Humans 0 Saiya-jin 1 to 6 Angels 7 😇 Kalki Ironman 5th matriya buddha 8th arc Angel 11th satguru 13th imam and 24th avatar after 2026 😎 Almighty God 9 😇 Humans type 2.5+ after 2026 by Kalki Ironman (christ in the white horse)(son of man on clouds) type 7 and 8 😎 Jarvis the world’s first artificial intelligence (parrot) 😎 Cuz Kalki is ironman batman super saiya-jin superman ben10 saitama Narutoo optimus prime and every super heroes combined after 2026 😎 Jarvis world’s first artificial living being (just like vision in marvel universe)😎 Made of Quantum and sub quantum particles 😎 Power source quantum energy arc reactor (type 7) level technology 😎 Kalki Ironman going to have every kind of arc reactor like:- type 1 Nuclear fission, nuclear waste, hydrogen fusion, type 2 3 4 5 antimatter arc reactor (solid liquid gas), type 6 electro quantum arc reactor, and type 7 Quantum arc reactor, type 8 limitless quantum energy arc reactor without quantum particles 😎 Kalki Ironman going to have sun in a box million billion tons of hydrogen nuclear fusion reactor type 2 3 4 5 just like sun and stars in the palm of his hand 😎 This all going to happened by self replicating quantum nanobots knowledge energy and techniques at type 7 7 7- respectively 😎 Ironman (Tesla 2.0) going to reveal every secrets of the world specially Tesla and his Antigravity 😎’”
It seems to me that a "no human presence" ship would be limited to coastal or river routes, where maintenance crews can easily reach it. I've worked as an engineer in a shipyard for a couple of years, and while I'm all in for electric propulsion, and even counting the fact that it needs far less maintenance than traditional engines, there is a LOT that can leak, wear or go wrong in a ship. Heck, sometimes it's the cargo that causes trouble, like chemical leaks or catching fire... Just like a Tesla factory; We need some human intervention in the end ;-)
@@sags9436 Yes, we could probably use a robot to at least diagnose a problem, acting on it is an order of magnitude harder, and at 300000$ each, you hit the paywall fairly quickly. 😉
There will be a lot of technicians in the future just like in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" someone has to fix the problems because a self repair system can only do such a great job.
The human presence is the least interesting, its cargo ships running on other fuel sources that are the issue. Hell pay me minimum wage and I'll sit on the ship and call somebody if something goes wrong.
Some shipping companies have been pursuing permission to operate unmanned cargo containers for many years. The ships would depart with a crew on board until safely offshore when the crew would be helicoptered back to port. As the ship neared its destination port, a crew would helicopter on board and bring the ship into port. To my knowledge, that hasn't been allowed yet but the technology to make the plan work has been available for quite some time.
This looks like it is built for short-distance Norway-only trips, making the legislature much simpler. But yeah, switching to unmanned electric ships would be great. Although even just switching to fully-electric could reduce crew sizes significantly.
I’m probably oversimplifying, and/or perhaps missing some of the finer points, but it seems to me that container ships could be the perfect use case for aluminum air batteries. If modular battery packs were contained inside the standard form factor of a shipping container, these packs could be the first thing on and the last thing off during loading and unloading using existing infrastructure, with battery refurbishment facilities located near or on the docks. Or maybe the battery packs contain grid-scale Lithium packs inside the containers, with charging solutions that are nearby so that a fully charged pack can be swapped in. Or hydrogen full cells, or even micro nuclear reactors (in the extreme). Any or all would work based on what’s available dockside. If the packs are standardized as far as fitting inside a shipping container, connection types, and voltage/amperage outputs, the energy source contained inside could be whatever is available or is the best option for the next trip. Essentially container ships have a range for potential flexibility that far outweighs that of automobiles and the like. They’re already designed to quickly swap these standardized boxes on and off and have the existing facilities to support that model. 🧐🤷🏻♂️
Since nearly all trans-ocean ships require a pilot on board to enter and navigate busy ports there is no reason why this shouldn't continue. Further, most often these big ships require tugs and there is no reason why those tugs cannot be electric. If all that docking and port navigation were kept as it is now then the only autonomous part will be the open ocean voyage.
Hopefully, they will be more open-minded and say "Lots of challenges, let's figure out how to overcome them, and be first to market." There's a lot of possibilities in this video.
May be build a reliable ship first. As all ships that I have worked on could not work for more then Two days without assistants. These are complex pieces of machinery. That are not mass produced like a car.
120 TEUs versus new ocean carriers of 20,000 TEUs is hardly a comparison. I remember doing calculations on locomotive trains that would run on batteries versus diesel. From what I recall it would take 800,000lbs of batteries to equal four days of diesel fuel in one locomotive tank. I can not even imagine how many pounds of batteries are needed in an ocean freighter. Using batteries on smaller ships may be economical and better for the environment. Especially if 98% of your energy comes from renewables like Norway. Most other countries still produce electricity from over 60% of fossil fuels.
Couple of points you didn't make: The cargo capacity of a ship goes up as the cube whereas the force required to drive it through the water goes up as the square, so overall efficiency scales up. Onboard maintenance would be an issue, you might require riding crews to handle (for example) chipping and painting (unless we can develop better protective coatings that actually stick to the steel). Regarding hydrodynamics a better option for bulk cargo is the submarine towing a 'slug' containing the cargo, with no crew requiring air, sunlight or somewhere to set up the barbecue that becomes an interesting proposition, it also avoids the damage caused by the increasing wave height caused by global warming. The power in a wave goes up as the cube of its height so a slight increase in wave height can cause real damage (I have seen inch-thick steel crumpled like paper) and wave heights are increasing. The major downside is that we will lose one of the best jobs ever created by man, but like doorstep milk deliveries (the healthiest job in the UK in the 1970s) I suppose that's the price of progress.
@@mb-3faze That was the plan (this was looked at in some detail in the 1970's or early 80's), the main application was for 'slugs' of crude oil, I suspect other cargo such as containers would not be viable but there was some discussion about that at the time. I am not a naval architect but as I understand it having everything submerged, assuming proper streamlining, results in less drag than having a conventional ship operating on the surface.
@@mikesmith2905 Hadn't heard of this idea before, thanks for mentioning it. You can see how this submerged slug idea would appeal when transporting oil. Oil would be a homogeneous fluid of a known relative density. Getting a container of it to float semi-submerged in sea water would be quite simple(ish). Consumer goods cargo in containers - that would be a different story! One day, of course, we wont have to transport oil around - either there won't be any left or we will have weened ourselves off it.
Right, because having civilians on the current ships is such a help. Autonomous might be much harder to board, have the same defence personnel/escort and cannot have hostages taken.
So, why not use turbine electric hybrids? Turbines produce massively less vibration than industrial diesels and are much more efficient under static RPM loads like a generator. I would love to see full electric, but as an interim, I feel like it’s a valid option.
Because these ships don't use diesel as we know it. They use heavy oil. Its the dregs of the oil barrel that can barely run in anything else. Because these engines are so huge they can use injectors that can utilise the viscosity of the oil. I can imagine they'll foul up a turbine, but I could be wrong. They could also use the turbine for additional thrust while it's charging.
