gump":3ojewz2d said:
When you have tankers that use thousands of times the amount of fuel than cars at much less efficiency than cars, this is just one example that if someone really gave a shit about the environment they would look to improve efficiency.
Actually the shipping sector is rather green and has been steadily imroving it's green credentials since the late 60's.
A 1970 built container ship burned 180 tonnes per day to move 1500 containers at 28 knots.
A 2000 built container ship uses 160 tonnes per day to move 4500 containers at 26 knots.
That is one hell of an improvment, still using low speed 2 stroke diesel technology. (by low speed I mean 80rpm, 1 meter bore x 6 meter stroke).
Compare the performance vs fuel economy or the Jaguar XK8 and the E type and it is a bit disappointing in comparison.
The IMO has just introduced MARPOL Annex VI requiring a massive reduction in particulate and NOx / SOx emmissions. The engine producers have responded with direct injection, water injection and variable geometry turbocharger blades to give a cleaner burn. Ship owners are buying more expensive lighter oils to burn.
The MARPOL convention on oil pollution has cleaned up the worlds oceans and harbours beyond beleif. No one I work with at sea would pump oil or dirty water over the side, it is all sent ashore to be reclaimed and re refined.
I agree with all the other comments. If anyone gave a damn about the environment rail travel would be free and you would pay 1/2 price council tax if you lived within 1 mile of your work place.
I am currently using the train to get to and from London twice a month. It costs me nearly twice what it did when I drove my Volvo 740 (hardly a paragon of economy!). It is irritating and makes me want to buy a car again, hardly the government's intention!
