>globalists and capitalists shove globalization down everyone’s throats
>globalists cause the most pollution with their massive container ships
>globalists then point the finger at us and say we need to change our lives because of global warming
Why does no one talk about this?
Other urls found in this thread:
industrytap.com
en.wikipedia.org
livescience.com
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
>the 16 biggest ships produce more pollution than all the cars in the World
No way.
The good news is that pressure is building from various governments around the world, including the United States, which just recently introduced legislation to keep these ships at least 230 miles away from U.S. coastlines.
lolwhat
That's a big ship.
Big if tru
But then how would we send our fresh water to China (that's often what they carry on the way back)?
Javalizard said so, it must be true.
I'm gonna need a source on this.
>No way.
they run on fuel oil
so yes
they should just use nuclear power like the navy does
sounds like an easy way to drastically cut down pollution
just modernize those 16 ships and reduce their emissions
hard to believe that's true though
yeah, okay.
and then what happens when pirates steal their fuel?
>"The US publisher Ward's, estimates that as of 2010 there were 1.015 billion motor vehicles in use in the world."
It's not possible by a long shot. You could set all 16 of those ships on fire and they wouldn't cause more pollution than a billion cars.
Still, even if they simply converted fuel to particulate, it wouldn't add up.
CHARGE A CARBON TAX ON CONTAINER SHIPS AND IT WILL REINVOGRATE DOMESTIC MANUFACTURING
I just checked and it's just SOx and NOx emissions, so "muh global warming" isn't really affected.
Kill yourself OP.
I'm wondering how in the hell they plan on offloading these ships 230 miles offshore and getting the product into the US from there. A gorillion little boats?
>en.wikipedia.org
>The Wärtsilä RT-flex96C is a two-stroke turbocharged low-speed diesel engine designed by the Finnish manufacturer Wärtsilä. It is designed for large container ships that run on heavy fuel oil. Its largest 14-cylinder version is 13.5 metres (44 ft) high, 26.59 m (87 ft) long, weighs over 2,300 tons, and produces 80,080 kilowatts (107,390 hp). The engine is the largest reciprocating engine in the world.
It burns 6.5 oz per cylinder per stroke of whats essentially filtered but unrefined crude oil.
>Says James Corbett, professor of marine policy at the University of Delaware: “Ship pollution affects the health of communities in coastal and inland regions around the world, yet pollution from ships remains one of the least regulated parts of our global transportation system.” It sounds serious, but how bad could it be? Staggeringly, if a report by the UK’s Guardian newspaper is to be believed. According to their story, just one of the world’s largest container ships can emit about as much pollution as 50 million cars. Further, the 15 largest ships in the world emit as much nitrogen oxide and sulphur oxide as the world’s 760 million cars.
>The problem isn’t necessarily with the ships’ 109,000-horsepower engines that endlessly spin away 24 hours a day, 280 days a year. In fact, these powerplants are some of the most fuel efficient units in the world. The real issue lies with the heavy fuel oil the ships run on and the almost complete lack of regulations applied to the giant exhaust stacks of these container ships.
This was way back in 2009 though, so there were less cars at the time.
Lol, same shit our government tells us with the need for a "carbon tax", despite producing less than 2% of global emissions meanwhile possessing almost 10 percent of the world's trees. Jewish trickery to make rich countries suffer and become uncompetitive while nonwhite polluters go unchecked.
Probably less carbon, but when in international waters they are allowed burn the shittiest, cheapest fuel they can buy, since there is literally no authority that could enforce it.
When close to shore they are forced to burn slightly better oil. I've been near one of these container ships as it left port, felt like I was going to choke to death.
The choice is simple.
Get rid of these 16 ships, and you can keep driving your car, this will save the economy for most people.
or let these few ships ruin everything so you can get cheap toys for 2$ less.
Bunk oil
I know the engines are big, but they're not bigger than 80 million car engines.
If by some long shot this were true, it says more about the miraculous cleanliness and efficiency of car engines than it does about ship engines.
