[HN Gopher] How to design a sailing ship for the 21st century?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How to design a sailing ship for the 21st century?
        
       Author : sealeck
       Score  : 98 points
       Date   : 2021-05-17 10:14 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (solar.lowtechmagazine.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (solar.lowtechmagazine.com)
        
       | newsclues wrote:
       | If there can be a tax on luxury cars that are transported by ship
       | or planes powered by fossil fuels that is reduced by wind powered
       | shipping, I'd gather there would be innovation in this industry.
        
       | samatman wrote:
       | > _Lithium-ion batteries are very compact, but they cannot be
       | considered sustainable and bring safety risks_
       | 
       | C'mon this is silly. The dominant safety risk of a small vessel
       | (and all of these are small in modern terms) is capsizing in
       | heavy weather, with the loss of all hands.
       | 
       | LiFePO batteries, built into a bank with _really excellent_
       | waterproofing, would be quite adequate to the job. If lithium
       | battery technology _in general_ proves to be unsustainable, we
       | may as well pack up and go home, because decarbonization isn 't
       | going to happen.
       | 
       | Taking the average specific energy of LiFePO from Wikipedia, we
       | get 12.5kg per kWh, almost five times denser for a proven
       | technology you can buy off the shelf. 4.4 tonnes for the larger
       | battery, compared to 9 tonnes for the smaller saltwater battery
       | sketched out in the draft, and 21 tonnes for the larger one.
       | That's 16.6 tonnes of additional life support the ship can carry;
       | stowing a ship is a classic knapsack problem, there's no such
       | thing as an "acceptable" amount of tonnage and volume to leave
       | out of the equation.
       | 
       | Using saltwater batteries here would be an ostentatious stunt.
       | Arguably that's what this whole thing is: an ostentatious stunt.
       | But it doesn't have to be, it's a good proving ground for much
       | larger sail ships, and a thousand tonnes here, a thousand tonnes
       | there, pretty soon you're talking about real cargo. Electricity
       | requirements should be very much sublinear with cargo capacity as
       | well.
        
         | _ph_ wrote:
         | Most yachts are switching to LiFePO, because they perform so
         | much better than any lead-based batteries. Haven't heard about
         | safety issues.
        
           | Teknoman117 wrote:
           | I still remember someone demonstrating the relative safety of
           | LiFePOs by driving a nail straight through one in front of
           | me.
           | 
           | The LiPo immediately started smoking and within a few seconds
           | erupted into flame, the LiFePo (an A123 cell) didn't really
           | do much of anything at all, other than no longer functioning.
        
         | rocqua wrote:
         | I think for ships of this size, fire is a bigger risk than
         | capsizing.
        
         | outworlder wrote:
         | > If lithium battery technology in general proves to be
         | unsustainable, we may as well pack up and go home, because
         | decarbonization isn't going to happen.
         | 
         | Exactly.
         | 
         | Lithium is not that uncommon. It's just that the reserves that
         | we have found (so far) where nature helpfully decided to
         | concentrate it for us are not very common. If we don't use
         | those, then it's expensive to extract (both in money and
         | energy). That's another argument for expanding renewables. Put
         | them to work to extract lithium from salt water.
         | 
         | Oil had a very similar argument, but we keep finding reserves
         | and devising ways to use previously uneconomical reserves.
         | 
         | Now, once extracted, we recover most of it when it comes time
         | for recycling. I bet older marine batteries would have plenty
         | of uses as second-life energy storage for stationary
         | applications. It may take decades until we even have to recycle
         | them.
         | 
         | > safety risks
         | 
         | As for the safety risks... One of the main ways to contain a
         | battery fire is to spray water on it. Is ocean water is too
         | salty(therefore, conductive) for this application?
        
         | lardo wrote:
         | I've never sailed in blue water, but I thought that modern
         | weather and navigation infrastructure mean bad weather can be
         | largely avoided. Either way fire on board is still something to
         | be avoided.
        
           | jgeada wrote:
           | Major storms can move faster than most sailboats can sail out
           | of the way.
        
           | samatman wrote:
           | The electricity still must be distributed around the ship.
           | 
           | Proper weatherproofing can easily make the battery the least
           | likely point of failure in the whole system.
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | Sure modern motorized merchant vessels generally route around
           | major named storms (except for rare tragedies like the SS El
           | Faro). But if you want to carry cargo reliably for paying
           | customers then you're going to have to sail into bad weather
           | occasionally. Winter weather in the North Atlantic is usually
           | bad and can change quickly. There's no avoiding it.
        
