Burning petrol & diesel in an uncertain world

[TwoHooter]

But nobody mentions the 'Modern Grand Solar Minimum'. That should peg back temperature rises somewhat.

I don't want to cause offence but I don't think you understand my point.

Even if the Grand Solar Minimum were to have a measurable effect in real time, and even if the Maunder Minimum were to bring about a mini Ice Age (spoiler: it won't), those events would not change the direction of travel. Temperature rises are no longer the point at issue. The amount of political capital invested in the anthropogenic climate change hypothesis by the political and Davos class is so huge that they literally cannot afford to allow the narrative to change. They will stick with it to the bitter end and every fact which casts doubt on the theory will be "fact checked" into oblivion. I'm surprised my posts in this thread haven't already been fact checked and deleted. The mods must be asleep.

It's a bit like the antipodean zero-C**** strategy. Even if Morrison and Ardern were to come to the conclusion that the strategy won't work they simply cannot afford to admit they were wrong. Their careers would be over if the public realised they had been led down the wrong path. As I said above: 'the right question to ask about climate change is not 'What is the climate going to do?', but 'What are the politicians going to do?' There's not much room for doubt about that as things stand at the moment.

 

[SimonD]

Brilliant and thought provoking post.

The issue is where the politicians are leading us.

I agree, but I wonder if they know where they're leading us. You say that much of the global political establishment (excepting the obvious) have hitched their wagon to the climate change train and dare not let go. It would be a brave world leader at COP26 who said: hang on everyone, I think we've got this wrong.

I would like to know where they're leading us but I think, from what you've said, they dare not tell us. The future world is a pretty dystopian place and the peasants would revolt if they knew that's where they're being led. One point I do disagree on though:

My best guess is that life will get so tough as we head in the direction our leaders are taking us that the public will demand they end things like boats that burn petrol and diesel. I just can't see the average member of the public accepting that they can't fly away for a holiday, or buy cheap stuff from the Far East, or build a house extension,... but we can still have boats.

The public accepted for the past two years they could not fly on holiday, so many of them bought a boat. If things go in the direction you're indicating, boat ownership will continue to increase because cutting back on international flight will have a greater effect than doing the same to leisure boating. I hope I'm right!

 

[TwoHooter]

....One point I do disagree on though: The public accepted for the past two years they could not fly on holiday, so many of them bought a boat. If things go in the direction you're indicating, boat ownership will continue to increase because cutting back on international flight will have a greater effect than doing the same to leisure boating. I hope I'm right!

That's a really good point (from a member of the mutual admiration club ).

Sticking to my thesis that we should try to predict what the politicians will do, I see two possible outcomes.

The first possible outcome is that boats will be a useful safety valve for people who can't travel abroad, so they might be allowed for that reason, the justification being that while an individual mobo might be quite a large emitter of the ghastly CO2 on the relatively rare occasions it is running at full chat the fleet as a whole is actually insignificant (see below*).

The second possible outcome is that the average member of the public using their precious carbon ration to get away for a holiday at the seaside and seeing mobos chuntering around the place. is going to be a tad jealous, and if the Twitterati latch on to that it won't be long before the politicians decide we're an easy target. A bit like throwing Christians to the lions to keep the Roman populace docile. I think that's the most likely outcome. Which is why I say we should enjoy it while we can.

Something you can be pretty sure of, if we do become a target we will go down without a fight. One of the most interesting things to come out of the last 18 months was Pants-Down Prof's comment in late 2020:- '“I think people’s sense of what is possible in terms of control changed quite dramatically between January and March,” Professor Ferguson says. When SAGE observed the “innovative intervention” out of China, of locking entire communities down and not permitting them to leave their homes, they initially presumed it would not be an available option in a liberal Western democracy. 'It’s a communist one party state', we said. 'We couldn’t get away with it in Europe, we thought… and then Italy did it. And we realised we could. ' It seems the general population actually like being told what to do, and want to run with the herd, particularly when every other option is fact-checked or cancelled out of existence. I don't think mobo owners are any different. Well, maybe some of us are. But not the majority.

* BTW, it would be really interesting to know what the annual CO2 emissions are from the UK fleet of leisure boats, and then to compare that to, say, the annual emissions from HM Queen Elizabeth's two gas turbines and four diesel engines. Or the annual flock of Bizjets to Davos (prediction: Bizjets will still be allowed). But I can't see the RYA making that sort of comparison (sorry to bang on about them but they have really got up my nose recently).

 

[BlueJasper]

My observation wasn't really directed at any point, more a tongue in cheek comment regarding global warming and potentially greater influences out of our control that do not feature in any political debate. Where we are being taken is one to contemplate.

I don't want to cause offence but I don't think you understand my point.

 

[SimonD]

BTW, it would be really interesting to know what the annual CO2 emissions are from the UK fleet of leisure boats, and then to compare that to, say, the annual emissions from HM Queen Elizabeth's two gas turbines and four diesel engines.