Ever see a ship burning bunker oil? The smoke stacks are huge for a reason.
they should use weapons like they navy does
globalists want pollution, they hate humanity and the prison planet
>why does no one talk about this
1)Because democrats lack basic reasoning skills and are akin to lemmings
2)Because Republicans don't care and correctly point out that there's nothing humans can do to curb it so who gives a fuck?
for you
Almost all of the sulphur in oil from the ground ends up in the fuel oil.
>James Corbett, professor of marine policy at the University of Delaware
>Dr. Corbett is focused on technology policy innovation for 21st Century freight systems, with a focus on international shipping and coastal marine policy. He has more than 20 years’ experience providing engineering, technology, and policy studies to industry, government, and other organizations. Dr. Corbett has joint faculty appointments in Civil and Environmental Engineering in the College of Engineering and in the School of Public Policy and Administration in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Delaware. Dr. Corbett was a lead author of seminal studies evaluating international shipping’s role in use of technology to meet stewardship goals. Among more than 175 publications, Dr. Corbett coauthored the 2000 IMO Study on Greenhouse Gases from Ships, the Second IMO Greenhouse Gas Study 2009, and the IMO Greenhouse Gas Study 2014.
And scientists are too lazy to admit that we have no idea how many undersea volcanos and suchlike are dumping out how much pollution by comparison. I wonder if modern secret satellite tech is good enough to get an estimate on that.
the problem is not just the 16 ships.. it's the 100 thousand + ships.
the shipping industry is worth trillions(US$15.5 Trillion by 2023) and everything depends on it. nobody is going to fuck with them.
Yeah, I've seen them, and they're big but not _that_ big.
Does smokestack size have that much to do with it? I'm just saying it seems mathematically impossible that one ship is dirtier than 80,000,000 cars.
It burns 250 tons of this per ship, per day.
>correctly point out that there's nothing humans can do to curb it
Yes they can. Inspect the container ships before leaving port to make sure they aren't carrying bunker oil.
Car engines are small and fuel efficient they have to meet emission standards in most countries of the world. my car for instance says it pollutes zero emissions and I believe it because it has a little green leaf on the back of the car.
for jew
cause people want to buy cheap shit
Why do our largest ships not use nuclear reactors?
>Why isn't the US (military at least) fleet not solely nuclear powered?
And have you seen them belch out huge clouds of sooty smoke? Just for instance watch Max Keiser's program when he's broadcasting from the London studio and wait for even a small ship to pass down the river in the background. Then notice how tiny all the vehicles on the bridge are to wrap your head around the sheer volume of exhaust gas.
This is an old study, the 2009 one. At the time there were only about 760,000,000 cars, not over 1,000,000,000.
1 Ship pollutes about as much as 50,000,000 cars and 760 million divided by 16 is a couple million less than 50.
This was almost 10 years ago though.
that looks like evil diarrhea.
reading about it now, apparently it's not even purified at all, it's literally the shit left over after taking out the good parts.
FUCK HERE IS AN ACTUAL REDPILL
Passenger cars are responsible for 6.3% of worldwide CO2 emissions.
They are bitching about fucking 6%, going full cuck electric musk mode over nothing.
OP is a fag for not explaining it, but you should read the thread because it's not about CO2.
I heard somebody suggest that Mearsk was looking into possibly supplementing its massive ships with sails, which is a curious idea. That's the sort of thing where, if they could make it work, I'd call that pretty cool just from an engineering standpoint.
That's the kind of green stuff I actually like.
Vs how many tons of gas burned per day? The U.S. alone burns 9.3 million gallons a day.
Hell, it might be true, but this seems like some attention whoring bullshit from some prof trying to make a name for himself.
because people can't think outside their own bubble
Yes goy it's OK for AL Gore to fly his jet to the carbon zero conference as long as his dope smoking son drives a Prius at 100 mph.
Another little red flag that 'global warming' is really just a redistributionist scam.
Yeah and they also sell used fry oil, used motor oil, etc. on the market for burning in those sorts of applications. I forget what the trade names for the different grades are, but it's not far off from remembering that when you "recycle" your motor oil there's a pretty good chance it's actually just being set on fire out at see somewhere.
fuck off
americans are just jealous of our ships
Only when measuring a very esoteric pollutant that cara are optimized not to produce and these ships dump out unfiltered. If it was more carbon you bet Jews wouldn't let you hear the end of it.
