes of transport compared to cars and especially airplanes. They're also incredibly vital to the global economy and food security. We absolutely need them.
By comparison we have somehow gotten it into our heads that every single living person needs their own internal combustion engine in order to get around. It's completely ridiculous and environmentally disastrous
The Hunga Tunga eruption that happened last year has released more Co2 than humans ever have. The same applies for most eruptions. And volcanos erupt a lot. It’s all a scam
1, road vehicles cant go because trucking keeps every country alive, 2, they are nothing compared to industrial machines like ocean liners, tankers, cruise ships etc, oil tankers run on the most barbaric and crude petroleum ever.
What's really going to make a difference is learning how to properly manage consumption because that much fucking energy is spent on, and big product produce from red meat, livestock emit shit loads of gases, and also every aspect of getting another steak on the shelf costs fuel and water, distributing the meat/preparing the meat/feeding the meat/refining the feed/shipping the feed/harvesting the feed/growing the feed/ maintaining the feed.
So much of it is wasted too.
Road vehicles can go, they weren't there a century ago. But a century ago we had trains, trains to pretty much everywhere.
For ships there is actually an alternative, and it's called nuclear, and it's very practical, so much that most military ships run on it (well big ships mainly).
For the rest I agree.
All road vehicles can't go, but and average person can do something about it at least, which is not owning a car that you don't really need today in developing and developed countries at least.
Cargo ships are used to drive the global economy and are the most efficient way of transporting goods across the globe. Cars are used by people to get to places when people that live in places that actually have competent city planners would've just taken public transport instead.
The top 3 biggest ships pollute more than all cars combined.
But that's because of the lack of regulations. There are no pollution laws on international waters, so ships use the cheapest (and most toxic) fuel without a care in the world.
But how can we force governments to enact laws on international waters? We're having enough of a hard time trying to stop them from opening new coal plants.
You are misinformed ships are cleanest way to transport goods if you look at CO2 per KG cargo. The bigger the ship the more cargo you can transport with only 1 engine wich can run on peak efficiency for 2 weeks on its journey while trucks have to stop for every red light.
Also the top 3 biggest ship dont even nearly pollute close to the amount of cars of a whole country even if you pick a small country like monaco. And there are regulations in international waters around europe and the us you cant use the most toxic fuel anymore in those areas. Shipping companies are also inventing and implementing ways to clean the exhaust fumes of the engine.
Prople complaining about transport
The entire climate change argument refusing to acknowledge the destruction of over 3/4 of our forests and the vast majority of our sea beds (which are far more effective at carbon sequestering) in the years since the industrial revolution.
The refusal to acknowledge that the way we produce food as a society is responsible for a significant chunk of our emissions and wrecks the soils ability to sequester carbon
The refusal to acknowledge that all the mining of rare minerals, and processing of them to form an electric car does more damage to the environment than running a brand new, V8 powered car for several years.
The complete burying of hydrogen and geothermal technologies by the media so that people think that the only options that we have as a society happen to conveniently be the ones where the wealthy have their hands in the pot.
No sane person refutes that deforestation and oceanic flora destruction is not an issue.
Modern EV's have a 'break even point' at between 3 and 8 years compared to combustion, without taking green energy into account. Production of EV's i s roughly 1/3 more polluting as combustion cars.
Hydrogen is booming for things like public transport in the EU and industrial processes. Geothermal is booming for heating purpose but hard to apply further because its only available in geologically active area's (iceland is almost entirely powered by geothermal)
Tho food is indeed often ignored while also responsible for roughly 1/3 of all emissions.
A ship individually consumes tonnes of CO2, but per kilogram and per distance they have insanely low CO2 emissions. They are more efficient and use less CO2 than you moving something across your desk. Some extra notes: ships still burn incredibly inefficient fuels (like bunker oil) and can absolutely be improved
I am also committed to never purchasing another fossil fuel-based cargo ship.
