• Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    It was viable in the 1800s because it was the best method available. We don’t use it today because it ultimately costs more. A wind-powered company would have to compete against others using extremely energy-dense fuels that enable hundreds of times more cargo (between increased speed and increased capacity) for the same time and money.

    • OwOarchist@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      So, in other words, it’s perfectly viable … just not economically viable.

      That’s a failure of our economy, not of the technology. Perhaps if all the externalities of fossil fuel emissions were included in the cost of fossil fuel shipping (say, with massive taxes on fossil fuels to fund environmental efforts and carbon capture), that would change the balance.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m not sure sail is even viable, as in not compatible with modern capitalism. Most shipping has some sort of schedule or deadline, and you can’t just take an extra month “ because we were becalmed”

        Although I was also going to object based on more complex harbors, but that leads right to battery power. Right where all the shipping, all the emissions, all the pollution comes together where it can harm people ……. Why not battery-only, while in harbor?

        • OwOarchist@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          And for that matter, battery power as a backup when you’re becalmed as well.

          Hell, even fossil fuel power as a backup would be better than fossil fuel power as the main and only power source.

      • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        That’s like saying, “So it’s perfectly possible … just not physically possible.” If you cannot afford to do something, then you can’t do it. It’s freaking tautological.

        • OwOarchist@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          “Can’t afford it” is very, very different than “not physically possible”.

          If our economic system changed, then it could be perfectly viable again.