@@SD-tj5dh , correct, the heavy oils used for the existing engines will create deposits and foul up a compressor. But, turbines are flexible, they can be engineered to run on a variety of fuels, they can even run as external combustion using steam.
@@SD-tj5dh they use a centrifuge and heat it up to create day tanks. A turbine uses fuel excessively. US navy ships have both and only use turbines for high speed runs .
In my opinion. The biggest disadvantages of using turbines are cost and complexity in marine operating environment for a ship without a crew. We have to remember that the marine shipping industry is very competitive. The high initial cost and low capacity of the ships may render them uncompetitive for even shorter range shipping.
Correct me if I'm wrong , but won't a turbine mounted on a ship, which can catch wind , also slow down/ put a reactionary force on the ship? Or are you talking about vertical turbines, in which case , won't the turbine actually "catch" wind and destabilize the ship?
We know carbon neutral shipping is possible. We only have to look at the boat going round the earth right now called the 'energy observer' It has solar power and wind power that charges up a hydrogen fuel cell, which collects hydrogen from directly electrolysing seawater. Whether its in port or out at sea its always generating power. It used to have vertical wind turbines to generate electricity but the vessel had an upgrade some time ago with what is called an 'oceanwing' which autonomously tacks into the wind to generate forward thrust. It then uses the electric propellers as generators to recharge the fuel cell. That could easily scale up but it seems like nobody is giving this vessel any air time. People are hell bent on putting lithium batteries in everything.
The only issue with this idea is that purely going electric wont help mitigate sound. A large portion of the sound is vibration for the ships equipment, but the remainder is actually the propeller itself due to a phenomenon called cavitation. This is actually something the US navy has sunk a lot of money into in order to hide nuclear subs. Could these ships convoy and if so would that lead to efficiency gains? Similar to how race cars draft one another in order to use less fuel, that being said I am not sure the exact differences in fluid dynamics between air and water. Most ports have port pilots that go out to meet the ship in order to guide the ship through the waterways to the port itself. They have a great deal of knowledge about those specific water ways where the the ships captain does not. Is that something that could be a stop gap until the AI navigation improves enough? The ship could be driven by the port pilot similar to how we remotely fly UAVs today or they could be shuttled out to the ship and assume control similar to how its done today?
@@JimfromIndy Its a combination of screw RPM as well as screw design. All propellers and on both aircraft as well boats take advantage of pressure differential to move the fluid and exert a force. Depending on the speed you can get a few thins happening. In aircraft typically you get the tips of the propeller exceeding or approaching the speed of sound, this causes induced drag due to non uniform flow. In ships however you get what is known as cavitation, at the outer tips of the propeller and along the boundary layer where the water meets the metal of the propeller you get extreme pressure differences. Given enough pressure drop you can the water to boil or expand rapidly forming bubbles in the water that then collapse. The collapsing of the the bubble which is at first very low pressure results in a large pressure spike and this collapse emits sound (all sound is pressure changes). Now only does this create noise which in water can be heard from very long distances away, the reason the navy researched it so heavily, it can also do significant damage to the propeller as well. If you want to see any example of this cavitation in action look up firearms test with ballistic gel. In slow motion often times you see what looks like an explosion as the cavity goes back to its initial size. This is the result of the air being compressed so rapidly it combusts. I am not an fluid dynamics expert and this explanation is to the best of my understanding so their may be some errors. If any Fluid dynamic experts would like to chime in and fill in gaps I might have missed or correct anything I got wrong that would be greatly appreciated!
@@joshedwards6205 The US Navy has designed bronze propeller screws for submarines which cavitate only during extreme acceleration. It would seem reasonable to design props for container vessels that do roughly the same. Cavitation wastes energy as well as propagating sound (the submarine's nemesis....) I suspect the problem with container vessels producing cavitation at constant speeds (which still implies acceleration, of course, since there is still drag...) is due to screws that are manufactured as cheaply as possible, and are neither tuned to not cavitate at constant speed, but are not tuned to the vessel at all. If we're designing ships from the ground up to be electric and self-navigating, it would seem we could economically tune the screws at the same time to prevent energy-sucking cavitation. Am I wrong? Wouldn't be the first time, LOL....
@@JimfromIndy I completely agree! We should put just as much thought into the propeller as we do the rest of the ship if we are looking to be as energy conservative as possible. That is like trying to save fuel by driving a Prius but driving on flat tires. If your mechanism to actually drive the vehicle is inefficient then improving the engine or energy source has diminishing returns.
International ship crews tend to not get paid much and the job is dangerous. The on deck container lashing have to be routinely tightened in route or you will end up losing a lot of containers in storms.
Using small module nuclear reactors, they could have effectively unlimited range. This might be the a requirement for larger cargo ships that make the runs between the far east and the American Pacific coast.
It might be worth it to make modular solar panel arrays that quickly plug in and lock onto the top containers of each voyage to give the ships more range and help recharge their batteries with solar power.
Battery capacity of 7MWh. How far can the ship sail with one charge? Is it a fe miles, a few hundred miles? How long does it take to recharge? I mean which is not sailing costs money, so the longer it is charging the more money is will cost. Don't get me wrong, I am totally in favorit of clean energy and this is a, well it could be, a breakthrough we so need. Do you have some more details about the ship?
*_That's_** what I'm talking about.* Clean _shipping._ No more burning _bunker oil._ No more leaving a trail of oil and oily soot all _over 70% of the globe._ The deck can be covered with solar panels, the bottom of the hull can use *LFP batteries* as ballast and the entire industry goes from the *_worst polluter_* to an *_eco-friendly_* method for sending stuff around the planet. Put on some *StarLink* terminals and the ships can be in constant communication with their fleet.
Pretty sure covering the deck with solar panels isn't going to work all that well. You have seen what a container ship looks like, right? Not a whole lot of exposed deck space there.
What gets me is we have a solution as it stands to not only make ocean freight faster but clean. Albeit I also I understand the other issues just more so this is unfortunate. A nuclear powered cargo vessel could run faster with zero emissions and run far longer. Currently slow steaming is massive as a change but these vessels could go above 21 knots meaning almost 2x speed with no change in co2. Albeit yes I don't overly trust a lot of freight companie
Ask yourself who only use mostly nuclear vessels in the first place and you have your answer, put nuclear powered in cargo vessel and all it takes is one to get hijacked. And then we have big problems on our hands. Its not hard to get away in a vast ocean compared to someone doing something shady on a land bound nuclear power plant. Yes your probably going think satellites will track any aggressors but that shady group if funded could throw on a few optic camo on the entirety of the ship and then no satellite can spot it unless it has thermal scan. Still think its a good idea?