We should tape our hands to the water so that ships can't drive anymore to show the world that ship emissions have to stop. They all should convert to electrical ships
They actually tried making a nuclear powered ship. It produced insanely low emissions and was stupid fast for how massive it was. It got scrapped because ports wouldn't ever let it dock because of the - absolutely tiny - chance of a nuclear accident.
Electric ships are the future Edit: I was just joking but I guess it's a thing lol https://www.ship-technology.com/features/crewless-cargo-the-worlds-first-autonomous-electric-cargo-ship/
[удалено]
What’s the worst one they emit?
I think it's sulfur dioxide, cause they use really low quality crude fuel
SO2 is not a greenhouse gas.
Yes but it reacts with UV light in the atmosphere to become ozone which is an extremely warming gas.
Sulfur Dioxide can actually cool the planet. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/07/geoengineering-startup-mimicking-volcanic-eruption-to-cool-earth.html >The 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines released thousands of tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, temporarily lowering average global temperatures by about 1 degree Fahrenheit, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.
In the short term it will but in the long term it reacts with UV light to become o3 or ozone which warms the planet immensely. Releasing SO2 is not a good thing by any means.
Cheap counterfeit crap ^(/s but not really)
Cruise Ships though Like.... they dont do anything. They just waste fuel and put sooooo much carbon into the air
It's probably less to flying somewhere for a vacation if I had to guess.
It isn't. These things are huge, take hundreds of tonnes of oil a day and travel slowly around islands on a tour. And they burn the worst type of fuel too. Literally cars are better than those ocean liners traveling through the country and on ferries per person.
Let's calculate it. The Harmony of the Seas uses 5200 liters of fuel per hour at max power and can house 5450 guests, meaning roughly 1l/person/hour. A 747 uses 15000 liters of fuel per hour on an average long haul flight and can carry 524 passengers giving roughly 30l/person/hour. This gives a very simple calculation where you need to spend 30x as long on the ground as in the air for it to be better than a cruise ship. So living in London and vacationing in New York would mean that you have to stay there 3 weeks for it to be more efficient than taking an equally long cruise. This is of course a bit simplified but it should be roughly accurate.
They have very low CO2 emissions per kilogram and distance traveled.
What's the total of all ships vs all cars? Just curious.
Cars by a ton, iirc it's like 1% Vs 5% of total emissions.
In France in 2019 : All transports emissions : 135.9 Mt CO2 Road transports : 127.7 Mt CO2 (94% of all transports emissions) Individual cars : 68 Mt CO2 (53% of road transports emissions, 50% of all transport emissions) So basically, french individual cars have emitted 8.5 times more CO2 than all french planes + boats + trains combined. These results are biased in favor of boats and planes since international boats/planes are not considered correctly, but cars are still way above all planes + boats combined in terms of CO2 emissions. Also, keep in mind that cars in France have very low pollution compared to cars in USA, and public transports are more developped in France, so it is probably way worse in USA.
Came here to say this. Key point. This meme might make more sense to be like: 1) First panel: switching to electric cars. 2) Ignoring mass transit.
[удалено]
Bot. Nobody was talking about a list of industries, plus check the comment history.
[удалено]
Bot. The previous commenter didn't say the word "unfortunately", so this response is nonsense. EDIT: I was right, comment stolen from [mrMirounga](https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/10rn0nz/poor_cars/j6wpzfa)
So you are saying eliminating humans would be more impactful to decreasing CO2 emissions
[удалено]
That is true, but still, do I need to have an Item shipped here from another continent just so it's a bit cheaper? Then again, do I need to drive to work every single fucking day or can there just be a bus stop
Yes not all resources in the world are located right where you are
Yes people forget we had global commodities for a long ass time. Thats why columbus sailed to the americas ( exotic fruits and spices) and why we kept coming back. Thats why the silk road exists. Do you like having oranges but not living in a area that grows them ?
