HI IINO san, thank you so much for your job. Is very important to me all your aportation in logistics, because from I found you I learned a lot about it and I really enjoy it! And that is thanks to you, so again thank you for your time I can imagine how busy would be your day. Have a nice day.
I chanced upon your channel today and immediately subscribed to you. Thank you so much for the quality content for knowledge. Your channel is truly a hidden gem. I wish you will not stop producing such content and hope you gain more subscribers in future! ☺️☺️☺️
The video is just great as always however have you ever considered building your own logistics blog, you know, after watching a video then we can read it once again on your blog, it would be so wonderful !!! Really hope that I can read your logistics blog someday. Thanks again for this video.
Decarbonization goals on marine transport are possible, but not based on the LNG/Ammonia/Hydrogen/Methanol pathways. LNG will increase the pollution from cooling and compressing. Ammonia need huge amount of green hydrogen from intermittent wind and solar farms, Green Hydrogen from intermittent renewables need huge investment and have high cost, and Methanol is even worse, green methanol need CO2 and Hydrogen and the process is energy intensive process. All these can be solved only with cheep energy from Levitation-gravity electricity generation, a technology which levitate heavy solid block using low energy.
Thanks for your very informative videos. Hope that there will be many exciting vids next times. Could you pls make a specific vid about when cnee take D/O at carrier's company? What happens when cnee does some procedures to take the goods?
Ships can be powered by nuclear reactors. This has been done for over 60 years on large military vessels. Small nuclear reactors actually take up way less space abroad a ship than fossil fuel engines a fuel tanks. The truth is nuclear power is probably the only way to reach zero emissions in shipping. The reason nuclear powered Ships aren't the industry standard isn't technological it's political. To clean up shipping we need to go nuclear.
By definition you cannot reduce CO2 with methanol or any other fuel, if the 10% reduction requires double the fuel tanks. At the end of the day, you need to transport a specific amount of cargo and any reduction in cargo is also considered in the environmental influence.
The volume is not a big issue.. First you dont have into account the higher efficiency from fuel cells, second what is the current volume of fuel oil of current tankers vs the size of the ship.. is not significant at all, then we need to remember that to double the volume, we just need to increase a 25% the diameter of the tank. At higher volume less issues to keep liquid hydrogen due the volume-surface ratio.
The higher efficiency of fuel cells cannot be compared to how much volume is being reduced. Considering the cargo transportation all vessels with alternative fuels do not comply with regulations.
@@GeorgiosD90 What? I can not understand your point.. Your point is about regulations? how those apply to the point I am doing? What are you saying about the efficiency? Sorry.. but try to explain your argument with more detail please. I also read your other comment that is not possible to reduce co2 with methanol if requires double the tank volume, that point does not have much sense either. First.. is not all about co2.. you have many other pollutants that you can reduce using LNG instead diesel. The volume thing is not a thing either, how much tank volume from the % of the total volume a container ship requires? Methane is a bit lighter, this mean less water displacement. I agree that there is no much point to use methane because adds co2 too. But what is your point against LH2??
@@angellestat2730 By definition you cannot reduce emissions with a fuel that has less energy density, because even if the fuel has less emissions more fuel needs to be burnt. Simple.
@@GeorgiosD90 ?? no.. it depends how efficient and energy dense is that fuel.. not just "volumetric energy density", it also depends on how clean it burns, which usually depends a lot in the energy content of that hydrocarbon, where methane is the one with less carbon ratio from h2. Also.. LH2 is way less dense.. and you reduce 100% of co2. So just with that example I eliminate your argument.
Hmm not really your field of expertise Iino san. Ammonia is definitely not 0 CO2, the production and transportation of all alternative fuels will also involve CO2 production. Also there are definitely Hydrogen engines, its a fuelcell to convert the hydrogen into water and make electricity to power an electric motor. This has no NOx release.
![АЛАУДИНОВ у Скабеевой: эти их ВСУ нас НЕ ДОГОНЯТ 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/an0anqU4WGQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Very informative and very useful knowledge to all Marine Engineers
HI IINO san, thank you so much for your job. Is very important to me all your aportation in logistics, because from I found you I learned a lot about it and I really enjoy it! And that is thanks to you, so again thank you for your time I can imagine how busy would be your day. Have a nice day.
Thank you for your comment! Good to know you enjoyed my video!