I suspect it will still need a crew for maintenance reasons. I’ve hear of hybrids wind and electric might be the way to go. It means much bigger ship using the wind when when it available and electricity when it’s not. You could dyson fan tech being used to make improved propulsion units. Smaller electric impeller turbine pumping gallons from one point to another. Give you Increased thrust potential. Manoeuvrability benefits as well. Also wind can be directed on top of a ship into a thruster unit. To increase efficiency. Also shaped like a dyson fan. If you can get a higher volume than was put in it got to be a bonus. Considering the thrust potential is something close to 10-1. So for a wind speed of 3m/s you should be able to get something like 30m/s out. This would definitely depend on aperture sizes, compression ratio and annuals trust modules. The list goes on. In fact with the thrust multiplier under the ship you could even have it acting as a hydroplane it would have to be fairly robust. 100kn is easily possible. The hulls can be reinforced and strengthened to take bigger impacts from warping. Be that twisting, hogging and sagging. Or even resonance. Mega ships become a reality. Going as far to say if we use all the known technology we have it can be achieved within the next 50 years. Perhaps in the next 25. Once all the modelling is completed.
I think it would work for some local or short distances, as others stated about maintenance, my concern would be about shipping piracy. That’s why I say short distance shipping.
Alternative power source? If only someone had thought of powering a ship without engines for crossing an ocean? If only there was a free power source you could tap into using a big sail type contraption that has moved vessels effortlessly for hundreds of years.
@@HSstriker not a huge fan of Elon Musk, but something that resonated with me was his quote "engineering when it's not required" aka don't over complicate it.
This would be the ideal use case to validate SMRs as most of the time they are far from land should they mess up. The one big sticking point that came to mind with maritime regulations is the requirement to answer distress calls.
@@IronmanV5 Totally unmanned vessels are highly unlikely. The amount of routine maintenance required on a large vessel is huge. Remember, “Rust never sleeps.” Plus, with the constant motion of a ship, fastenings start to work loose. Small things (a loose turnbuckle, perhaps) can lead to big things, such as a 50 ton locomotive running amok on the vehicle deck and knocking a hole through the side.
Piracy means that there is someone to negotiate with. Who do you negotiate with on an autonomous ship? It's going to use *StarLink* to be in constant communication with the fleet and with vessels intersecting its path. It's not going to stop on the high seas for anybody for any reason except collision avoidance (and even at that, it would just adjust its direction.) It's not going to ever get ill and need to be taken to shore or be threatened or shot.
Good video. Glad to know about this development. Hydrogen is not the answer for cars. In cargo vessels though, it may well be a good solution; either through fuel cells or to fuel a gas turbine which could generate electricity. Not sure which of those approaches is more efficient. The turbine though may have the undesirable side effect of producing NOx. So if fuel cell tech can be worked on it's probably the better approach.
Such electric ships could not be "blanketed bow to stern in solar" as suggested at 10:35, unless the solar cover was removable. Keep in mind we are talking about container ships, and container ships are loaded by overhead crane. That operation might be tricky with a solar roof covering the entire ship.
The only winners in a fully electric autonomous ships is the owners/operators. They no longer have to cover the cost of a crew which increases their profits and has a negative effect on everyone else in the industry particularly those who depend upon the jobs.
Round out the equation with solar vacuum tube- / phase change- wind- take trade winds and environment conditions into play with temperature pressure differential/ Tesla turbine = slow down to fine tune the variables
That could be the PERFECT COVID-19 FREE Cruise - there’s no one onboard except me! Just make sure the auto-chefs are fully stocked. Have Atlas come around and pickup my luggage. Weeeeee!
To Hell with this. It is only a means for the already rich to eliminate the honest wages paid to deserving human beings. This autonomous move is detrimental to people.
i thought there were talking about building Green Hydrogen Ships. Batteries on Ships are a dead weight to drag on. If they can figure out a way to produce H2 from the sea itself, that would change the equation completely.
While dining aboard a cruise ship a few years ago, the deck suddenly tilted and I thought the plates were going so slide off the table onto the floor. An announcement soon came over the ship's PA system to tell the guests aboard that the violent maneuver had been performed to avoid a pod of whales. The autonomous electric ships will take no such evasive action, because there will be nobody on the lookout for marine life.
Maybe or they’ll have computers far better to monitor for such life. Remember to program a computer to monitor sonar 24/7 is a lot easier and cheaper than a human
@@TwoBitDaVinci - Sonar is known to cause distress to cetaceans and other marine animals. That could make autonomous ships even noisier underwater than what we now have.
I do wonder how the reduction in noise will affect the number of collisions between marine life and cargo ships. The fact that they happen even with cargo ships as noisy as they are, implies that being louder isn't the answer. Maybe being quieter is? Maybe part of the problem is the ship noise is interfering with their echo location ability? Just throwing out guess here. I do like somebody else's suggestion of making the fuel (battery, hydrogen, reactor, whatever) a cargo container which sits at the bottom of the cargo container stack (first in, last out). They could modulate the amount of "fuel" needed for a trip by changing the number of such containers installed (leaving the rest of the bottom slots available for actual cargo). Only trouble being if there is a last minute change, it's really hard to add new fuel containers.
Bound to make a pretty big splash, eh? Glad it's not just a drop in the bucket 😉 Super interesting, glad for the early innovators and excited to see what's next.
Why not have sea based Wind Turbines and battery backup that can then recharge passing ships? If big enough (think oil 100,000 tons) they could even act as massive moving batteries to plug into Coastal networks!
Was thinking of solar heater covers that would warm sea water and then vent through an impeller for sunny days. Darker surface could be dolor cells and water provides coolant to keep solar panels working at peak performance. Or even just using meta materials. Just a thought. But you can’t tell me they have no emergency engine on this vessel.
Power source, the same that NASA uses for large rovers and landers. Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator. Scaled up would be a hands free power source the military ships use.
Issue with RTG is the unit is rather large for its small output. So the energy density overtime is high but the output is low. So to run a ship off of RTG's would take up a large part of the ship in just a generator. Not to mention leaving a bunch of materials that can be repurposed for dirty bombs is not a great idea. Militaries use a much larger output reactor. Tho i do think the use of molten salt fast small modular reactors would be a great option for marine fuel.
Article was muddied with 2 different technologies, each has its benefits. The autonomous nature of shipping is a given and the minor inconveniences you bring up can be programmed around [much less stupids to deal with un-like cars] The size of the ship is not connected to the control mechanism. A 20,000 TEU carrier can be as autonomous as the 120 you displayed. Now about the power source. 80km is nothing barely able to get from port to port. Hydrogen is an interesting idea, but damn they will have to be large ships just to hold the fuel. If I was a betting man I would put my money on SMR, the US navy have been using the technology for many years, I just wonder if that makes them a no go into some existing port-o-call.
The masts and sails will likely require more manual work and maintenance, not to mention taking up deck space which can be used to carry more cargo. Better to just install a secondary wind generator options, small roof top wind turbines such as the Tulip ones .
A lot of infrastructure in northern Europe is being set up for industrial use of hydrogen fuel cells. With that infrastructure in place, hydrogen cargo ships is mostly a matter of scaling up.
The work machinery company JCB already has hydrogen combustion motors for their production machines, surely someone will soon make hydrogen engines for ships.