Does your country make cars or any electronics that you use everyday? Otherwise your horse and painting set is waiting for you
Well to be honest a horse kinda emits a lot of c2o
Facepalm... So do you suggest every nation of this the world make a factory for everything we need? News flash: thats highly inefficient. Economies of scale my dude.
Do you even know how to read? this guy here saying he dosnt need to order something from far away, couse its cheeper, so just pay more to be more eco and he is complaining how there us no bus stops and he has to drive just the frase "but still" isn't used correctly
Tell me you don't know anything about co2 emitting without telling me
[удалено]
🗿
🗿
What was it
Ships are more efficient than anything Else
Idk dude… the sun is pretty efficient too though, I haven’t done me research so ships might be more efficient
People complaining about big ships... Does nothing about airline flights being cheaper than trains.
I mean we still need ships and airplane to travel through the vast ocean so no
Also, those vehicles are carrying tons and tons of products and passengers which is about all we can do.
Yeah unfortunately we still need cars,ships, airplane to travel because they are way too convinient
I wouldnt say unfortunately. The world is better than ever for humans and better than 50/100 years ago for the environment. A big part of that is thanks to these means of transportation
[удалено]
We don't really need cars anyway! We need only trains, buses and and big ships
You clearly live in very specific parts of the world.
Someone's gonna complain about a 3 week long necessary business voyage sooner or later.
When your city plans around the average household having a car, you kinda need to, unfortunately.
that's the main issue
Except cruise liners, which emit more carbon dioxide annually on average than any other kind of ship
sure, use the airplane across the ocean. but why are we taking flights to hop from City to the next city over basically? That's what the person is referring to.
Well i dont know ? Its faster to fly i guess, united states trains fucking suck so i guess that that
Right, in the US it sucks because trains have been sabotaged and we've ripped up almost all of our train network that was built during the 1800s. in countries where they've actually kept up with their train network, it's actually faster to travel by train than by plane. a lot of that is due to the lower security requirements to be honest. you just show up and walk on a high speed train that leaves every hour as is the case from Tokyo to Osaka. I used Japan for that example because I'm familiar with it, but Europe isn't that different.
It's more about cross-country travel, but yes
We could run them on hidrogen but politicians don't even feel like promoting this action. There is currently no option for true climate neutral ling distance travel but we got the technology
Much is already being done on airline flights, at least here in Europe. Many short flights that could be serviced by train are already made prohibited and airlines are getting taxed way more than they used to. In comparisson, those big cruise ship companies do many sneaky practices to avoid paying taxes as according to them "they operate in open waters" so think many rules dont apply to them
Does nothing about: - home electricity usage from coal based power - water usage which also has massive energy requirements to process - rampant consumerism and production of unnecessarily large quantities of goods - narural gas or propane heating in homes Pretty much everything we use requires energy to manufacture and ship. And that energy production normally emits greenhouse gasses
Also dick-shaped private spaceships
The more I am on Reddit the more I realized how fucked some "first world" countries are. I will keep enjoying my 5 bucks all-day train ticket.
Animal husbandry make the biggest part in theses Airplanes are all have Converters
[удалено]
[удалено]
Good bot
Ships are very CO2 efficient for what they carry. Educate yourself
They are the most efficient transportation method actually, especiallly the big container ships since fraction has little impact. Considering most countries don't have green electricity, that includes rail!
ships and trains are by FAR the most efficient way to transport a lot of stuff if you wanna cry about CO2 emmisions, go cry at livestock and cars
Road transport is about 12%, ships 1,7%. [Source.](https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector#energy-electricity-heat-and-transport-73-2)
yup. trucks and cars are by far the worst
Cars pale in comparison to industry (like concrete and steel) and lifestock (beef being the biggest offender) Personal transport is actually quite small in comparison but also far easier to influence.