I chanced upon your channel today and immediately subscribed to you. Thank you so much for the quality content for knowledge. Your channel is truly a hidden gem. I wish you will not stop producing such content and hope you gain more subscribers in future! ☺️☺️☺️
thank you for your subscribe!
Thankings IINO so much,It is so important
Yeah, Zero emission is the world import topic now.
The video is just great as always however have you ever considered building your own logistics blog, you know, after watching a video then we can read it once again on your blog, it would be so wonderful !!! Really hope that I can read your logistics blog someday. Thanks again for this video.
Thank you for your idea. Now most contents in this blog.
forwarder-university.com/training-lesson/
please use it as well.
This is very informative. Thank you very much!
My pleasure😄
Thank you IIno san
You are welcome!
Excellent summary
Good information
Decarbonization goals on marine transport are possible, but not based on the LNG/Ammonia/Hydrogen/Methanol pathways. LNG will increase the pollution from cooling and compressing. Ammonia need huge amount of green hydrogen from intermittent wind and solar farms, Green Hydrogen from intermittent renewables need huge investment and have high cost, and Methanol is even worse, green methanol need CO2 and Hydrogen and the process is energy intensive process.
All these can be solved only with cheep energy from Levitation-gravity electricity generation, a technology which levitate heavy solid block using low energy.
Good one 👍🏻
Thanks for your very informative videos. Hope that there will be many exciting vids next times. Could you pls make a specific vid about when cnee take D/O at carrier's company? What happens when cnee does some procedures to take the goods?
Thank you for your comment and idea😄
Ships can be powered by nuclear reactors. This has been done for over 60 years on large military vessels. Small nuclear reactors actually take up way less space abroad a ship than fossil fuel engines a fuel tanks. The truth is nuclear power is probably the only way to reach zero emissions in shipping. The reason nuclear powered Ships aren't the industry standard isn't technological it's political. To clean up shipping we need to go nuclear.
Thanks for the informations. If you need any assistance from Turkiye, pls do not hesitate to contact with us(Armada Logistics).
By definition you cannot reduce CO2 with methanol or any other fuel, if the 10% reduction requires double the fuel tanks. At the end of the day, you need to transport a specific amount of cargo and any reduction in cargo is also considered in the environmental influence.
👍
Methanol can be burnt more efficiently with fuel cell compared to IC engines.
Methanol, I also check this new fuel.
Doesnt matter, it is not efficient enough.
Are There any companies that are front runners that i can invest in?
The volume is not a big issue.. First you dont have into account the higher efficiency from fuel cells, second what is the current volume of fuel oil of current tankers vs the size of the ship..
is not significant at all, then we need to remember that to double the volume, we just need to increase a 25% the diameter of the tank. At higher volume less issues to keep liquid hydrogen due the volume-surface ratio.
👍
The higher efficiency of fuel cells cannot be compared to how much volume is being reduced. Considering the cargo transportation all vessels with alternative fuels do not comply with regulations.
@@GeorgiosD90 What? I can not understand your point..
Your point is about regulations? how those apply to the point I am doing?
What are you saying about the efficiency?
Sorry.. but try to explain your argument with more detail please.
I also read your other comment that is not possible to reduce co2 with methanol if requires double the tank volume, that point does not have much sense either.
First.. is not all about co2.. you have many other pollutants that you can reduce using LNG instead diesel.
The volume thing is not a thing either, how much tank volume from the % of the total volume a container ship requires?
Methane is a bit lighter, this mean less water displacement.
I agree that there is no much point to use methane because adds co2 too.
But what is your point against LH2??
@@angellestat2730 By definition you cannot reduce emissions with a fuel that has less energy density, because even if the fuel has less emissions more fuel needs to be burnt.
Simple.
@@GeorgiosD90 ?? no.. it depends how efficient and energy dense is that fuel.. not just "volumetric energy density", it also depends on how clean it burns, which usually depends a lot in the energy content of that hydrocarbon, where methane is the one with less carbon ratio from h2.
Also.. LH2 is way less dense.. and you reduce 100% of co2. So just with that example I eliminate your argument.
Hmm not really your field of expertise Iino san. Ammonia is definitely not 0 CO2, the production and transportation of all alternative fuels will also involve CO2 production.
Also there are definitely Hydrogen engines, its a fuelcell to convert the hydrogen into water and make electricity to power an electric motor. This has no NOx release.
Oh.. I see. It's come from Japanese transportation ministry information.
And imagine how much energy is wasted in making hydrogen, then converting it back to water and electricity and powering the electric motor lol