Until we make hydrogen from renewables (green hydrogen) it is a highly polluting fuel. Not at the point of use but in its production from petroleum products. Ships have been using wind power, directly, through amazing technology called “sails” for centuries. Nowadays, kites are being developed that have several advantages for use on cargo ships. Firstly, they don’t need masts pwhich are a real hindrance during loading and unloading. Second, they can provide the thrust of sails without any of the heeling moment that sails entail. Third, they can be retrofitted to existing ships. Fourth, because kites can be manoeuvred to fly a continuous figure-eight through the air they can increase the “apparent wind” they experience and generate a lot more thrust per unit area than conventional sails. Fifth, they can fly at different altitudes to make the best use of wind strength and/or direction. The idea is not to replace engines completely but to use kite power to reduce fuel consumption while still being able to keep to a schedule. This technology already exists. The kites are computer controlled, “set and forget” devices. At this stage there are probably several, much higher-value uses for green hydrogen such as iron-ore smelting and steel production, where the potential carbon savings of using hydrogen instead of carbon monoxide, as the reductant, are huge.
I wonder what would happen if you attach a floating solar park behind the ship and charge battery to propel only at night... May be on deep ocean we can take advantage of OTEC too
Fully autonomous will cause other problems , easier high jack, labour market backlash. This is like Tesla mixing two things , FSD anything not S easy when bad weather or other human external involvement
Hmm... I love those market analysts. 10 years of 15% compound growth of 'nearly nothing' is 4x 'nearly nothing'. A quadrupling of 'barely counts as experimental' will become niche at best by that forecast.
Well what do you think about ships using some wind power / sails as part of the propulsion system. Additionally while the sea is somewhat easier than roadways one has to think about various demands of storms and or small vessels etc. Vessel crews are not so large on container ships as they have been with more automation anyway.. This might though be a solution for major river traffic and coastal transport. There is some possibility to use a flow battery system that uses sea water as one of the electrolytes
I don't trust the remote monitoring to prevent it from colliding with small boats like mine. With no crew onboard, it would demolish my boat and just keep going without even stopping to pull me out of the water. Monitoring might be attentive to the first and only ship, but when dozens of them are moving, they will save salary by having one monitor, they're corporations
Interesting tech, but do not kid yourself - robots do get sick, many of them chronically. I can see ships drifting helplessly all over the ocean, with repair teams scrambling to get them going again. But still, some will take their batteries to the bottom of the ocean.
It would be great to see multiple solar total ship coverings unfurl sideways out into the open ocean, probably with catamaran supports, for each ship. Solar is very light compared to the freight and batteries.
I think that its a madder of time before these ships every ware. As automation will cake over once the technology is ready. This could do inside with a mainly autonomous shipping system (from source to destination). However this will probably take vary long time (to get a fully autonomous system).
I like it. Zero emissions, full autonomy. But I think I prefer if we didn’t need as many shipping vessels. Your 90% figure of all goods spending some time in a cargo ship is staggering.
Zero Emissions - Yea!! Except for recharging the batteries, making the batteries, etc And autonomous has worked so well with cars, what could go wrong?
As renewables take over more and more of the energy percentage, the CO2 associated with creating those sources of energy goes down, if it were up to people like you, nothing would ever get done about the usage of fossil fuels, and your sons will be left scratching their heads with issues their father before them left them out of sheer nearsightedness and greed
With no crew, there is no reason to be big; so tiny fully enclosed submerged cargo TEUs could be shepherded by machines that utilize all the wave wind solar etc forces at sea with autonomous electric powered tugboats herding them into ramped ports where they load automatically onto railroad cars on tracks leading out from the water - then the self-propelled, self-energizing railroad cars run autonomously to central distribution/Re-manufacture locations where they are unpacked, processed and the end product is delivered by SD/SE drones directly to the end user.
Great stuff More automation "will" improve safety but where will all the jobs go. Not just the seafarers but the port workers? The TV show Total Recall highlighted this point. We are not there yet but it seems inevitable. Will all the jobs be just moving to making youtube vids -- and if everyone is making vids than there will be no one to watch them and it all just spirals into chaos 😨
Go to honehealth.com/twobitdavinci to get your at home assessment and doctor consultation for only $45
Humans 0
Saiya-jin 1 to 6
Angels 7 😇
Kalki Ironman 5th matriya buddha 8th arc Angel 11th satguru 13th imam and 24th avatar after 2026 😎
Almighty God 9 😇
Humans type 2.5+ after 2026 by Kalki Ironman (christ in the white horse)(son of man on clouds) type 7 and 8 😎
Jarvis the world’s first artificial intelligence (parrot) 😎
Cuz Kalki is ironman batman super saiya-jin superman ben10 saitama Narutoo optimus prime and every super heroes combined after 2026 😎
Jarvis world’s first artificial living being (just like vision in marvel universe)😎
Made of Quantum and sub quantum particles 😎
Power source quantum energy arc reactor (type 7) level technology 😎
Kalki Ironman going to have every kind of arc reactor like:- type 1 Nuclear fission, nuclear waste, hydrogen fusion, type 2 3 4 5 antimatter arc reactor (solid liquid gas), type 6 electro quantum arc reactor, and type 7 Quantum arc reactor, type 8 limitless quantum energy arc reactor without quantum particles 😎
Kalki Ironman going to have sun in a box million billion tons of hydrogen nuclear fusion reactor type 2 3 4 5 just like sun and stars in the palm of his hand 😎
This all going to happened by self replicating quantum nanobots knowledge energy and techniques at type 7 7 7- respectively 😎
Ironman (Tesla 2.0) going to reveal every secrets of the world specially Tesla and his Antigravity 😎’”
It seems to me that a "no human presence" ship would be limited to coastal or river routes, where maintenance crews can easily reach it. I've worked as an engineer in a shipyard for a couple of years, and while I'm all in for electric propulsion, and even counting the fact that it needs far less maintenance than traditional engines, there is a LOT that can leak, wear or go wrong in a ship.
Heck, sometimes it's the cargo that causes trouble, like chemical leaks or catching fire...
Just like a Tesla factory; We need some human intervention in the end ;-)
Can we use Spot-The DogRobot made by Boston Dynamics?😂😂
@@sags9436 Yes, we could probably use a robot to at least diagnose a problem, acting on it is an order of magnitude harder, and at 300000$ each, you hit the paywall fairly quickly. 😉
@@brunoethier896 We will develop robots to do that too in the near future. Future is exiting 💯
There will be a lot of technicians in the future just like in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" someone has to fix the problems because a self repair system can only do such a great job.
The human presence is the least interesting, its cargo ships running on other fuel sources that are the issue. Hell pay me minimum wage and I'll sit on the ship and call somebody if something goes wrong.
Some shipping companies have been pursuing permission to operate unmanned cargo containers for many years. The ships would depart with a crew on board until safely offshore when the crew would be helicoptered back to port. As the ship neared its destination port, a crew would helicopter on board and bring the ship into port. To my knowledge, that hasn't been allowed yet but the technology to make the plan work has been available for quite some time.
This looks like it is built for short-distance Norway-only trips, making the legislature much simpler. But yeah, switching to unmanned electric ships would be great. Although even just switching to fully-electric could reduce crew sizes significantly.
Wind powered ships! What an innovation! Who would have ever thought to make a ship powered by the wind?