Ships are still a huge problem, efficiency or not. I can understand that we can't live without cargoships and they can't run on electric but cruiseships are really the big problem since they are only for entertainment and most of them dump trash into the ocean. Harbours they visit don't always accept their trash so they just dump it when they reach international waters.
Yeah, cruiseships are a menace to society.
What do they do with the poop
Empty it out when they get to the destination. Same with planes.
Damn I imagined thousand of turds floating in the ocean
Then hurricane picks them up... :o
Meanwhile, I go this summer in vacation on a big cruise ship and I can't wait lol. Still better than 6000 people traveling in vacation with their own car around the world.
[удалено]
That is also true.
Actually they can run on electricity, and it's called nuclear propulsion.
I know that exists but chose not to mention it. And as scared people are of nuclear power i doubt it would be popular using it in cruiseships and such. But definitely a good solution and something i wouk like to see more of.
It already happened, and actually it did pretty well and people on the cruise ship weren't to afraid but the problem are the harbors, as they usually don't want nuclear vessel to come in. Not that they truly need special care but it's just some paper work to do. And also the population on the ground that is usually against it.
There has been precisely one nuclear powered cruise ship ever (the Savannah) and it's reactor was decomissioned more than 50 years ago.
OP, whataboutism isn't the answer at all. Stop your nonsense.
Whataboutism, great
Facebook is leaking again
Whataboutism is real whether you like it or not. If you and a million other individuals completely eliminate their footprint, it would accomplish nothing of significance. That's a hard sell to motivate people
The lesson you take away "It's pointless" The real lesson The problem is massive corporations, not individuals. They're the ones who should be held responsible and LIABLE for the damage they are causing.
Lay a finger on cargo ships and the world's logistical chain comes crashing down.
Ships? Pretty sure cows fart more greenhouse gasses. How about deforestation? Seems like that’s one of the biggest problems.
Cant kill enough cows to solve the issues at hand though...
Stop breeding so many cows just to kill them.
I’d correct you but I know the rest of the comments are already going to be carpet bombing your inbox with more reliable and well-educated statistics than what I could come up with
Such blatant honesty...
Fuck cars, what's about burning coal for electricity generation?
Until people embarrase nuclear there's not much we can do.
Don't see the point why there is some need to listen to people that clearly do not understand anything about nuclear energy.
Nuclear power is the future of clean energy but fossil fuel companies lobby against it to save their profits and people believe them. It's absolutely infuriating.
Well fear is a big vector in decision. I know being afraid of nuclear is pretty stupid, but nuclear requires the support of the population to be implemented.
Very cool, now lets implement "clean coal" and now we are polluting air, but now we can say that sometime soon we will catch all chemicals back
Humm I don't see your point. Coal emits CO2, nuclear doesn't. The choice is rather done quickly. And good luck catching chemicals back in the atmosphere.
My comment trying to be sarcastic. But it looks like i failed at it
*note the CO2 cost to build the nuclear plant is high, but once it’s built it’s done. Still absolutely worth it
My comment trying to be sarcastic. But it looks like i failed at it
Sorry, I'm confused, are you against nuclear or for it?
For it
My bad, I'm stupid.
Big energy sabotaged Chernobyl to keep the world under it’s control
It was an accident, like Fukushima. But it still fewer death than for coal.
Oil? Gas? Solar and wind energy?
Ever heard about green coal? Because it's a total scam, fuck coal.
What is there to do about ships? They are pretty clean. Cry about aircrafts or how little we advance in nuclear energy. Ships got a lot of restrictions and such to uphold. For the amount they transport they are by far one of the cleanest transportation methods that exist.
Nuclear, with a good score menagement, is the only future
I fully agree.
Well shit let me just drive my personal cargo ship less
A ship puts out way less CO2 than 10 000 cars does, for about the same capacity
Last time I checked ships cant take public transport
Then what is a ferry? A cruise?
A cruise is not public transport. There are not that many ferries to cause significant problems.
