12 to 15 percent more efficient because you eliminate people? And where is the part where a miricle occurs and the laws of physics are modified?
The efficiency and pollution problem with cargo ships can't be fixed with more crgo ships. That's just insane. Build a dedicated high-speed nuclear, wind and solar powered high speed cargo train connecting the US coasts and the gulf. This alone would eliminate some ten thousand cargo ships per year making the trek through the Panama Canal. During this trek they burn over a million dollars of bunker fuel, the nastiest most polluting fuel you can burn.
Methinks this is just one of those "let's burn government money 'cause they don't know any better" scams. Not the first time.
"By replacing the bridge -- along with the other systems that support the crew, such as electricity, air conditioning, water and sewage..."
It's not just eliminating people. It's eliminating the whole bridge, and adding more cargo. And the 12 to 15 percent number might be a "fuel per unit of cargo" number, not necessarily "total fuel per boat".
"Build a dedicated high-speed nuclear, wind and solar powered high speed cargo train connecting the US coasts and the gulf"
Who do you propose pays for this, the government which "don't now any better"? Private companies?
If this was actually cheaper than burning a million dollars of fuel, they would have done it already.
And I doubt trains could carry nearly as much cargo as a large cargo ship.
Of course I did. And I am disputing these numbers.
The Maersk triple e class cargo ships can carry 18,000 containers. There is no way removing crew quarters will make room for another 1,800. For one thing, even an autonomous ship must have the ability to be crewed from onboard due to safety/emergency considerations. It's a pipe dream, a stunt, just like Amazon delivering packages in a busy city using drones.
The hydrodynamic drag of these ships by far overwhelms the cost equation. The only way you are going to save 10% is by slowing down. And you can do that just fine with a crew. In fact, this is precisely what they do to control costs. I did extensive research on this topic about three years ago. If I remember correctly, the trip from Shaghai to Europe through the Suez canal takes approximately 32 days. When fuel costs spiked cargo ships slowed down to make the same trip in sixty days in order to control costs.
I could be wrong, of course. Based on what i know I just don't see how automation could make such an impact. The 800 pound gorilla isn't the crew quarters, it's physics.
Also, slowing down with a crew means continuing to pay them for the extra days. Slowing down w/out one should not incur significant extra costs, making it worthwhile to do so.
You are trying to support a position that is simply not supportable. The cost of the crew is a mere rounding error when you consider fuel, insurance and other costs. I don't have the time to dig up my research from several years ago for all the details. As an example, I remember that crossing the Panama Canal costs several hundred thousand dollars for a PANAMAX class ship.
This whole idea of slowing down the ships doesn't work because there's an asymptotic function attached to that idea. You can't wait half a year for 20,000 containers to get from China to Europe or the US. Business can't be conducted effectively when delivery times start getting ridiculous. Sixty days from China to Europe was horribly painful and it hurt business and economies in multiple ways.
Again, I could be wrong. I'd like to read more. From my current vantage point this is as viable an idea as delivering books in Manhattan using drones.
Assuming the New Panamax toll is similar to the 2011 toll of $72/TEU listed at https://www.pancanal.com/eng/op/tolls.html gives about $400,000 for a crossing. This corresponds to 10 days of sailing. Note that there's another day for transit.
To double check, the Panama Canal saves about 13,000 km of travel. Slow steaming is about 35 km/hour, or about 15 days of sailing. Thus, for the cost of 11 days of sailing one can save 14 days, making the Panama Canal fee entirely reasonable.
The efficiency and pollution problem with cargo ships can't be fixed with more crgo ships. That's just insane. Build a dedicated high-speed nuclear, wind and solar powered high speed cargo train connecting the US coasts and the gulf. This alone would eliminate some ten thousand cargo ships per year making the trek through the Panama Canal. During this trek they burn over a million dollars of bunker fuel, the nastiest most polluting fuel you can burn.
Methinks this is just one of those "let's burn government money 'cause they don't know any better" scams. Not the first time.