         | decafninja wrote:
         | Not a sailor nor a maritime expert by any means, but IIRC Japan
         | now has submarines that uses lithium-ion batteries to power
         | submerged movement. Granted it is mil-spec.
        
           | Someone wrote:
           | Yep. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-
           | ships/a344285...
        
       | puzzlingcaptcha wrote:
       | The most popular class of bulk carriers (some 70%) are the mid-
       | sized Handymax and Supramax with ~50 000 deadweight tons
       | capacity, while employing a similar-sized crew of ~15. I honestly
       | don't know what this clipper would need to carry to be
       | profitable.
       | 
       | https://maritime-connector.com/bulk-carrier/
        
         | samatman wrote:
         | Ecotourists, and premium goods which advertise their cutting-
         | edge sustainability.
        
       | aww_dang wrote:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP1f3Df6SXE
       | 
       | Maybe this kind of lifestyle appeals to enthusiasts, but I can't
       | see modern unions allowing some of the dangerous work out on the
       | sails.
        
         | tdfirth wrote:
         | Thanks for sharing this interview. I've seen about 10 minutes
         | so far and I'm hooked. I just love learning about lives that
         | are/were so different to mine.
        
         | mistrial9 wrote:
         | aargh - this is a step in the expansion of humanity on a planet
         | divided by vast oceans, a way of life, adventure and the actual
         | elements of air, water and sun..
         | 
         | a union rule book is .. what? boring!
        
           | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
           | It's a nice case of how anything can be 'just a job' to the
           | people doing it, at which point the people doing the work
           | really want safety at work, even if to outsiders it looks
           | like an adventure.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | I see no reason why most of the sail work couldn't be automated
         | and motorized.
        
           | aww_dang wrote:
           | Rigid wingsails make more sense than tall ships, unless you
           | are looking for nostalgia.
        
       | client4 wrote:
       | It's a bit tangential, but I enjoy Moxie's (of Signal) stories
       | relating to sailing. https://moxie.org/stories/together-two/
        
       | edeion wrote:
       | Tangent: thank you for the link, the whole website looks very
       | promising! That's a tremendous collection of articles on low
       | energy footprint. I've only skimmed through some of them but it's
       | a joy!
        
       | castaweh wrote:
       | I sailed cape to cape on the Bark Europa in 2018, and while we
       | did need to use the engines at times, there was a strong
       | preference to sail under wind power unless absolutely necessary.
       | Everyone in the crew was very much environmentally focused. On
       | the point about warm showers... It's pretty cold down there
       | around Antarctica!
       | 
       | I loved travelling with nothing but the wind powering us, and I'd
       | prefer to sail over flying, preventing a lot of emissions.
       | Unfortunately the world moves too fast now and we can't afford to
       | spend months at sea.
        
       | maCDzP wrote:
       | If you are interested in an account of how it was to sail tall
       | ships I can recommend "Around Cape Horn" [0]
       | 
       | If you are curious about sailing tall ships. And have the means.
       | Apply to one of these ships [1]. I have gone sailing a couple of
       | times and it's one of the most rewarding experiences I have had
       | so far.
       | 
       | [0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9tuTKhqWZso [1]
       | https://sailtraininginternational.org/sailtraining/
        
         | Lev1a wrote:
         | German documentaries about the "Peking"s journey home to
         | Germany from NYC [0] and then the restoration process itself
         | [1] in Germany. Unfortunately for international viewers there
         | are only auto-generated subtitles (and translations from those)
         | which from a quick look are just horrendous.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n11HVFKO0jA
         | 
         | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So609NxlTcw
        
         | lnwlebjel wrote:
         | You would probably enjoy the book _Two Years Before the Mast_
         | by Richard Henry Dana - an account of working on a tall ship in
         | the 1820 's (Boston - Cape Horn - California). It's a personal
         | favorite.
        
       | SubiculumCode wrote:
       | The website has a battery that indicated something was at ~83%.
       | Apparently it is the solar-powered battery that is running the
       | server. Cool.
        
       | luke2m wrote:
       | Imagine the irony if a tanker ship had sails.
        
         | yboris wrote:
         | "Oceanbird's huge 80-meter sails reduce cargo shipping
         | emissions by 90%"
         | 
         | https://newatlas.com/marine/oceanbird-wallenius-wing-sail-ca...
        
           | meepmorp wrote:
           | Hypothetically. They've not built such a beast.
        
