Shiping represents about 10% of the 25% of global carbon emissions from transportation, so 2.5%, similar to aviation. Yes, it’s a problem but it’s not the boogeyman you seem to think it is.
The problem is A+B+C+D+E+F+G+H+I+J+K+L+M+N+O+P+Q+R+S+T+U+V+W+X+Y+Z+A1+B1 … etc.
We need to change everything. Everything needs a reduction. AND we need to build massive nuclear CO2 extraction facilities that generate synthetic fuels for the places where we need energy density, seeded with carbon captured from the few places where we still release.
And we can do it. It won’t even be that expensive, certainly not as expensive as we fear, once we get going.
But we lack the will. Things need to get a lot worse before we will get our asses in gear.
Everything needs a reduction. AND we need to build massive nuclear CO2 extraction facilities that generate synthetic fuels for the places where we need to energy density seeded with carbon captured in the few places where we still release.
What will actually happen is the rich people will get choice land in the areas still stable. The rest of us will be fighting for scraps and erecting shanty towns.
My point is less regarding the fact that it’s a big boogeyman… The point I’m trying to hit on here is that everyone is focused on personal responsibility with their own CO2 emissions and entire sectors have made zero progress, and they’re left completely out of the conversation.
We’re not going to solve the problem with a single solution. Its simply too large of an issue for that. We also can’t be entirely complacent on any factor. While consumer vehicles are a nontrivial contribution, it’s the same for global shipping; while there’s still a lot to do with personal vehicles before we’re on the right track, it seems to me that there’s been zero effort from global logistics to curb their diesel engine vessels on the open seas.
In addition to this, I’m always curious where the data for sites like the one you linked, actually comes from, not because I think it’s wrong, but because I’m wondering if it’s incomplete. It’s easy to simply ask each country for their emissions numbers, do a bit of addition and call it a day, but does that include emissions created in international waters? I don’t know. Do you?
Again, I’m not doubting the numbers, I’m just wondering if companies have tried to find loopholes to hide their emissions… And it’s 100% the companies that would do it too.
There are lots of folks working on maritime (and aviation) decarbonization, it’s not being ignored. It’s just harder than decarbonozing other sectors because they can’t just electrify like you and I can do with our cars and homes. The solution is likely to be synthetic fuels of some sort, ammonia, hydrogen, biodiesel, etc. We’re seeing sails come back, there have been innovation hull designs, etc. You could even call tarrifs a partial solution here because building locally reduces shipping needs. It’s just not as cheap/easy as installing solar panels/wind/batteries though. We need policy to drive change here, which puts it on a different level than the personal responsibility measures. I absolutely agree we need to do all of the above though.
As to the source, I don’t know but it’s cited in government records everywhere. They have a good handle of how much fuel is produced everywhere, we know exactly what ships exist and where they go in real time globally, we know how efficient they are, so it doesn’t seem nebulous enough to me to have any real doubt in. NASA can probably track all their emissions from space too.
These are good points. I always thought hydrogen fuel cells had a good application in vessels like this, but I don’t have any power over what’s decided there.
Thank you for the engagement. I think for the most part we just agreed that problems exist.
Shiping represents about 10% of the 25% of global carbon emissions from transportation, so 2.5%, similar to aviation. Yes, it’s a problem but it’s not the boogeyman you seem to think it is.
https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport
100% this.
The problem isn’t X. Or Y. Or W.
The problem is A+B+C+D+E+F+G+H+I+J+K+L+M+N+O+P+Q+R+S+T+U+V+W+X+Y+Z+A1+B1 … etc.
We need to change everything. Everything needs a reduction. AND we need to build massive nuclear CO2 extraction facilities that generate synthetic fuels for the places where we need energy density, seeded with carbon captured from the few places where we still release.
And we can do it. It won’t even be that expensive, certainly not as expensive as we fear, once we get going.
But we lack the will. Things need to get a lot worse before we will get our asses in gear.
What will actually happen is the rich people will get choice land in the areas still stable. The rest of us will be fighting for scraps and erecting shanty towns.
My point is less regarding the fact that it’s a big boogeyman… The point I’m trying to hit on here is that everyone is focused on personal responsibility with their own CO2 emissions and entire sectors have made zero progress, and they’re left completely out of the conversation.
We’re not going to solve the problem with a single solution. Its simply too large of an issue for that. We also can’t be entirely complacent on any factor. While consumer vehicles are a nontrivial contribution, it’s the same for global shipping; while there’s still a lot to do with personal vehicles before we’re on the right track, it seems to me that there’s been zero effort from global logistics to curb their diesel engine vessels on the open seas.
In addition to this, I’m always curious where the data for sites like the one you linked, actually comes from, not because I think it’s wrong, but because I’m wondering if it’s incomplete. It’s easy to simply ask each country for their emissions numbers, do a bit of addition and call it a day, but does that include emissions created in international waters? I don’t know. Do you?
Again, I’m not doubting the numbers, I’m just wondering if companies have tried to find loopholes to hide their emissions… And it’s 100% the companies that would do it too.
There are lots of folks working on maritime (and aviation) decarbonization, it’s not being ignored. It’s just harder than decarbonozing other sectors because they can’t just electrify like you and I can do with our cars and homes. The solution is likely to be synthetic fuels of some sort, ammonia, hydrogen, biodiesel, etc. We’re seeing sails come back, there have been innovation hull designs, etc. You could even call tarrifs a partial solution here because building locally reduces shipping needs. It’s just not as cheap/easy as installing solar panels/wind/batteries though. We need policy to drive change here, which puts it on a different level than the personal responsibility measures. I absolutely agree we need to do all of the above though.
As to the source, I don’t know but it’s cited in government records everywhere. They have a good handle of how much fuel is produced everywhere, we know exactly what ships exist and where they go in real time globally, we know how efficient they are, so it doesn’t seem nebulous enough to me to have any real doubt in. NASA can probably track all their emissions from space too.
These are good points. I always thought hydrogen fuel cells had a good application in vessels like this, but I don’t have any power over what’s decided there.
Thank you for the engagement. I think for the most part we just agreed that problems exist.
Getting rid of dirty boat fuel is likely the reason why we see this sudden rise in temperature: https://lemmy.world/comment/10570999