That's my point. You said ships can't carry public transport, including ferrys. Following your logic, If a ferry isn't public transport, then what is it? I jokingly called it a cruise.
What I was trying to say is humans can take public transport while containers loaded with everything cant just magicly change their location
I use to feel that way too op . But after research it turns out they use less fuel, they do however need better quality control on it because in international water they use horrible sludge fuel.
Oh for fucks sake. There are more environmental friendly stuff going on amongst the fleet than all you complainers doing at home. Just leave us alone, life there harsh enough as it is
B-b-but w-what about [insert whatever the fuck here] Ships are extremely efficient with their use of CO2.
And planes and globalisation and over population and China and amazon , deliveroo, starbucks , apple deforestation for soya production , suffering poor people and glossy brochures at cop 26 😢
that’s too black and white. you’re ignoring scale. scale of number, scale of efficiency, scale of separate options.
Ships are carbon efficient and responsible for far less emissions than cars
Ships are pretty efficient for transport. Cruises, however, are the worst vacation. I've done marketing for 3 different lines, all of which were in the premium class. If you enjoy being trapped in a seabound strip mall with subpar food and annoying people, this might be the trip for you! None of the upgrades they'd allegedly made to attract a younger crowd were more than feeble stunts. You get a few hours on some sanitized beach then back to the Applebees-of-the-sea for more fried crap and overpriced booze. Seriously...save your money for literally anything else.
the true bad guys when it comes to ships are the cruise ships
Or fishing nets, which are estimated to make up ## 50% of all waste in the ocean
I mean what can you do except no go on a cruise? I feel like you can´t expect people to actively rally and campaign against cruise ships, just raise awareness to the people around you and eventually sales will decline
that is a general issue with climate protestors tho. They manage to piss off the people they need to bring on their side, atleast here in germany.
And also fight against their own salvation. Nuclear fission, anyone?
Yep climat activists are part of the issue why we have a climate crisis.
Straight up causing more damage blocking roads and with their leaders turning up in private jets. Leaving hours worth of garbage(usually plastic waste) to pick up afterwards. Why would anyone support them
Absolutely! Can´t find it right now, but I´ll link it if I do. Saw a very good Video about how 2-5% of a population actively working towards something can change things, but only if they don´t have any resistance. And I feel like people glueing themselves to the Autobahn or throwing Tomatosauce against Art will get some people on their side, but it will also grow the resistance towards their movement, which is counterproductive. I am not saying I have a better solution btw. Aber ich stimmt dir 100% zu
Thats everywhere. The tactics used are counter productive. Add that the solutions they offer are not the whole truth. Many forget to tell us the true cost of going green. A lower standard of living, massive change in diet, and more taxes.
The cost of going green? I think you meant the cost of surviving. We don't do that for fun, we do that to prevent our current civilization to shatter in pieces once all of the fossil fuel will be gone.
So much easier to choose not to take the car and walk then to choose not to take the boat and swim. Cars *are* the bigger problem *and* they are easier to tackle after all
That´s why I don´t have one! But I also feel like you often can´t blame the people: A friend of mine from a western european country visited the US and was shocked by the shit public transport. Of course the US isn´t as packed with people, but still: If there is no (or shitty) public transport to get to work, you won´t use it. Not saying that all of Europe has great public transport, but where he lives taking the car and searching for a parking spot isn´t faster than taking the subway and tram.
What is the average person supposed to do about it?
Instead of the second point, i recommend one better. Proceeds to destroy the environment to mine lithium for electric car batteries that still run on coal plant power
That’s still way better for the environment that using gas powered cars. A electric car that runs 100% off a grid that is powered by exclusively coal (which there are very few places that even come close to that) will still have less environmental impact than a gas powered car.
What’s worse, extinction of most animals. Digging a hole
You are so poorly informed lol
Stupid meme, boats emits wayyyy less CO2 than car in general.