>americans are just jealous of our ships
90 percent of everything we buy arrives via ship
that includes US
You realize the gas we burn is highly refined and in States like California with the highest car ownership there is special California only fuel with lots of alcohol and additives to make it burn cleaner.
Ban chink shit, autarky now. Oh wait the left is now 100% third worldist bugman faggots who stopped caring about muh environment as soon as they realized they would have to curb immigration...
Well that's a shame. Guess global capitalism wins. Thankfully most leftists have no children and are nihilistic enough to ignore this problem. The right dies in a generation due to demographic change so good luck whoever is left arguing with kikes, niggers, arabs, and mestizos, and other vermin about how we gotta stop pollution. I'm sure they'll care.
I wrote this
yeah but none from the biggest ships in the world
because your ports are too small to accommodate them
Did they factor in how much it would pollute to transport that same shit by other means?
We like our pussies tight
>Other 5%
farts?
>Noyacht detected
Well, that and Basically this professor is doing an attention grab so he can get on the conference circuit and get some cheddar.
The left always say the right is infiltrated by Russia.
Little do they know the left is literally the arm of China and Russia.
>Basically this professor is doing an attention grab so he can get on the conference circuit and get some cheddar.
Do you have any proof of that? Or are you just assigning motive arbitrarily?
>The media not understanding that ships are way, way more fuel efficient than cars.
>The media not understanding how big ships are.
This whole Muh Global Warming thing has totally got out of hand.
What does human and all animals use to fuel their cellular process: Oxygen.
What is the waste-product of this reaction?
CarbonDioxide
What does plant use to fuel their cellular process: CarbonDioxide.
What is the waste-product of this reaction? Oxygen.
We would die without CarbonDioxide.
CO2 is the cell fuel for plants which are producing the oxygen.
If you know anything about photosynthesis its Plants transform Sunlights rich energy rays into plant cell cellulosa, plant-eating-animals eat plants.
Predators and higher animals in the food chain eat the plant-eating-animals.
All this is fueled by the symbiosis of animals and plants are exchanging CarbonDioxide and Oxygen.
So this whole shit is so much bullshit I want to vomit. There cant be too much CO2, its like saying "oh they sky has too much oxygen" or "the ocean has too much watermolecules".
The power that be must be laughing their fucking ties off that liberals believe this.
No CO2= we die. CO2 isnt good for life, it is essential for life.
You see, Giuseppe, you are right, theoretically speaking, but
BUT
what if you could n o t have to transport so much shit so far?
It's really dreary to watch how many people work in academia and how little the public understands that half of everything they talk about is how to get something publish or which funding cock to suck or where the next luxury resort they're going to go to give a talk or whatever.
>Why does no one talk about this?
Whats wrong with you? Don't want to buy that new iPhone or something? Bad Cattle! A Squad has been dispatched to collect you for reintegration into "modern society".
I believe I watched something 1 time that said they carry 2 fuels, 1 clean fuel to burn in a country's territory if they are strict, and 1 low grade cheap high pollution fuel to burn out in open waters
>Why does no one talk about this?
because by way of super advanced technology and weapons, people are fucking. brainwashed
youtube.com
What? But then we couldn't have all our cheap shit manufactured with cheap slave labor and no environmental controls in shithole countries like China.
Setting the ships on fire would produce less of the emissions they are talking about, because the ships would stop functioning and burning nasty fuel that's illegal in developed countries.
Though you would end up with sunken, dirty shipwrecks...
>So this whole shit is so much bullshit I want to vomit. There cant be too much CO2
You're stupid. Please take off your flag, I'm actually curious now.
Too much of anything is bad. Just because we need some doesn't mean having too much is absolutely impossible. That's like saying someone can't have too much food or too much water. You need food and water, but you can still have too much.
>Leftists go full NIMBY and apply retarded amounts of regulations to everything
>Corporations outsource to countries that haven't done that
>Transport pollution increases dramatically as a result
>Leftists don't care
Shoot a traitor before an enemy Jimbo.