I’m probably oversimplifying, and/or perhaps missing some of the finer points, but it seems to me that container ships could be the perfect use case for aluminum air batteries. If modular battery packs were contained inside the standard form factor of a shipping container, these packs could be the first thing on and the last thing off during loading and unloading using existing infrastructure, with battery refurbishment facilities located near or on the docks.
Or maybe the battery packs contain grid-scale Lithium packs inside the containers, with charging solutions that are nearby so that a fully charged pack can be swapped in. Or hydrogen full cells, or even micro nuclear reactors (in the extreme). Any or all would work based on what’s available dockside. If the packs are standardized as far as fitting inside a shipping container, connection types, and voltage/amperage outputs, the energy source contained inside could be whatever is available or is the best option for the next trip.
Essentially container ships have a range for potential flexibility that far outweighs that of automobiles and the like. They’re already designed to quickly swap these standardized boxes on and off and have the existing facilities to support that model. 🧐🤷🏻♂️
Do a little math, the volume of batteries required exceeds the ships capacity for all but the shortest trips.
Since nearly all trans-ocean ships require a pilot on board to enter and navigate busy ports there is no reason why this shouldn't continue. Further, most often these big ships require tugs and there is no reason why those tugs cannot be electric. If all that docking and port navigation were kept as it is now then the only autonomous part will be the open ocean voyage.
Shipping companies, boat builders, and anyone who knows about boats and shipping, are like, "What a stupid idea!"
Exactly😂 all these morons think that you can just stuff batteries in everything. This ship is an absolute joke. Literally not even a proof of concept
Hopefully, they will be more open-minded and say "Lots of challenges, let's figure out how to overcome them, and be first to market." There's a lot of possibilities in this video.
May be build a reliable ship first. As all ships that I have worked on could not work for more then Two days without assistants. These are complex pieces of machinery. That are not mass produced like a car.
120 TEUs versus new ocean carriers of 20,000 TEUs is hardly a comparison. I remember doing calculations on locomotive trains that would run on batteries versus diesel. From what I recall it would take 800,000lbs of batteries to equal four days of diesel fuel in one locomotive tank. I can not even imagine how many pounds of batteries are needed in an ocean freighter. Using batteries on smaller ships may be economical and better for the environment. Especially if 98% of your energy comes from renewables like Norway. Most other countries still produce electricity from over 60% of fossil fuels.
12 nautical miles ! 🤔 Is that it? Small ship, ridiculous time, horrendous costs, what a waste 🤨
"12 nautical miles"
The ships range was 80 km i.e. about 43 nautical miles, not 12.
Couple of points you didn't make: The cargo capacity of a ship goes up as the cube whereas the force required to drive it through the water goes up as the square, so overall efficiency scales up. Onboard maintenance would be an issue, you might require riding crews to handle (for example) chipping and painting (unless we can develop better protective coatings that actually stick to the steel). Regarding hydrodynamics a better option for bulk cargo is the submarine towing a 'slug' containing the cargo, with no crew requiring air, sunlight or somewhere to set up the barbecue that becomes an interesting proposition, it also avoids the damage caused by the increasing wave height caused by global warming. The power in a wave goes up as the cube of its height so a slight increase in wave height can cause real damage (I have seen inch-thick steel crumpled like paper) and wave heights are increasing. The major downside is that we will lose one of the best jobs ever created by man, but like doorstep milk deliveries (the healthiest job in the UK in the 1970s) I suppose that's the price of progress.
The only problem with your screed is that there is no "global warming".
Are you suggesting the whole propulsion system AND cargo are completely submerged?
@@mb-3faze That was the plan (this was looked at in some detail in the 1970's or early 80's), the main application was for 'slugs' of crude oil, I suspect other cargo such as containers would not be viable but there was some discussion about that at the time. I am not a naval architect but as I understand it having everything submerged, assuming proper streamlining, results in less drag than having a conventional ship operating on the surface.
@@mikesmith2905 Hadn't heard of this idea before, thanks for mentioning it. You can see how this submerged slug idea would appeal when transporting oil. Oil would be a homogeneous fluid of a known relative density. Getting a container of it to float semi-submerged in sea water would be quite simple(ish). Consumer goods cargo in containers - that would be a different story! One day, of course, we wont have to transport oil around - either there won't be any left or we will have weened ourselves off it.
We need these in place of the normal ones yesterday! Although the stuff they carry around is also a main problem, stop buying or we're doomed.
Good job, you have given the pirates in the straight a wonderful moment of grabbing what they can with no crew to stop them.
Exactly, plus many people would lose their jobs 😔
Right, because having civilians on the current ships is such a help.
Autonomous might be much harder to board, have the same defence personnel/escort and cannot have hostages taken.
So, why not use turbine electric hybrids? Turbines produce massively less vibration than industrial diesels and are much more efficient under static RPM loads like a generator. I would love to see full electric, but as an interim, I feel like it’s a valid option.
Because these ships don't use diesel as we know it. They use heavy oil. Its the dregs of the oil barrel that can barely run in anything else. Because these engines are so huge they can use injectors that can utilise the viscosity of the oil. I can imagine they'll foul up a turbine, but I could be wrong.
They could also use the turbine for additional thrust while it's charging.
@@SD-tj5dh , correct, the heavy oils used for the existing engines will create deposits and foul up a compressor. But, turbines are flexible, they can be engineered to run on a variety of fuels, they can even run as external combustion using steam.
@@SD-tj5dh they use a centrifuge and heat it up to create day tanks.
A turbine uses fuel excessively.
US navy ships have both and only use turbines for high speed runs .
In my opinion. The biggest disadvantages of using turbines are cost and complexity in marine operating environment for a ship without a crew. We have to remember that the marine shipping industry is very competitive. The high initial cost and low capacity of the ships may render them uncompetitive for even shorter range shipping.
Correct me if I'm wrong , but won't a turbine mounted on a ship, which can catch wind , also slow down/ put a reactionary force on the ship?
Or are you talking about vertical turbines, in which case , won't the turbine actually "catch" wind and destabilize the ship?
We know carbon neutral shipping is possible. We only have to look at the boat going round the earth right now called the 'energy observer'
It has solar power and wind power that charges up a hydrogen fuel cell, which collects hydrogen from directly electrolysing seawater. Whether its in port or out at sea its always generating power.
It used to have vertical wind turbines to generate electricity but the vessel had an upgrade some time ago with what is called an 'oceanwing' which autonomously tacks into the wind to generate forward thrust. It then uses the electric propellers as generators to recharge the fuel cell.
That could easily scale up but it seems like nobody is giving this vessel any air time. People are hell bent on putting lithium batteries in everything.
The only issue with this idea is that purely going electric wont help mitigate sound. A large portion of the sound is vibration for the ships equipment, but the remainder is actually the propeller itself due to a phenomenon called cavitation. This is actually something the US navy has sunk a lot of money into in order to hide nuclear subs.
Could these ships convoy and if so would that lead to efficiency gains? Similar to how race cars draft one another in order to use less fuel, that being said I am not sure the exact differences in fluid dynamics between air and water.