       | atlantageek wrote:
       | I struggle with this whole article. It implies keeping a sailing
       | ship labor intensive just with a few electric winches. Wing Sails
       | seem like a better approach and I assume they are much less labor
       | intensive.
        
         | jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
         | You're spot on. I've followed this topic area for some years
         | out of curiosity. Saildrone style wingsails only require a very
         | small electric actuator to move a control surface. The control
         | surface sets the overall net angle of attack of the assembly.
         | The wing tracks the wind, only needing the control surface
         | changed as the bow crosses the wind.
         | 
         | A system like this can be entirely labor free.
         | 
         | Tall ships on the other hand... I don't care how many electric
         | winches you have, they'll always require massive numbers of
         | people for sail handling.
        
         | irishjohnnie wrote:
         | Yup. OceanWings by VPLP
         | https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/vplp-design-signs-its-f...
        
       | hyko wrote:
       | _It is surprisingly difficult to build a carbon neutral sailing
       | ship_ ... _if_ you somehow rule out using wood, because "some of
       | the trees might not grow back". Utter bullshit!
        
       | silicaroach wrote:
       | Finally, a proper look at the cost in most respects of the real
       | cost of a 'sustainable' technology. We need more of these but no
       | one will pay nor pay attention.
       | 
       | Unfortunately though, sail driven ships are kind of useless for
       | the efficient movement of cargo. Masts are required and take away
       | stowage space and, more importantly, make efficient cargo
       | loading/unloading impossible. Read the book "The Box" to
       | understand the changes brought about in cargo shipping over the
       | last century.
        
         | aclatuts wrote:
         | Tanker boats could probably use sails without loading and
         | unloading getting in the way. I would imagine it's just hoses
         | and pumps to get the liquid out.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Exactly, and these are precisely the vessels that can most
           | handle slower transfer speeds - as you just have more
           | sailboats to make up for slower speeds/smaller sizes. All
           | that matters is how many arrive each day, as the cargo is
           | fungible.
           | 
           | In fact, doing such would provide a buffer that could help
           | prevent supply shocks.
        
             | TylerE wrote:
             | At what point does the additional resource of building a
             | lot more ships (which have more crew, eating more food,
             | producing more waste) result in a net negative?
             | 
             | Oceangoing ships have a relatively short useful life...salt
             | water is rough on metal.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | I suppose the upper limit would be when it's possible to
               | make an ocean-wide winch system and you can just hook
               | barges to it and pull them across the ocean.
        
               | jasonschlatt wrote:
               | Just hook containers to it like cable-cars and move them
               | across.
        
         | vanderZwan wrote:
         | Instead of sails we could try other methods, like kites, or
         | that weird turning-metal column effect. To name two serious
         | proposals I've seen
        
           | minitoar wrote:
           | I assume you're referring to the Coanda effect.
        
             | prideout wrote:
             | I think rotor sails leverage the Magnus effect, not the
             | Coanda effect.
        
           | krisoft wrote:
           | Good news on the "weird turning-metal column effect" front:
           | they just installed five tilting rotor sails on a newlybuilt
           | bulk ore carrier.
           | 
           | https://gcaptain.com/newbuild-vale-vloc-revealed-as-bulk-
           | car...
           | 
           | Why is this important? It shows that the ship owners has seen
           | enough promise in the technology to overcome the potential
           | risks. If it works out well for them we will very likely see
           | wider adoption.
        
             | loudmax wrote:
             | From that article:
             | 
             | "If the pilot proves effective, it is estimated that at
             | least 40% of the fleet will be able to use the technology,
             | which would result in a reduction of almost 1.5% of Vale's
             | annual iron ore maritime transport emissions."
             | 
             | Well, that's a step in the right direction so something to
             | be applauded. But taken alone, an emissions reduction of
             | "almost 1.5%" isn't going to save the planet.
        
             | naravara wrote:
             | How does this work? The article assumes I should already
             | know the mechanics of it, but googling only seems to turn
             | up a bunch of the same sorts of articles.
        
