Climate Cult Super Concerned With Shipping

I wonder if they are considering that a goodly chunk of their goods come on ships? Autos and auto parts. Their smartphones. Computers. Routers. TVs. Their fast fashion for selfies. The NY Times is Very Concerned, and will manufacture this issue, rather than, you know, actually just covering the news

Shipping Contributes Heavily to Climate Change. Are Green Ships the Solution?

climate cowOn a bright September day on the harbor in Copenhagen, several hundred people gathered to welcome the official arrival of Laura Maersk.

Laura was not a visiting European dignitary like many of those in attendance. She was a hulking containership, towering a hundred feet above the crowd, and the most visible evidence to date of an effort by the global shipping industry to mitigate its role in the planet’s warming.

The ship, commissioned by the Danish shipping giant Maersk, was designed with a special engine that can burn two types of fuel — either the black, sticky oil that has powered ships for more than a century, or a greener type made from methanol. By switching to green methanol, this single ship will produce 100 fewer tons of greenhouse gas per day, an amount equivalent to the emissions of 8,000 cars.

The effect of global shipping on the climate is hard to overstate. Cargo shipping is responsible for nearly 3 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions — producing roughly as much carbon each year as the aviation industry does.

Figuring out how to limit those emissions has been tricky. Some ships are turning to an age-old strategy: harnessing the wind to move them. But ships still need a more constant source of energy that is powerful enough to propel them halfway around the world in a single go.

No, really? They need constant power? Kinda like citizens forced to deal with unreliable solar and wind?

The Laura Maersk is the first of its kind to set sail with a green methanol engine and represents a significant step in the industry’s efforts to address its contribution to climate change. The vessel is also a vivid illustration of just how far the global shipping sector has to go. While roughly 125 methanol-burning ships are now on order at global shipyards from Maersk and other companies, that is just a tiny portion of the more than 50,000 cargo ships that ply the oceans today, which deliver 90 percent of the world’s traded goods.

Depending on the source, methanol ships can be 12% to 54% more expensive than traditional fossil fuels. I do like that it is a whole lot less polluting than fossil fuels, from an environmental stance, not a climate cult stance. Regardless, this means the cost of goods will go up.

Yet that easy consumption has come at the price of a warmer and dirtier planet. In addition to affecting the atmosphere, ships burning fossil fuel also spew out pollutants that reduce the life expectancy of the large percentage of the world’s people who live near ports, said Teresa Bui, policy director for climate at Pacific Environment, an environmental organization.

That pollution was particularly bad during the Covid-19 pandemic, when supply chain bottlenecks caused ships to pile up outside of the Port of Los Angeles, producing pollution equivalent to nearly 100,000 big rigs per day, she said.

“They have been under regulated for decades,” Ms. Bui said of the shipping industry.

Funny how they always want more government, eh?

But the world today does not yet produce much green methanol. Maersk has committed to using only sustainably produced methanol, but if other shipping companies end up using methanol fuel made with coal or oil, that will be no better for the environment.

Surprise? Plus, there isn’t that much. Which would drive up the price, which would then drive up the price of goods. All for a scam.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

10 Responses to “Climate Cult Super Concerned With Shipping”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Puhlease understand that the “true cost” of fossil-fuel based transport must include the negative externalities associated with global warming. Sorry, but true.

    This would make local foods and manufactured products more competitive, right?

    The globe is subsidizing* China and their exports!!!

    *We know, we know, most connies only consider subsidies to be direct payments to people they don’t favor.

    • James Lewis says:


      No matter how you slice it this new “green fuel” will be a lot more expensive than the fuel that has been used for years,

      This added cost will be added to whatever product shipped.

      Another hidden cost of the lies told by the Left

    • Jl says:

      J-what negative externalities associated with global warming?

  2. H says:

    Most of the fossil fuel exporting countries are supporting Hamas. Shouldn’t that alone be a good reason to cut back in fossil fuels use?
    Remember that 9/11 was financed by fossil fuels radical Islam is/was financed by fossil fuels. How long must we support radical islam?

    • Jl says:

      Brandon is supporting Hamas, isn’t that reason to cut back on Brandon? Johnny, always good for a laugh….

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:


        President Biden supports Israel and Netanyahu.

        • L.G.Brandon!, L.G.Brandon! says:

          “President” LOL biden supports president biden. He doesn’t support Israel, he doesn’t support Netanyahu (neither do you by the way you’ve made that pretty clear) and he doesn’t support the United States of America. He supports everything beneficial to the Democrat/Communist Party and everything beneficial to Joe robinette Biden.

          Look around you blind fool. What do you see now that is better than it was four years ago? The senile fool has built nothing back nothing better. And “don’t don’t don’t” isn’t a motto it’s what every woman in your life has told you.

          So how many stolen votes in the next election do you plan to win by? Last time you claimed 81 million votes from and who never left his basement and couldn’t draw a crowd of more than 200 people. I imagine this time you’ll go for 100 million votes from a man who can’t leave the stage without an escort and who hasn’t said a cogent line in three years.

        • Jl says:

          J-and he’s given over 1 billion to Hamas, sorry.

  3. Dana says:

    The article missed a major part of business. The Japanese pioneered it, but a huge number of American companies have adopted the concept of ‘just in time’ inventory, in which products they need are ordered to arrive as close to the time they’ll be needed as possible. This reduces both inventory and finance costs for businesses, and in many instances reduces warehousing personnel. Ideally, if the inventory arrives just in time, it is handled by one less person, as it is handed from the shipper directly to the user.

    What this can lead to is more, smaller shipments of inventory. The trucks being used for the shipments can be — though not necessarily are — smaller, but the trucks move more often.

  4. James Lewis says:


    No matter how you slice it this new “green fuel” will be a lot more expensive than the fuel that has been used for years,

    This added cost will be added to whatever product shipped.

    Another hidden cost of the lies told by the Left

Pirate's Cove