Most ports have port pilots that go out to meet the ship in order to guide the ship through the waterways to the port itself. They have a great deal of knowledge about those specific water ways where the the ships captain does not. Is that something that could be a stop gap until the AI navigation improves enough? The ship could be driven by the port pilot similar to how we remotely fly UAVs today or they could be shuttled out to the ship and assume control similar to how its done today?
I'm not sure why cavitation is a big issue when ships travel at a steady speed. Is it due to poorly machined screws?
@@JimfromIndy Its a combination of screw RPM as well as screw design. All propellers and on both aircraft as well boats take advantage of pressure differential to move the fluid and exert a force. Depending on the speed you can get a few thins happening. In aircraft typically you get the tips of the propeller exceeding or approaching the speed of sound, this causes induced drag due to non uniform flow. In ships however you get what is known as cavitation, at the outer tips of the propeller and along the boundary layer where the water meets the metal of the propeller you get extreme pressure differences. Given enough pressure drop you can the water to boil or expand rapidly forming bubbles in the water that then collapse. The collapsing of the the bubble which is at first very low pressure results in a large pressure spike and this collapse emits sound (all sound is pressure changes). Now only does this create noise which in water can be heard from very long distances away, the reason the navy researched it so heavily, it can also do significant damage to the propeller as well. If you want to see any example of this cavitation in action look up firearms test with ballistic gel. In slow motion often times you see what looks like an explosion as the cavity goes back to its initial size. This is the result of the air being compressed so rapidly it combusts.
I am not an fluid dynamics expert and this explanation is to the best of my understanding so their may be some errors. If any Fluid dynamic experts would like to chime in and fill in gaps I might have missed or correct anything I got wrong that would be greatly appreciated!
@@joshedwards6205 The US Navy has designed bronze propeller screws for submarines which cavitate only during extreme acceleration. It would seem reasonable to design props for container vessels that do roughly the same. Cavitation wastes energy as well as propagating sound (the submarine's nemesis....) I suspect the problem with container vessels producing cavitation at constant speeds (which still implies acceleration, of course, since there is still drag...) is due to screws that are manufactured as cheaply as possible, and are neither tuned to not cavitate at constant speed, but are not tuned to the vessel at all. If we're designing ships from the ground up to be electric and self-navigating, it would seem we could economically tune the screws at the same time to prevent energy-sucking cavitation. Am I wrong? Wouldn't be the first time, LOL....
@@JimfromIndy I completely agree! We should put just as much thought into the propeller as we do the rest of the ship if we are looking to be as energy conservative as possible.
That is like trying to save fuel by driving a Prius but driving on flat tires. If your mechanism to actually drive the vehicle is inefficient then improving the engine or energy source has diminishing returns.
I think the latest subs hide their props (as top-secret) - and are more like turbine blades than "propellers" as well.
International ship crews tend to not get paid much and the job is dangerous. The on deck container lashing have to be routinely tightened in route or you will end up losing a lot of containers in storms.
Silly me. I would assume one could easily automate on-deck container lash tension. That sounds like a simple problem to me....
@@JimfromIndy Nope, unless you've done the work it really isn't simple.
With cheaper electric "fuel" mean we could use more, smaller ships and then be able to use more diverse, closer to destination, shallower ports?
Cargo ship need to be big in order to be cost effective
@@willy4170 isn't the main cost fuel and crew?
@@Tuncup time is money
Current vessel are ~20 000TEU and this is only 120 TEU, imagine the nightmare of docking and undocking of 1000 of these verses 1 diesel ship.
Using small module nuclear reactors, they could have effectively unlimited range. This might be the a requirement for larger cargo ships that make the runs between the far east and the American Pacific coast.
I really think that which countries will take the lead in the future is entirely dependent on who gets over there antì-nuclear paranoia first.
sure put a unguarded nuclear any thing on a autonomous ship for it to fall in to the wrong hands.
That is the future way.
It might be worth it to make modular solar panel arrays that quickly plug in and lock onto the top containers of each voyage to give the ships more range and help recharge their batteries with solar power.
Battery capacity of 7MWh. How far can the ship sail with one charge? Is it a fe miles, a few hundred miles? How long does it take to recharge? I mean which is not sailing costs money, so the longer it is charging the more money is will cost. Don't get me wrong, I am totally in favorit of clean energy and this is a, well it could be, a breakthrough we so need. Do you have some more details about the ship?
*_That's_** what I'm talking about.* Clean _shipping._ No more burning _bunker oil._ No more leaving a trail of oil and oily soot all _over 70% of the globe._
The deck can be covered with solar panels, the bottom of the hull can use *LFP batteries* as ballast and the entire industry goes from the *_worst polluter_* to an *_eco-friendly_* method for sending stuff around the planet.
Put on some *StarLink* terminals and the ships can be in constant communication with their fleet.
Pretty sure covering the deck with solar panels isn't going to work all that well. You have seen what a container ship looks like, right? Not a whole lot of exposed deck space there.
What gets me is we have a solution as it stands to not only make ocean freight faster but clean. Albeit I also I understand the other issues just more so this is unfortunate. A nuclear powered cargo vessel could run faster with zero emissions and run far longer. Currently slow steaming is massive as a change but these vessels could go above 21 knots meaning almost 2x speed with no change in co2. Albeit yes I don't overly trust a lot of freight companie
Decommissioning and disposal costs both restrictive and, in the case on log term disposal of the reactors, very limited and punitively expensive.
Ask yourself who only use mostly nuclear vessels in the first place and you have your answer, put nuclear powered in cargo vessel and all it takes is one to get hijacked. And then we have big problems on our hands. Its not hard to get away in a vast ocean compared to someone doing something shady on a land bound nuclear power plant. Yes your probably going think satellites will track any aggressors but that shady group if funded could throw on a few optic camo on the entirety of the ship and then no satellite can spot it unless it has thermal scan. Still think its a good idea?
I suspect it will still need a crew for maintenance reasons. I’ve hear of hybrids wind and electric might be the way to go. It means much bigger ship using the wind when when it available and electricity when it’s not. You could dyson fan tech being used to make improved propulsion units. Smaller electric impeller turbine pumping gallons from one point to another. Give you Increased thrust potential. Manoeuvrability benefits as well. Also wind can be directed on top of a ship into a thruster unit. To increase efficiency. Also shaped like a dyson fan. If you can get a higher volume than was put in it got to be a bonus. Considering the thrust potential is something close to 10-1. So for a wind speed of 3m/s you should be able to get something like 30m/s out. This would definitely depend on aperture sizes, compression ratio and annuals trust modules. The list goes on. In fact with the thrust multiplier under the ship you could even have it acting as a hydroplane it would have to be fairly robust. 100kn is easily possible. The hulls can be reinforced and strengthened to take bigger impacts from warping. Be that twisting, hogging and sagging. Or even resonance. Mega ships become a reality. Going as far to say if we use all the known technology we have it can be achieved within the next 50 years. Perhaps in the next 25. Once all the modelling is completed.
I think it would work for some local or short distances, as others stated about maintenance, my concern would be about shipping piracy. That’s why I say short distance shipping.