               | krisoft wrote:
               | I'm not an expert on it really. They rotate the giant
               | cylinder and the wind is blowing by. The rotation forms a
               | low pressure zone one side of the cylinder which acts as
               | a lift force perpendicular both to the rotational axis of
               | the cylinder and the wind.
               | 
               | It's the same effect which "turns" a soccer ball if you
               | kick it with a spin. There is a really nice demonstration
               | of the effect in this video:
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OSrvzNW9FE
               | 
               | This wikipedia page has a way better summary than my
               | attempt above: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_ship
        
       | aivisol wrote:
       | > However, by definition, the sailing ship is not a carbon
       | neutral technology. For most of history, sailing ships were built
       | from wood, but back then whole forests were felled for ships, and
       | those trees often did not grow back.
       | 
       | I do not understand this sentence. If I cut down a tree and do
       | not burn it, isn't it a carbon neutral process? It did not
       | release any carbon into atmosphere. By this logic is there any
       | material to use to build something which is neutral?
        
         | faichai wrote:
         | It will eventually rot and release its captured carbon.
        
           | LeifCarrotson wrote:
           | All trees, even those which are not cut down for constructing
           | a sailing ship, also eventually rot and release _most of_
           | their captured carbon. Only those which are burned
           | efficiently in a high-oxygen environment turn completely into
           | CO2.
           | 
           | In a natural forest, it's true that a tiny fraction of this
           | biomass derived from atmospheric CO2 rots incompletely on the
           | forest floor and is turned into a small amount of carbon-rich
           | soil, but this process is glacially slow. [1] suggests
           | single-digit grams per square meter per year. Rotting on the
           | seafloor may or may not be any better or worse.
           | 
           | Relatedly, carbon sequestration projects have biological
           | carbon intake as one option. Instead of using industrial-
           | scale chemical or electrical reactions to pull carbon from
           | the atmosphere, use photosynthesis. Grow some trees, process
           | them into ethanol and graphite, and bury the carbon-rich
           | waste forever.
           | 
           | [1]: DOI:10.1007/978-3-540-92706-8_11 https://www.researchgat
           | e.net/publication/225314103_Soil_Carb...
        
             | dtech wrote:
             | Tree contains X Co2 => Tree gets cut down without
             | replacement => ship gets made and rots => X Co2 releases
             | into atmosphere. Net Co2 = +X
             | 
             | Tree contains X Co2 => Tree dies => New tree grows in
             | opened up space. Net Co2 = 0
        
               | marcinzm wrote:
               | Why do you assume the tree would not be replaced, we
               | plant more trees than we cut down nowadays for example.
               | The only reason to not replant the tree is if the land
               | was being used for something but then the tree would have
               | been cut down anyway ship or not.
        
               | rocqua wrote:
               | The original quote at the top of this thread says that
               | ships were build from trees that were felled _and not
               | replaced_. The discussion started from that assumption.
        
               | socialdemocrat wrote:
               | Anyone interested in a fair comparison should point out
               | the error of that comparison. Using wood in a managed
               | forest it's not a bad thing. It's greatly preferable to
               | extracting coal and oil.
        
           | socialdemocrat wrote:
           | So what? That's part of the natural CO2 cycle. The problem
           | isn't carbon dioxide. The problem is adding CO2 from fossil
           | fuels. As long as there is a net growth forest there is no
           | problem. Just make sure you replant trees cut down. It is
           | more important that we start extracting coal and oil.
        
         | Gupie wrote:
         | Yes, and it is not releasing fossil carbon.
        
         | AtlasBarfed wrote:
         | Plus, it's my impression (it could be very effective marketing
         | by the lumber industry) that lumber trees are quickly grown and
         | chopped in farms and controlled logging. And the next tree is
         | planted.
         | 
         | I'd guess that construction is probably a pretty good sequester
         | for the wood/carbon in terms of length of service, and
         | likelihood for controlled recycling or burial after its done.
         | 
         | The logging industry is likely incented to maximize the carbon
         | sequestration rate: which is growing trees producing future
         | lumber.
        
         | tantalor wrote:
         | "by definition" of what? Carbon neutral or sailing ship?
         | Neither term is defined in the article, and neither
         | interpretation makes any sense.
        
         | tofuahdude wrote:
         | The tree is no longer alive to photosynthesize co2.
        
           | c06n wrote:
           | It only takes up Co2 in its growth phase, not afterwards.
        
             | aidenn0 wrote:
             | That seems intuitively true, but apparently it's still
             | debated whether old- or new-growth forests are more carbon-
             | negative.
        
               | socialdemocrat wrote:
               | It is really only a debate about when exactly trees stop
               | growing and consuming CO2. Given enough time, sooner or
               | later the tree isn't consuming CO2. At that point there
               | is no point in leaving the tree standing. Cut it down and
               | let a new tree grow there.
        
