@@DatawaveMarineSolutions I want to own a small sail boat/motor sailer. I'm afraid of ongoing maintenance costs! But anyway, what amazes me is the ships that have expansion built into them! now this is probably occurring at centre of G, but it still must be a engineering masterpiece to be two totally different lengths and be efficient!
so IFO 380 and IFO 180 Fuel prices are going to drop? Because of the regulation, these fuels will become illegal for use on ships unless they build scrubbers, so the demand for these fuels will drop lowering the price
I guess not only do these videos get attention for your company, but also raise awareness of issues in prospective customers so that they understand an issue and thus not requiring you to go back to basics every time. You could probably tell a few stories about customers that would not listen along the lines of "I need you to sign the papers not lecture me"
Scrubbers that wash the sulphur into the sea kind of defeat the point behind the IMO regulation... I'm glad to see that not all ships went that cheap route.
I doubt that we will see fuel prices rise sufficiently to justify nuclear propulsion on cargo ships. But I'm not a nuclear engineer. My perception is that putting nukes on ships is still high risk and expensive. Some nuclear engineers may counter that we have new technology like thorium molten-salt reactors that could reduce that cost. But I doubt the mariners would go for it. In reality, I expect the fuel prices to once again stabilize after some time. Ship owners are rapidly installing exhaust gas scrubbers, which will allow them to return again to burning heavy fuel oil. But it takes time. The main manufacturers can only provide so many scrubbers per year, and there are a lot of ships out there.
@@DatawaveMarineSolutions I'm not very positive about nuclear marine propulsion either, at least outside of a small number of military vessels. With thousands of nuclear powered, large ships running all over the world, a disaster is inevitable. Reactors themselves can be made very safe, on land, sitting inside a big containment structure, but the sea can always break a ship, and then it can get to work breaking the reactor and leaching out and dissolving all those lovely fission products. I don't believe anyone who thinks he can design a reactor that can sit on the seafloor for centuries and hold all that in. The sea always wins eventually. If we really have to stop running our civilization on ancient dead plants one of these days, I think biofuels, or synthetic fuels are how we'll be powering our ships.
Putting reactors on a ship is expensive, the cost of getting them out and scrapped should be exorbitant. After a lifetime of operations the metal inside the reactor core has been activated and used fuel rods are orders of magnitude more reactive than fresh ones. Even most land based nuclear powerplants should not make a profit if you include all of the follow up costs. An accident on sea would probably be not as disastrous as one on land, because water is so good at shielding radioactivity that it is used in reactors to do exactly that. However every sailor on board would need a background check and you need a security parameter once in harbour. The navy can do that but probably not a private company. That being said, i think the NS Savannah is absolutely gorgeous.
In future we will see smaller faster cargo ship fuel not a factor flying cost shipping near free, so quad hull sway w/foils 2 & 2 per side w/4 shafts propellers 2 inside & impellers 2 outside. Add the air ship fans on back & some kind of water like skit & u could get cargo moving 39 knots all over the globe not flying jack shit. BC u go after the worst polluters most wasteful 1st that is planes by a tremendous long margin absolute worst way to move ppl & esp cargo.
If u combine the best of sway only 4 not 2 for wt, & foils, & best low speed propeller design & 2 best impellers to help steer & floating skits w/air ship lift & 2 airship motors for choppy seas use u will get mind blowing leap forward efficiency. Even travelers not rushing around enslaved will chose ship leaving daily over flying prison who knows if leaving weather wise or if your stuff gets there w/u, all of 1 bag for month long travel fat chance. The shipper gets to revenue streams making go amount lower level passenger travel & makes ok on cargo stored main deck top side. Amount of cargo that normally moves place to place on day to day need, or u go next day no big deal. Even fruits can wt 1 day, & bc smaller easier to load & off load any where closer to spot where cargo actual going not fucking terminal wrong side of city or island.
All truckers should be burning nat gas or propane, bc we hve nat gas & it is faction of cost & fraction of pollution & when hydrogen is added to propane or nat gas info structure u can drive for free God/ JBM My world my rules. U done force ppl to switch the wrong way u force them to switch right way the gets them where we r going free fuel for all so cheap not even a factor any more God JBM my birth right my planet my rules.
Why do I keep watching these video? I don't even own canoe, and never mind a ship! ;-p
Whether you own one or not, boats are awesome!
@@DatawaveMarineSolutions I want to own a small sail boat/motor sailer. I'm afraid of ongoing maintenance costs!