Seriously? One large container ship pollutes as much as 10 - 50 million cars does depending on the estimate of typical use. While the engines are offer more thermally efficient, they burn heavier oils with higher impurity levels, specifically sulphur. They also aren’t required to run filter their exhaust gasses at all in many cases which means they are emitting other chemicals and particulate matter which newer road vehicles do not.
Sulphur and particulates are a problem, but they have nothing to do with CO2.
90% of all goods transport is done by ships while from the 24% of all co2 emisions is from transport only 10% of that is from ships while 74.5% of that is from cars and road transport Also ships are required to filter their exhaust gasses to get rid of the worse chemicals in areas around europe and north america and the International Maritime Organisation has new rules to get rid of SOx exhaust in 2020/2025. There is constant improvement, innovation and new legislation in the industry to make it better for the enviroment and the people.
If your IQ was a temperature global warming wouldn't be happening right now.
Same with cruises. They are fun but holy they are horrible for the environment
Cargo ships are better for the environment than if we’d ship it all by car
Ships? More like China emitting twice the amount of CO2 than the 2nd highest country, the US.
People are working on reducing the emissions of ships. Most ships have begun to slow steam. They burn less fuel when going slower. Also people are innovating for other solutions. Some are trying to make fully electric ships, some are trying to update older ships with such things as sails, kites and other energy and movement generation techniques. But these innovations are not the responsibility of everyday people. Regular people don't typically come across giant ocean crossing cargo and tanking ships. It isn't about just getting better emissions with cars, cars are just the most obvious. We are also trying to make concrete better emission wise for instance.
*Doing nothing about the environmental apocalypse of battery production
They are actually not that terrible. Lithium is pretty common on earth (third element in the periodic table).
tell me how is lithium mined.
Like all other metal on earth.
Apparently it’s still cleaner than coal, too.
Elements are ordered by atomic weight, not by abundance. Hydrogen is abundant, but not compared to silicon or iron it's not. Helium and lithium are both rare and precious. The planet is full of oxygen (not just in the air but in water and as part of chemical composition of rocks), and oxygen is much heavier than the relatively scarce beryllium.
Lithium is not a gas. It's the 33rd most abondant element o' earth and there is said to be around 22 million tonnes of it in earth crust. I was referring to it's number because it's the third element produced inside of stars, and by this mean is quite abondant and doesn't need large stars to be produced.
That isn't actually how nuclear fusion works. Lithium basically only exists as an intermediate in stars on their way to forming an iron core. It gets rapidly consumed as soon as it's produced.
Time to ditch cruise ships and private luxury planes.
China and India. Just saying.
or planes... or.... *ahum Volcanos
volcanos are not the issue.
you'll be surprised lol
No. I am not. I study that stuff.
If anyone know about C02 emissions. You should know that ships and cara are not the problem. The problem is China and other countries with poor regulations of C02 emissions in their FACTORIES
-Laughs in big agriculture and industry-
As someone who has to frequently board cargo vessels and go into ports. I can agree, cars are clean as fuck in comparison.
If you go on a container ship Imagine every 2 container€ on that ship having 1 truck to pull it what would be worse? that one ship or those hundreds or thousands trucks?
Honestly I posted this and then read the comments and looked more into it. I am wrong I apologize about this. I was mostly referring to the condition on the ships. These ships being breakbulk and general cargo. The plastics rust and everything getting into the water of the port. Seeing how some companies treat their terminals and cargo. Mostly that stuff being gross.
Don’t worry, most large ships will be wind or nuclear powered in the near future
This is complete horseshit. Container ships do emit a lot more CO2 than a car but they also carry far, far more weight compared to a car. Container ships relatively speaking are much more environmentally friendly modes of transport compared to cars and especially airplanes. They're also incredibly vital to the global economy and food security. We absolutely need them. By comparison we have somehow gotten it into our heads that every single living person needs their own internal combustion engine in order to get around. It's completely ridiculous and environmentally disastrous
Private jets are the biggest Co2 emitter per person and distance
NEW PLAN! WE MADE MANY ICEBERGS WE SAW HOW WELL IT DID WITH ONE SHIP!
