this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2024
1259 points (99.1% liked)

Science Memes

11397 readers
1816 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 94 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Some of these ships would carry green hydrogen and new lithium batteries and old lithium batteries (to be recycled) and whatnot. Also at least some oil would be still needed for fine chemicals like meds or (idk what's proper english term for that) large scale organic synthesis like plastics, or even straight distillates like hexane (for edible oil extraction) or lubricants. Some of usual non-energy uses of oil can be easily substituted with enough energy like with nitrogen fertilizers but some can't

[–] UsernameHere 68 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

We aren’t consuming batteries anywhere near the rate we consume oil and coal. Hydrogen even less than batteries.

So the amount of ships needed would still be a fraction of what we use now.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (3 children)

not now, but if hydrogen were to be used as an energy source/storage, then it'd be used plenty. same with batteries

[–] InverseParallax 27 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

We can make hydrogen everywhere, we can't 'make oil'.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Yeah, there's no reason to be transporting hydrogen long distances. You can make it anywhere that has water and electricity. And if you've transitioned to a hydrogen based economy (which is a big if), ships wouldn't run on oil any more anyway, so there's no problem there.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (6 children)

there absolutely is? What if i can buy hydrogen at 1$ per ton, from the hydrogen production empire, meanwhile in the manufacturing empire hydrogen is produced at 2$ per ton. Economically, it would make sense to buy that hydrogen from the hydrogen production empire.

It's not going to be as significant as a trade as something like coal and LNG obviously, but the market IS going to do this in some capacity. And it's a beneficial thing for everybody.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah but your electricity also needs to be produced by reusable manners, which commonly results in solar power. And since the intensity of solar rays and the amount of sunny hours per day vary on the global scale there are some countries which are capable of producing more hydrogen and cheaper than producing locally. I know that the German government is looking at Marocco to establish a hydrogen production and import.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

you really think this is going to stop the globalism aspect from happening? If you can ship something, and get better market rates on it, you're going to do it. Economics follows the cheapest route, not the most efficient.

It also just makes sense if you think about it. Places like alaska are going to struggle to generate green energy compared to another place like, texas for example. If you can ship in green hydrogen much cheaper than you can locally produce energy, why wouldn't you? It's a reasonable solution to the problem of supply and demand scaling.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

no we can't make hydrogen everywhere, there will be regions with large excess of renewable energy compared to population. these places could export hydrogen. you also don't need a lot of transport if crude is extracted near place where it's used, like for example heavy crude from alberta

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] grandkaiser 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We absolutely can 'make oil'. Been doing it since world war II. Synthetic oil is extremely common.

[–] InverseParallax 6 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I mean, yeah, but also, that's not really efficient or effective for burning.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] someguy3 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

And oil for Styrofoam. And met coal for steel.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

There's alternative processes, and if you avoid burning oil and coal for fuel you can basically do all that with the amount of oil that's in easy reach instead of using tar sands or drilling into even more difficult to reach places.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife 37 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Fun fact: through the 1800s coal-powered steamships mostly replaced sailing vessels for the transportation of people and time-sensitive cargo around the world. But steamships were highly inefficient and required frequent re-coaling, and locally available coal was dirtier and contained less thermal energy than the good stuff that Britain (who was doing by far most of the shipping) got from Wales and other places on their island. Because steamships could not efficiently and cheaply haul the coal that they needed around the world to restock the coaling stations, this was done instead by an enormous fleet of sailing colliers. So the "steam revolution" of the 1800s was actually a steam/wind-power hybrid. It wasn't until the advent of triple- and quadruple-expansion steam engines, turbines, and greatly improved boilers in the early 1900s that steam-powered vessels could efficiently and economically haul their own fuel. And even with that, wind-powered cargo vessels remained economically viable and operating in significant numbers right up until the start of WWII (that's II, not I).

A great read is The Last Grain Race by Eric Newby, about his time as a sailor aboard Moshulu (a large steel sail-powered cargo ship) in 1938-1939. Moshulu went on to star in The Godfather Part II as the ship which brings young Vito Corleone to New York, and is now weirdly enough a floating restaurant in my city of Philadelphia (I've never eaten there but I want to).

[–] roguetrick 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

These chairs they have inside it would make me not want to eat there.

[–] LovableSidekick 35 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Won't someone think of the seamen?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm constantly thinking of seamen

[–] WhatYouNeed 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Capt'n Pugwash and Seaman Stains will both be out of jobs.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Don't forget, Roger the cabin boy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Anyone know how much of the oil transported is actually used for plastic, percentage wise?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (5 children)

correct me if I'm wrong, but the United States doesn't even have oil refineries that are capable of making gasoline out of American oil? like we need the type of oil that the middle East has, so we're constantly trading oil back and forth even though we have plenty of it

I think I've heard this is true. something about politicians wanting to look environmentalist and therefore preventing the building of any more refineries

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

it's also to do with prices. There is a certain amount of this that is true, but the primary reason is oil prices.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

yeah from what people are telling me, we have the capability of processing lower quality crude oil so it makes more sense to export our high quality stuff, then buy the cheap stuff since we can already refine it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

yeah thats pretty much the TL;DR here. It's complicated since oil is complicated and there isn't really a "insert oil" oil to talk about, there are a lot of variations of it, and a lot of ways to refine it, and a lot of different resultant products from it as well.

The fact that the modern petro industry even works is kind of insane.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] seeyouatthepartyrichter 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So what you’re saying is the companies that own those boats will lobby the government so that this never happens? Sweet.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

actually, it's already happening, why do you think LNG is such a massive export from the US right now?

[–] M600 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Now I’m waiting for the news report,

“Green Energy will cost jobs!”

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

yeah, free market economies baby, making everything more efficient!

[–] Redex68 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah but if I'm not mistaken, emissions from shipping are quite low anyways. It's something like 2-5℅ of all our emissions, so it's pretty low priority.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Idk man 5% sure sounds a hell of a lot better than 0%

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›