           | TeMPOraL wrote:
           | Yes, but a tree that isn't growing isn't trapping much carbon
           | dioxide either.
        
           | citrin_ru wrote:
           | A tree cannot live forever. Once it is dead all (or almost
           | all) accumulated carbon slowly released back into atmosphere
           | as CO2 by bacteria. So cutting trees and preserving them from
           | decay is a carbon negative process in a long run.
        
             | abfan1127 wrote:
             | how is it carbon negative? wouldn't it be neutral? unless
             | the trees were sent underground to prevent release into the
             | atmosphere? or became petrified?
        
               | goodpoint wrote:
               | Correct: to make a change we would have to bury millions
               | of tons of valuable wood deep enough that the co2 stays
               | trapped. In short, it would be the opposite of extracting
               | and burning oil.
        
               | socialdemocrat wrote:
               | If I keep cutting down and re-growing trees on the same
               | plot of land over and over again I will reduce the total
               | CO2 in the atmosphere as long as the cut down trees are
               | not burned or rot. You can avoid that by building houses
               | for instance. Or boats.
        
         | counters wrote:
         | The thought could be that in "tree form", the material
         | contributes to the net uptake of carbon from the atmosphere, so
         | once it is harvested that negative flux on the balance sheet
         | shifts equilibrium more towards lower or net negative uptake.
         | It's relative.
        
           | Aperocky wrote:
           | That's not true though, the tree stop growing at a certain
           | point and is really carbon neutral until it dies and decays
           | into the ground and new ones replace it.
           | 
           | By removing trees and planting new ones, this process is sped
           | up and more carbon is removed from atmosphere.
        
             | naravara wrote:
             | During the age of sail most of those forests were cut down
             | and turned into farms or pasture-land. So there was a net
             | increase in carbon emission just from the expansion in
             | human activity.
        
               | socialdemocrat wrote:
               | If you were going to build a farm there anyway, then it's
               | better to build a ship out of that wood than to burn it
               | down.
        
       | forgotpwd16 wrote:
       | Discussed few days ago:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27128257
        
         | carapace wrote:
         | One of the comments there (
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27138310 ) pointed out
         | this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2WKJtbm8yM about a
         | project to build a cargo ship:
         | 
         | > This is a summary of our story so far, from building the
         | shipyard to shipbuilding. The film follows the progress made by
         | SAILCARGO INC. a young organisation emerging from the mangroves
         | of Costa Rica, with the bold aim to change how the world goes
         | about international shipping.
         | 
         | https://www.sailcargo.org
         | 
         | > Building Ceiba: 45m Square-Topsail Cargo Schooner
         | 
         | > We are a group of shipwrights, carpenters, business
         | professionals and sailors. Ceiba is our effort to inspire
         | change in the industry to which we have devoted our lives.
         | Ceiba is a sustainably-constructed vessel that will carry
         | cargo, 100% emission-free. When operational in 2022 she will be
         | the world's largest, active, clean ocean-going cargo vessel.
         | She will elevate the existing sail cargo movement to a new
         | level while bringing attention to the harmful and pollutive
         | practices of the global shipping industry.
         | 
         | (I have no idea if it's practical, but it's _wonderfully
         | romantic_ and I love it!)
        
       | exolymph wrote:
       | Recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27128257
        
       | thinkingkong wrote:
       | There are types of sails or wind power that have been
       | investigated to reduce carbon output / efficiency of tankers but
       | they never seem to have been deployed at scale in any sense.
       | Basically a kite-surfing tanker.
       | 
       | It seems like until we get tiny compact fusion energy we'll
       | always end up running off the cheapest oil products, as they make
       | the most sense economically. Without any actual incentive to
       | switch, not a single shipping company will.
        
         | AtlasBarfed wrote:
         | LFTR: it's almost everything you want from fusion but can do
         | now.
         | 
         | Scales down for the size No meltdown/overload No proliferation
         | risk
         | 
         | But... artificial fuels are probably the (at least) carbon
         | neutral path forward for shipping and aviation.
        
       | llsf wrote:
       | Maybe we could revisit what SkySails started
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySails
        
       | saadalem wrote:
       | Hundredrabbits are traveling on a sailor ship while working on
       | OSS and many projects, they are also providing many informations
       | about their 1982 boat and about sailing and how they are
       | providing electricity from solar power etc..
       | 
       | https://100r.co/site/sailing.html
        
         | canadianfella wrote:
         | What is a sailor ship?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-17 23:01 UTC)