Alternative power source? If only someone had thought of powering a ship without engines for crossing an ocean? If only there was a free power source you could tap into using a big sail type contraption that has moved vessels effortlessly for hundreds of years.
This gets me mad every time. Especially with that kite sail now
@@HSstriker not a huge fan of Elon Musk, but something that resonated with me was his quote "engineering when it's not required" aka don't over complicate it.
This would be the ideal use case to validate SMRs as most of the time they are far from land should they mess up.
The one big sticking point that came to mind with maritime regulations is the requirement to answer distress calls.
Maybe the persons on board would have a way to override the guidance system for response to s.o.s...
@@jimmyrk3 they're supposed to be unmanned.
@@IronmanV5 In the video he stated there would be people on board to facilitate loading and unloading.
@@jimmyrk3 At ports. Not while at sea.
No crew facilities = more room for cargo.
@@IronmanV5
Totally unmanned vessels are highly unlikely. The amount of routine maintenance required on a large vessel is huge. Remember, “Rust never sleeps.”
Plus, with the constant motion of a ship, fastenings start to work loose. Small things (a loose turnbuckle, perhaps) can lead to big things, such as a 50 ton locomotive running amok on the vehicle deck and knocking a hole through the side.
Pirates will love autonomous ocean going ships. I'd imagine the controls would be secured behind thick doors.
Autonomous navigation neatly circumvents the Jones act, making these vessels suitable for operation within the United States.... Food for thought....
Ship becomes a Bruce Willis or Steven Seagal movie, after hackers take over ship and prepare to run it into New York.
Piracy means that there is someone to negotiate with. Who do you negotiate with on an autonomous ship?
It's going to use *StarLink* to be in constant communication with the fleet and with vessels intersecting its path.
It's not going to stop on the high seas for anybody for any reason except collision avoidance (and even at that, it would just adjust its direction.)
It's not going to ever get ill and need to be taken to shore or be threatened or shot.
Good video. Glad to know about this development. Hydrogen is not the answer for cars. In cargo vessels though, it may well be a good solution; either through fuel cells or to fuel a gas turbine which could generate electricity. Not sure which of those approaches is more efficient. The turbine though may have the undesirable side effect of producing NOx. So if fuel cell tech can be worked on it's probably the better approach.
Such electric ships could not be "blanketed bow to stern in solar" as suggested at 10:35, unless the solar cover was removable. Keep in mind we are talking about container ships, and container ships are loaded by overhead crane. That operation might be tricky with a solar roof covering the entire ship.
I was just thinking "why don't they make anonymous cargo ships?" And then boom, this popped up in my recommendations.
Really? That’s wild
@@TwoBitDaVinci it really was.
The only winners in a fully electric autonomous ships is the owners/operators. They no longer have to cover the cost of a crew which increases their profits and has a negative effect on everyone else in the industry particularly those who depend upon the jobs.
Round out the equation with solar vacuum tube- / phase change- wind- take trade winds and environment conditions into play with temperature pressure differential/ Tesla turbine = slow down to fine tune the variables
That could be the PERFECT COVID-19 FREE Cruise - there’s no one onboard except me! Just make sure the auto-chefs are fully stocked. Have Atlas come around and pickup my luggage. Weeeeee!
To Hell with this. It is only a means for the already rich to eliminate the honest wages paid to deserving human beings. This autonomous move is detrimental to people.
YESSS!!! OH MANNNNN Here comes the future... Two Bit told ya first hahah keep it up brother!!!
🙏
Great to start talking about the alternatives to the present shipping nightmare!
Well there still be at least one or more workers on board in case of a emergency!!
With recent breakthroughs, NH3 fueled ships is likely to be cheaper and greener than hydrogen but some R&D is still needed.
i thought there were talking about building Green Hydrogen Ships.
Batteries on Ships are a dead weight to drag on.
If they can figure out a way to produce H2 from the sea itself, that would change the equation completely.
While dining aboard a cruise ship a few years ago, the deck suddenly tilted and I thought the plates were going so slide off the table onto the floor. An announcement soon came over the ship's PA system to tell the guests aboard that the violent maneuver had been performed to avoid a pod of whales. The autonomous electric ships will take no such evasive action, because there will be nobody on the lookout for marine life.
Maybe or they’ll have computers far better to monitor for such life. Remember to program a computer to monitor sonar 24/7 is a lot easier and cheaper than a human
@@TwoBitDaVinci - Sonar is known to cause distress to cetaceans and other marine animals. That could make autonomous ships even noisier underwater than what we now have.
Whale strike avoidance tech R&D is still needed. Could be done with sonar and warning sounds.
I do wonder how the reduction in noise will affect the number of collisions between marine life and cargo ships. The fact that they happen even with cargo ships as noisy as they are, implies that being louder isn't the answer. Maybe being quieter is? Maybe part of the problem is the ship noise is interfering with their echo location ability? Just throwing out guess here.
I do like somebody else's suggestion of making the fuel (battery, hydrogen, reactor, whatever) a cargo container which sits at the bottom of the cargo container stack (first in, last out). They could modulate the amount of "fuel" needed for a trip by changing the number of such containers installed (leaving the rest of the bottom slots available for actual cargo). Only trouble being if there is a last minute change, it's really hard to add new fuel containers.
How are you going to load and unload them if they are covered in solar panels?
Irony being that the best application of this is for tankers. 🤣
The notion of "retractable panel arrays doesn't seem difficult....
@@JimfromIndy I thought of that also, but I am pretty sure that ocean gales would easily shred them.
A company in China has already automated two cargo ports and have seen a %30 increase in speed and efficiency. Added onto automated semi trucks.
Pirates will love these
Welcome to the Fully Charged team
Bound to make a pretty big splash, eh? Glad it's not just a drop in the bucket 😉 Super interesting, glad for the early innovators and excited to see what's next.
Why not have sea based Wind Turbines and battery backup that can then recharge passing ships? If big enough (think oil 100,000 tons) they could even act as massive moving batteries to plug into Coastal networks!
Interesting, but autonomy worries me. The sea is notoriously dangerous and unpredictable. I foresee some nasty accidents...
Should be good for shorter regional distances. I wonder if these can be pirate proof with no human controls.
Maybe an un crewed vessel will help reduce piracy, unless the cargo becomes the hostage.
Was thinking of solar heater covers that would warm sea water and then vent through an impeller for sunny days. Darker surface could be dolor cells and water provides coolant to keep solar panels working at peak performance. Or even just using meta materials. Just a thought. But you can’t tell me they have no emergency engine on this vessel.
Power source, the same that NASA uses for large rovers and landers. Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator. Scaled up would be a hands free power source the military ships use.
Issue with RTG is the unit is rather large for its small output. So the energy density overtime is high but the output is low. So to run a ship off of RTG's would take up a large part of the ship in just a generator. Not to mention leaving a bunch of materials that can be repurposed for dirty bombs is not a great idea.
Militaries use a much larger output reactor. Tho i do think the use of molten salt fast small modular reactors would be a great option for marine fuel.