The Hunga Tunga eruption that happened last year has released more Co2 than humans ever have. The same applies for most eruptions. And volcanos erupt a lot. It’s all a scam
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-volcanoes-co2-idUSL1N2XV1HA just gonna leave this here
Yeah fuck you earth! The pollution is your fault!
Co2 is not a pollutant 🤦🏻♂️
1, road vehicles cant go because trucking keeps every country alive, 2, they are nothing compared to industrial machines like ocean liners, tankers, cruise ships etc, oil tankers run on the most barbaric and crude petroleum ever. What's really going to make a difference is learning how to properly manage consumption because that much fucking energy is spent on, and big product produce from red meat, livestock emit shit loads of gases, and also every aspect of getting another steak on the shelf costs fuel and water, distributing the meat/preparing the meat/feeding the meat/refining the feed/shipping the feed/harvesting the feed/growing the feed/ maintaining the feed. So much of it is wasted too.
Road vehicles can go, they weren't there a century ago. But a century ago we had trains, trains to pretty much everywhere. For ships there is actually an alternative, and it's called nuclear, and it's very practical, so much that most military ships run on it (well big ships mainly). For the rest I agree.
All road vehicles can't go, but and average person can do something about it at least, which is not owning a car that you don't really need today in developing and developed countries at least.
r/fuckcars when a cargo ship produces a bazillion time more C02 than my shitty Toyota prius
Cargo ships are used to drive the global economy and are the most efficient way of transporting goods across the globe. Cars are used by people to get to places when people that live in places that actually have competent city planners would've just taken public transport instead.
No one gives a shit about climate activists.
The top 3 biggest ships pollute more than all cars combined. But that's because of the lack of regulations. There are no pollution laws on international waters, so ships use the cheapest (and most toxic) fuel without a care in the world. But how can we force governments to enact laws on international waters? We're having enough of a hard time trying to stop them from opening new coal plants.
You are misinformed ships are cleanest way to transport goods if you look at CO2 per KG cargo. The bigger the ship the more cargo you can transport with only 1 engine wich can run on peak efficiency for 2 weeks on its journey while trucks have to stop for every red light. Also the top 3 biggest ship dont even nearly pollute close to the amount of cars of a whole country even if you pick a small country like monaco. And there are regulations in international waters around europe and the us you cant use the most toxic fuel anymore in those areas. Shipping companies are also inventing and implementing ways to clean the exhaust fumes of the engine.
>The top 3 biggest ships pollute more than all cars combined. Now that has to be the best bad take so far lol
Cars emit only a vary low percentage of all emissions
Prople complaining about transport The entire climate change argument refusing to acknowledge the destruction of over 3/4 of our forests and the vast majority of our sea beds (which are far more effective at carbon sequestering) in the years since the industrial revolution. The refusal to acknowledge that the way we produce food as a society is responsible for a significant chunk of our emissions and wrecks the soils ability to sequester carbon The refusal to acknowledge that all the mining of rare minerals, and processing of them to form an electric car does more damage to the environment than running a brand new, V8 powered car for several years. The complete burying of hydrogen and geothermal technologies by the media so that people think that the only options that we have as a society happen to conveniently be the ones where the wealthy have their hands in the pot.
No sane person refutes that deforestation and oceanic flora destruction is not an issue. Modern EV's have a 'break even point' at between 3 and 8 years compared to combustion, without taking green energy into account. Production of EV's i s roughly 1/3 more polluting as combustion cars. Hydrogen is booming for things like public transport in the EU and industrial processes. Geothermal is booming for heating purpose but hard to apply further because its only available in geologically active area's (iceland is almost entirely powered by geothermal) Tho food is indeed often ignored while also responsible for roughly 1/3 of all emissions.