Thread

1. fsckboy · 1789610353 · focus · HN ↗

   Growing up as I did in an old seafaring town, quite near Ahab's ports of call, I love the romance of the sea and I listen exclusively to sea chanties.

   For low-value and bulk cargo, ships make sense, and modern computer-controlled sail trim and wind energy harvesting probably makes a great case. But high value cargo is largely today shipped by air. Nvidia wants money for its chips ASAP, too valuable to sit around non productively while being steamered. Maybe with surplus wind energy they could mine bitcoin while en route?

   A sort of related topic, about 20 years ago during peak farm-to-table "buy local" fashion, the NY Times pointed out that lamb shipped from New Zealand (where is that on a map, I can't find it?) to New York City arrives with a lower carbon footprint than lamb delivered by trucks from nearby upstate NY farms, such are the economies of scale in shipping.

   But now, blow me down me hearties, I look forward to dining on New Zealand lamb carried to my door by the winds of fortune!

   1. upboundspiral · 1789613143 · focus · HN ↗

      If there was a direct and maintained electric train route + stronger food regulation in the US you could dine on fresh local produce with a lower carbon footprint.

      International cooperation and trade is great, but in the US specifically the economic behemoths have used globalization to paper over the real problems that we face at home (we haven't truly invested in infrastructure in a long time, the meat we produce is rejected on health standards abroad, etc). I doubt the smokescreen will last much longer with Trump et al blowing up international agreements.

      1. fsckboy · 1789618945 · focus · HN ↗

         NYers dine on fresh local produce without subsidies or government interference.

         Farm fresh vegetable produce is perishable and goes from fresh to wilted/rotten very quickly. It is in the capitalist interest with no regulation to move fresh produce as quickly as possible to the supermarkets and onto the shelves. Every day trucks bring fresh produce from NJ and LI and upstate NY into the city and it immediately goes onto the shelves for sale. No communist system could do it as well.

         Produce is an extremely profitable segment of supermarket sales. The markups are very low (no communist could compete) but the turnover is very quick. While a can of beans might sit there a few weeks, customers love fresh produce. So hypothetically, they could make a 0.5% markup (you going to take public transit to NJ to buy produce a half a point cheaper?), but that's every week, so in a year it's a healthy 25% markup for the supermarket's annual investment. I made up the numbers to explain the concept, but that in a nutshell is supermarket economics. Maybe they mark up 2% and the annualized profit is 100%. Tiny margin, healthy profit, point made. Very efficient, happy customers, happy supermarkets.

         Trucks bring produce farm to table, maybe a distribution stop. Trains are for bulk stuff and not route flexible, so it's not clear they contribute any advantage to the mix, but I love me trains too.

         And it's not just NYer's, that's just an urban extreme example, every supermarket chain the the country operates like this.

         1. happyopossum · 1789681056 · focus · HN ↗

            > Maybe they mark up 2% and the annualized profit is 100%.

            That's not how profit works. If you spend $100 to make $102, that's a 2% margin. If you do that every week, you've spent $5200 to make $5304: still a 2% margin.

            You don't get to count only the margin every week, you have to count the outlay every week too...

      2. derektank · 1789620422 · focus · HN ↗

         >If there was a direct and maintained electric train route

         What do you mean by this? Most US freight trains are already diesel electric. German freight uses overhead electric wires on most of the shared passenger rail network, which is great, but doesn’t make it any easier or faster to deliver freight to consumers. Are you thinking of high speed rail? Bullet and maglev trains aren’t used to deliver freight anywhere globally that I’m aware of.

         1. Gud · 1789626002 · focus · HN ↗

            Diesel... electric. Now remove the word diesel.

            It reduces the carbon footprint considerably if you don't have to fill up your trains with carbon.

            1. derektank · 1789689527 · focus · HN ↗

               Perhaps I misread the parent comment, but the emphasis on that clause seemed to be on the fresh produce, not the lower carbon emissions. I don’t know how swapping out for 100% electric improves people’s access to fresh produce is my point

               1. Gud · 1789718217 · focus · HN ↗

                  Diesel electric are not at all the same as an electric train network. Electric trains have a very interesting property, as they work as a grid as both producers, feeding back when they are breaking.

                  You made a second point, that most trains are already "diesel electric", I am pointing out, that the function is very different from an electric train, and much less friendly(and less efficient) to the environment.

         2. yreg · 1789628343 · focus · HN ↗

            No, you don't need maglev to compete with a ship sailing from NZ on speed.

            1. pbmonster · 1789635095 · focus · HN ↗

               But you would need maglev if you wanted to compete on energy per ton of cargo per mile. Ships are several times more efficient than classic trains.

               1. yreg · 1789640359 · focus · HN ↗

                  NZ is also several times farther.
         3. mschuster91 · 1789631066 · focus · HN ↗

            Look around on youtube how dilapidated a lot of US freight rail is.

            I'm German, so I'm well used to dishing out on our railways, but at least our rails don't look like spaghetti that have been way overcooked and can only safely be driven at walking speed. And the amount of black smoke the locomotives emit when spinning up their old engines... wouldn't pass any emissions inspections here in Germany.

            1. weberer · 1789641593 · focus · HN ↗

               American diesel emission standards are famously more strict than Germany's. That's the whole reason why diesel cars aren't as common in the USA, and why Volkswagen had to cheat to pass emissions tests.

               1. mschuster91 · 1789641955 · focus · HN ↗

                  Railways have emissions standards different from road vehicles. And VW cheated because they couldn't pass European regulations, the thing is that the big lawsuit took place in the US because US courts allow far bigger monetary amounts.
            2. bluGill · 1789643926 · focus · HN ↗

               US rail is in great shape. You are confusing lines that are nearly abandoned and will be soon but they can take a couple more trips for the state of US rail. US rail is in great shape overall, and very well maintained.

               YouTube is not an unbiased source of information, please find a better source before making claims.

            3. hshdjdjdif · 1789669122 · focus · HN ↗

               HN, where a german lectures you about emissions inspections

               lol

               lmao even

      3. bell-cot · 1789625052 · focus · HN ↗

         I'd first question whether the NY Times' accounting included the carbon footprint within NZ, where the lambs are probably raised far from the shipping piers. Then you've got the infrastructure and power requirements for freezing for the long ocean voyage. Then...

         After that, I'd question local sheep farmers about how suitable upstate NY is for raising lambs, compared to NZ. And about the regulatory and business environment they face. Agriculture in the US is a hellish mess, and the great majority of its problems are caused by neither its associated carbon emissions nor by underinvesting in transportation infrastructure.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.