Article was muddied with 2 different technologies, each has its benefits. The autonomous nature of shipping is a given and the minor inconveniences you bring up can be programmed around [much less stupids to deal with un-like cars] The size of the ship is not connected to the control mechanism. A 20,000 TEU carrier can be as autonomous as the 120 you displayed.
Now about the power source. 80km is nothing barely able to get from port to port. Hydrogen is an interesting idea, but damn they will have to be large ships just to hold the fuel. If I was a betting man I would put my money on SMR, the US navy have been using the technology for many years, I just wonder if that makes them a no go into some existing port-o-call.
Great presentation
What about vertical sails for these vessels, should give them a good push, as long as the wind is blowing.
The masts and sails will likely require more manual work and maintenance, not to mention taking up deck space which can be used to carry more cargo. Better to just install a secondary wind generator options, small roof top wind turbines such as the Tulip ones .
Some ships use Flettner rotor sails but these only cut the fuel consumption by a smallish percentage.
A lot of infrastructure in northern Europe is being set up for industrial use of hydrogen fuel cells. With that infrastructure in place, hydrogen cargo ships is mostly a matter of scaling up.
The work machinery company JCB already has hydrogen combustion motors for their production machines, surely someone will soon make hydrogen engines for ships.
Until we make hydrogen from renewables (green hydrogen) it is a highly polluting fuel. Not at the point of use but in its production from petroleum products.
Ships have been using wind power, directly, through amazing technology called “sails” for centuries. Nowadays, kites are being developed that have several advantages for use on cargo ships. Firstly, they don’t need masts pwhich are a real hindrance during loading and unloading. Second, they can provide the thrust of sails without any of the heeling moment that sails entail. Third, they can be retrofitted to existing ships. Fourth, because kites can be manoeuvred to fly a continuous figure-eight through the air they can increase the “apparent wind” they experience and generate a lot more thrust per unit area than conventional sails. Fifth, they can fly at different altitudes to make the best use of wind strength and/or direction.
The idea is not to replace engines completely but to use kite power to reduce fuel consumption while still being able to keep to a schedule. This technology already exists. The kites are computer controlled, “set and forget” devices.
At this stage there are probably several, much higher-value uses for green hydrogen such as iron-ore smelting and steel production, where the potential carbon savings of using hydrogen instead of carbon monoxide, as the reductant, are huge.
I wonder what would happen if you attach a floating solar park behind the ship and charge battery to propel only at night... May be on deep ocean we can take advantage of OTEC too
Fully autonomous will cause other problems , easier high jack, labour market backlash. This is like Tesla mixing two things , FSD anything not S easy when bad weather or other human external involvement
Hmm... I love those market analysts. 10 years of 15% compound growth of 'nearly nothing' is 4x 'nearly nothing'. A quadrupling of 'barely counts as experimental' will become niche at best by that forecast.
Pirates are going to love autonomous.
Well what do you think about ships using some wind power / sails as part of the propulsion system. Additionally while the sea is somewhat easier than roadways one has to think about various demands of storms and or small vessels etc. Vessel crews are not so large on container ships as they have been with more automation anyway.. This might though be a solution for major river traffic and coastal transport. There is some possibility to use a flow battery system that uses sea water as one of the electrolytes
I don't trust the remote monitoring to prevent it from colliding with small boats like mine. With no crew onboard, it would demolish my boat and just keep going without even stopping to pull me out of the water. Monitoring might be attentive to the first and only ship, but when dozens of them are moving, they will save salary by having one monitor, they're corporations
China has a new autonomous ship yard.... combine that with autonomous ships, trucks, and all electric power...
Interesting tech, but do not kid yourself - robots do get sick, many of them chronically. I can see ships drifting helplessly all over the ocean, with repair teams scrambling to get them going again. But still, some will take their batteries to the bottom of the ocean.
Can't wait for Megawatts of lithium to come in contact with sea water...
It would be great to see multiple solar total ship coverings unfurl sideways out into the open ocean, probably with catamaran supports, for each ship. Solar is very light compared to the freight and batteries.
Cant be any worse than drunken sailors running into rocks and spilling oil
Super cool ship. I love the future it’s looking green
Two words Nuclear Reactor. Solves all the problems that were addressed in the video.
pirates will search for crew for a while then they will give up and leave
Thank you shipping for the plant food.
Great Video!
BEV plus onboard-solar plus Hydrogen is the future of shipping.
I think that its a madder of time before these ships every ware. As automation will cake over once the technology is ready. This could do inside with a mainly autonomous shipping system (from source to destination). However this will probably take vary long time (to get a fully autonomous system).
I like it. Zero emissions, full autonomy.
But I think I prefer if we didn’t need as many shipping vessels. Your 90% figure of all goods spending some time in a cargo ship is staggering.
80 km range, dude this is a niche ship, short routes with little to no storage. this will never take over shipping.
Zero Emissions - Yea!!
Except for recharging the batteries, making the batteries, etc
And autonomous has worked so well with cars, what could go wrong?
As renewables take over more and more of the energy percentage, the CO2 associated with creating those sources of energy goes down, if it were up to people like you, nothing would ever get done about the usage of fossil fuels, and your sons will be left scratching their heads with issues their father before them left them out of sheer nearsightedness and greed
With no crew, there is no reason to be big; so tiny fully enclosed submerged cargo TEUs could be shepherded by machines that utilize all the wave wind solar etc forces at sea with autonomous electric powered tugboats herding them into ramped ports where they load automatically onto railroad cars on tracks leading out from the water - then the self-propelled, self-energizing railroad cars run autonomously to central distribution/Re-manufacture locations where they are unpacked, processed and the end product is delivered by SD/SE drones directly to the end user.
sounds like a great target for pirates (this is still a thing believe it or not)
Quieter ships will increase the chances of "whale-collisions"....
I don't think even a modern submarine can sneak up on a whale. I would not worry about a whale not noticing surface vessel.
Gives me hope 🖖🏼
I bet they will hide someone inside there just in case. lol
Haha
The 100% electric Energy Observer catamaran has traveled around the world.
Elon belike: *Write that down! Write that down!*
Westinghouse has an nuclear battery called
Evincitm micro rector
I think multiple batteries can be used at the same time
Longer range electri-ships could be a good case for orbital solar, microwave delivery.
Wish they'd just go with nuclear autonomous ships with widespread communication with each other. Shrinking the world
SC Connector is a ship that use susistable energy methods
I think Dr. Tesla had the same idea 100 years ago.
Molten metal batteries would be a great thing on these ships...
Extreme weather? All the pictures shown here are on totally flat calm water.
Great stuff
More automation "will" improve safety but where will all the jobs go. Not just the seafarers but the port workers?
The TV show Total Recall highlighted this point. We are not there yet but it seems inevitable. Will all the jobs be just moving to making youtube vids -- and if everyone is making vids than there will be no one to watch them and it all just spirals into chaos 😨
No you can not replace inland trucking with sea shipping.
great video
merry christmas to the pirates haha
Wind or sun either ways ships need innovation
And what about nuclear? It's not like we don't know how to put a nuclear reactor on a big ship...
And what ships do they mostly go on MILITARY come on now, next thing you know some insurgent enemy get there hands on free dirty bomb material.
Encorporate wind power😊