>implying that's not what happens when they decide to scuttle an old ship anyway
They use a shit tier type of fuel that's basically the worst sludge. That's part of why. Economists say that even though there's so much pollution caused by container ships it's still relatively efficient. However... why not produce product locally so it doesn't require so much fuel to move it. (((Economists))) can't have that though because it would lower their numbers. I wish Americans would refuse to buy from China but Americans are Amerimutts who don't care about quality and locality.
Because the people who control oil and fuel want to get their money's worth before making money off the next thing even if it means destroying the world a bit
I learned this stat like 3 or 4 years ago. It's a great red-pill for climate change freaks who want to shame people who drive trucks or eat meat.
Drop this piece of knowledge and then something like "You know, it's almost like they just want to control people and how they get around more than solve climate change."
That's weird, I guess they filter it. Probably ends up better quality than the bunker oil.
Its like saying there is too much salt-molecules and watermolecules in the sea.
Its fucking saltwater.
Oxygen and CO2 are constituents of the sky, but most of it are other gases like Nitrogen.
Also there cant be too much in the sky of CO2, we die without CO2.
If there is too much of CO2, then it would mean the plants have too much fuel, and there would be too much Oxygen, this cant be and is a retarded and flawed concept.
The whole subject of marine bunker fuels is very complex. The answer is to link Russia (Asia) to America (North America) by rail. From there you would need to modernize the rail system through Central and South America.
On the other end rail link Africa and Europe at Gibraltar and Suez, and of course Japan to China. No need for big ships, or least very few.
You would want to electrify the system, and power it with Nuclear power, both stationary and rail mounted.
an organism eating food is something different all together.
the plants change CO2 to oxygen so there cant be too much CO2, the amount and volume needed for that case is virtually impossible to create as it would require more CO2 than fits on all planets in the solar system.
Its theoretically impossible.
Maybe we should stop importing shit from China?
Most of it is a future landfill anyway. But soyboys need their Funko Pop dolls i guess
It's the only motive that makes sense.
>zomg 16 ships pollute moar than a billion cars!
.
.
.
>of this pollutant that cars don't emit and doesn't affect global warming that much but pay no mind to that the big thing here is the headline for the people who don't read much lol gibs tenure pls.
>Also there cant be too much in the sky of CO2, we die without CO2.
>If there is too much of CO2, then it would mean the plants have too much fuel, and there would be too much Oxygen, this cant be and is a retarded and flawed concept.
Take off your memeflag, I'm really curious if you're a leaf or something. No one could be this stupid. I'm not saying whether we have too much or not, just that it isn't impossible. To think it's impossible "because plants use it to make oxygen" is ridiculous.
You're even redditspacing. Look at this shit.
Well, if the amount of oxygen went up by even a small %, we and everything else would die in a huge planet-wide fire. So yes you can have too much oxygen. And are you familiar with concept of suffocation?
It's a moot point because there probably isn't enough carbon in the world to ever be "too much"
There is such a thing as too much though, like venus which is mostly CO2.
en.wikipedia.org
Stop buying from China would mean taking home production and give prosperity and endless of accessable jobs to white western countries, then they risk of having a good life and getting children.
Oh cant let that happen.
the only benefit to losing all our jobs to automation and AI will be the return of USA made products. Shipping will be the determining factor in profit margins
And it's nearly entirely foreign owned and controlled. It supports the gutting of North America and Europe.
So you have no proof and you're just assuming.
this guy gets it
Fuck Venus, Venus is a cucked planet. Maybe we have some Swede around to help us on the cucked topic.
There is an uncontable amount of Nitrogen mixed with the other gases, even with the sun as a power source, you couldnt make that process ever happen.
Are you familiar with the concept of liberal media?
The answer for everything is ending kike globalism.
But not even the "redpilled" crowd ever get their heads around that.
That's literally how science news works. My boss got uptight at me once for calling the university PR guy the university propaganda guy.
I guess he doesn't know that PR is literally propaganda per Edward Bernays. Not very academic! Many such cases!
And you're assuming that this hyperbole is just totally above board because professors only have pure motivations?
If Dr. Corbett's motives were pure he wouldn't have to resort to hyperbole.
We should plant more trees and plants.