Indeed, and what would be the annual CO2 emissions from cruise liners (that's when there in use, never mind the past 18 months idling in Weymouth Bay!).

Maybe if we were stopped from boating, we should go on a cruise, or buy a motorhome or caravan and take the ferry to the continent. Maybe the Government has thought of this and calculated the net CO2 saving.... Or maybe not.

 

[Bouba]

It’s a numbers game. The government has self imposed targets for emissions (which the PM just announced might be unachievable). So, if you take a tiny fraction of a percent from everywhere it all adds up. Boating will be a victim. Remember during the first lockdown, no one was allowed to stay in their holiday home, despite that being a more logical place to isolate, because it’s divisive. Why should we be stuck in inner city flats when the rich can swan off. So same logic, why should we make so many sacrifices for the environment when the rich can swan about on their boats.....

 

[Momac]

...... the public will demand they end things like boats that burn petrol and diesel.

Which is a good reason why we should request marinas supply HVO instead of diesel for use in our boats.

 

[GravyStain]

When the discussion turns to Global Warming, or Climate Change, everyone rightfully talks about emissions, be they diesel, petrol, Avgas or whatever.

No one seems to acknowledge the real reason staring them in the face. The worlds population has TRIPLED in the last seventy years.

That is your problem. Right there. No need to look any further. End of.

BUT...Unless you're a dictator, you can't take away the divine right to have children. Maybe we need to?

Interestingly though, the momentum of thought is that the world population is heading for a sharp decline over the next century and some countries (Japan for example) will need to heavily relax it's immigration laws in order to function as a nation.

Thoughts anyone?

 

[BruceK]

Not just Japan, most developed countries have a negative population growth leading to an aging population, been that way throughout history. No civilization has ever survived the longhaul without immigration and not suffered economic collapse.

 

[superheat6k]

We're bombarded daily with the dire consequences of climate change and extorted to do our bit to stop it happening. Meanwhile, Governments and other organisations meet regularly to discuss setting targets for reducing CO2 emissions. However, these are processes, rather than an end goal. I have not heard anyone set out what a sustainable planet would look like.

I'm sure there are some who think society should return to a pre-industrial revolution state. But you can't uninvent industrialisation and, despite the fact no-one voted for it, most of us wouldn't want to give it up. So, what does the future world look like? At present, what's on offer seems to be both ruinously expensive and unpalatable. We'll be driving electric cars, paying a lot more for heating our homes, eating less meat, not flying to Alicante every year, seeing huge swathes of the countryside being covered in solar panels, etc.

Is that it? Is there not a better vision where we can keep on living pretty must as we do now through the application of technology? Does it all come down to generating energy without generating CO2? If so, surely nuclear power is the answer (be it fission or fusion). And yet, it hardly gets a mention in the media. Is that because the green zealots would kick off or are Governments secretly planning an explosion (pardon the pun) of some form of nuclear power generation and want it to be a surprise.

I have no idea what the answer is, but I just wish someone in power, i.e. the means to make a real difference, would stop telling us how we can change the future without telling us what it looks like.

Deleted - the truth hurts !!!

 

[Bouba]

Deleted?

 

[superheat6k]

Unfortunately, while there are some kernels of truth, if your attitude to the environment goes viral, then it’s very likely that the public and government will not go lightly on us?

I can't delete your reply

 

[PowerYachtBlog]

When the discussion turns to Global Warming, or Climate Change, everyone rightfully talks about emissions, be they diesel, petrol, Avgas or whatever.

No one seems to acknowledge the real reason staring them in the face. The worlds population has TRIPLED in the last seventy years.

That is your problem. Right there. No need to look any further. End of.

BUT...Unless you're a dictator, you can't take away the divine right to have children. Maybe we need to?

Interestingly though, the momentum of thought is that the world population is heading for a sharp decline over the next century and some countries (Japan for example) will need to heavily relax it's immigration laws in order to function as a nation.

Thoughts anyone?

It is also a true though that the worst emissions are coming from China, India, USA, Europe. The last is two are in a negative population side.

But yes the real problem is that seven billion (nearly eight) of population from three billion in 1960.

 

[mainshiptom]

welcome back Graham!

Just do it and make sure to invite me!

 

[henryf]

Fuel burn is certainly a thing but unlike with an aeroplane you have options. Our 50 footer can burn circa 15-20 litres per hour which, when using prevailing tides in the Solent gives us 8-10 knots. All of a sudden the fuel used on a 4 hour trip overseas gives 3 or 4 people in a boat scope for a couple of weeks away.

In crude terms I would estimate around 250 litres of fuel per person in plane flying for 4 hours each way. That’s 50 hours of displacement cruising assuming 4 in the boat. Of course we can burn a lot more going quickly but we don’t do huge numbers of hours because we’re travelling at 25-30 nautical miles per hour then.

If you take our maximum capacity of 12 paying guests then that gives us 3,000 litres to play with. I might argue a day chartering with us is the same as a weekend away on a plane. Juggle the numbers however you like, 1.5 hours flying gives 12 pax around 900 litres to play with and our typical day charter uses about half that.

