55
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
55 points (93.7% liked)
Europe
3879 readers
43 users here now
Europa
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
If his alternative was boat, from what I've read, they aren't really better...
That's common misinformation you've heard. Sure, the global footprint of cargo ships is very high. But if you look at the CO2 per ton-kilometer, even the dirty ships are 20-30x more efficient than brand new airplanes.
Ships emit a lot globally because they carry an insane amount of cargo around. There's just no way whatsoever to carry as much on planes.
It should also be noted that, due to absurd economies of scale, international production can often still be more environmentally efficient than local production for some items, even if they have to be shipped halfway across the world.
But we're talking about passengers, not cargo, so the relevant numbers are CO2 per passenger-km.
Which changes the efficiency - because while you can cram people tightly for a 12h flight, you can't do that for a few weeks journey.
https://travelandclimate.org/transport-calculations
https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2006/dec/20/cruises.green
Not when you're hitching a ride on a cargo ship, no, like the person you're replying to said.
But that's not a real alternative - you can't redirect all isn't traffic to hitch a ride in cargo ships.
IMO the main problem with cargo ships is that the bunker oil they use is super dirty (in terms of NOx, SOx, and particulate emissions), not that it's inefficient in terms of CO2 per ton-kilometer. (That said, there's still room for improvement on the latter, by using sails -- either the traditional kind or the newfangled computer-controlled kite sails.)
Sounds more like he was hitching a ride on a cargo ship that was already going that direction.