But anyway, what amazes me is the ships that have expansion built into them! now this is probably occurring at centre of G, but it still must be a engineering masterpiece to be two totally different lengths and be efficient!
Entertaining and informative, great job!
so IFO 380 and IFO 180 Fuel prices are going to drop? Because of the regulation, these fuels will become illegal for use on ships unless they build scrubbers, so the demand for these fuels will drop lowering the price
So, in Jan 2020 the price if diesel is likely to rise. Kerosene too?
I guess not only do these videos get attention for your company, but also raise awareness of issues in prospective customers so that they understand an issue and thus not requiring you to go back to basics every time. You could probably tell a few stories about customers that would not listen along the lines of "I need you to sign the papers not lecture me"
Scrubbers that wash the sulphur into the sea kind of defeat the point behind the IMO regulation... I'm glad to see that not all ships went that cheap route.
“We can decide what 2020 will involve” rip
Is this the right time to reconsider nuclear propulsion for cargo ships?
I doubt that we will see fuel prices rise sufficiently to justify nuclear propulsion on cargo ships. But I'm not a nuclear engineer. My perception is that putting nukes on ships is still high risk and expensive. Some nuclear engineers may counter that we have new technology like thorium molten-salt reactors that could reduce that cost. But I doubt the mariners would go for it.
In reality, I expect the fuel prices to once again stabilize after some time. Ship owners are rapidly installing exhaust gas scrubbers, which will allow them to return again to burning heavy fuel oil. But it takes time. The main manufacturers can only provide so many scrubbers per year, and there are a lot of ships out there.
@@DatawaveMarineSolutions I'm not very positive about nuclear marine propulsion either, at least outside of a small number of military vessels. With thousands of nuclear powered, large ships running all over the world, a disaster is inevitable. Reactors themselves can be made very safe, on land, sitting inside a big containment structure, but the sea can always break a ship, and then it can get to work breaking the reactor and leaching out and dissolving all those lovely fission products. I don't believe anyone who thinks he can design a reactor that can sit on the seafloor for centuries and hold all that in. The sea always wins eventually.
If we really have to stop running our civilization on ancient dead plants one of these days, I think biofuels, or synthetic fuels are how we'll be powering our ships.
Putting reactors on a ship is expensive, the cost of getting them out and scrapped should be exorbitant.
After a lifetime of operations the metal inside the reactor core has been activated and used fuel rods are orders of magnitude more reactive than fresh ones.
Even most land based nuclear powerplants should not make a profit if you include all of the follow up costs.
An accident on sea would probably be not as disastrous as one on land, because water is so good at shielding radioactivity that it is used in reactors to do exactly that.
However every sailor on board would need a background check and you need a security parameter once in harbour.
The navy can do that but probably not a private company.
That being said, i think the NS Savannah is absolutely gorgeous.
the rear lifting foils should be a biplane wing design speed slow drag not real a big deal.
In future we will see smaller faster cargo ship fuel not a factor flying cost shipping near free, so quad hull sway w/foils 2 & 2 per side w/4 shafts propellers 2 inside & impellers 2 outside. Add the air ship fans on back & some kind of water like skit & u could get cargo moving 39 knots all over the globe not flying jack shit. BC u go after the worst polluters most wasteful 1st that is planes by a tremendous long margin absolute worst way to move ppl & esp cargo.
If u combine the best of sway only 4 not 2 for wt, & foils, & best low speed propeller design & 2 best impellers to help steer & floating skits w/air ship lift & 2 airship motors for choppy seas use u will get mind blowing leap forward efficiency. Even travelers not rushing around enslaved will chose ship leaving daily over flying prison who knows if leaving weather wise or if your stuff gets there w/u, all of 1 bag for month long travel fat chance. The shipper gets to revenue streams making go amount lower level passenger travel & makes ok on cargo stored main deck top side. Amount of cargo that normally moves place to place on day to day need, or u go next day no big deal. Even fruits can wt 1 day, & bc smaller easier to load & off load any where closer to spot where cargo actual going not fucking terminal wrong side of city or island.
All truckers should be burning nat gas or propane, bc we hve nat gas & it is faction of cost & fraction of pollution & when hydrogen is added to propane or nat gas info structure u can drive for free God/ JBM My world my rules. U done force ppl to switch the wrong way u force them to switch right way the gets them where we r going free fuel for all so cheap not even a factor any more God JBM my birth right my planet my rules.