The other thing to remember is that as a nation we have a rather good boat building industry. Between them Princess and Sunseeker build around £6-700 million worth of boats per year many of which are exported bringing vital cash into the country. Labour intensive so lots of well paid skilled jobs.

No sensible politician will want to kill off that golden goose in a hurry. You also have the huge service industry surrounding boating from repairs to berthing to food.

Boating isn’t a financial race to the bottom, it genuinely puts food on the table.

 

[James L]

Fuel burn is certainly a thing but unlike with an aeroplane you have options. Our 50 footer can burn circa 15-20 litres per hour which, when using prevailing tides in the Solent gives us 8-10 knots. All of a sudden the fuel used on a 4 hour trip overseas gives 3 or 4 people in a boat scope for a couple of weeks away.

In crude terms I would estimate around 250 litres of fuel per person in plane flying for 4 hours each way. That’s 50 hours of displacement cruising assuming 4 in the boat. Of course we can burn a lot more going quickly but we don’t do huge numbers of hours because we’re travelling at 25-30 nautical miles per hour then.

If you take our maximum capacity of 12 paying guests then that gives us 3,000 litres to play with. I might argue a day chartering with us is the same as a weekend away on a plane. Juggle the numbers however you like, 1.5 hours flying gives 12 pax around 900 litres to play with and our typical day charter uses about half that.

The other thing to remember is that as a nation we have a rather good boat building industry. Between them Princess and Sunseeker build around £6-700 million worth of boats per year many of which are exported bringing vital cash into the country. Labour intensive so lots of well paid skilled jobs.

No sensible politician will want to kill off that golden goose in a hurry. You also have the huge service industry surrounding boating from repairs to berthing to food.

Boating isn’t a financial race to the bottom, it genuinely puts food on the table.

Politicians will just rely on the market deciding for them.
Just like with Electric cars, the politicians didn't do anything to develop them, but once it was obvious that ICE cars won't make financial sense in a few years they all jumped on the bandwagon to ban them.
The same with fossil fuel heating etc, in a few years as the cost of renewable electricity drops politicians will ban fossil fuel heating from some point in the future where they see electric heating being cheaper.
I see something similar happening with boats, most likely in the way of a replacement fuel, whatever the commercial boats are using will be mandated for pleasure boats. In the long term it will probably be cheaper, but we'll probably have to deal with some severe taxes in the medium term.

 

[henryf]

Large commercial shipping is the low hanging fruit when it comes to pollution, private craft are a long way down the line.

 

[TwoHooter]

Large commercial shipping is the low hanging fruit when it comes to pollution, private craft are a long way down the line.

Exactly. If you feel a moral imperative to burn less hydrocarbons there are two things you should do to make a good start. Boycott cruises. Passing two anchored cruise ships in Weymouth Bay on Sunday 19th I noticed they were casting their usual pall of filthy particulate-ridden gas from their smokestacks, to say nothing of CO2. And the other thing you should do is boycott every item in your life which has been shipped (or flown for that matter) into the country.

Let me know how you get on.

 

[tico]

Theres already a competition to develop an alternative to red diesel...
Apply for the Red Diesel Replacement competition Phase 1

 

[TwoHooter]

Well COP26 has kicked off, and before the mods get excited and start pressing the ban button I wish to point out that the following is NOT fake news, it is real news and I submit that it is directly relevant to this thread and our future as owners of motor boats.

Bezos Leads Parade Of 400 Private Jets To COP26 With $65M Gulfstream As Greta Accuses Leaders Of Betrayal | ZeroHedge
'Hypocrisy and hot air over Glasgow Airport as the 2021 UN Climate Change Conference, also known as COP26, attracts 400 private jets carrying world leaders and business executives from around the world. '

NOTE: I think the flight record shows flights into Glasgow, not the whole of the UK. The point about use of private and chartered aircraft to attend the conference is valid but I think the title of this video is wrong.

Hypocrisy and hot air hover over Glasgow as Cop26 leaders fly in by polluting private jet
'Meanwhile, two Estonian-owned cruise liners that have been moored on the Clyde to provide overspill accommodation for people working at Cop26 will have to run their diesel engines to generate electricity, because they cannot be rigged up to shore power. The Tallink Group, owners of the Romantika and the Silja Europa, told The Daily Telegraph that only one of the vessels was capable of plugging in to shore power but it was not available at either of the berths.'

Boris kicks off COP26 warning leaders it is a 'minute to midnight'
'On Sunday, MailOnline observed at least 52 private jets landing at Glasgow - while estimates put the total number flying in for the conference at 400...... Prince Charles was among those travelling by non-commercial plane from the G20 in Rome, MailOnline can reveal. A Clarence House spokesman said: 'His Royal Highness has personally campaigned for a shift towards Sustainable Aviation Fuel and would only undertake travel to Rome when it was agreed that sustainable fuel would be used in the plane.' The spokesman said that sustainable fuel would also be used 'wherever possible... from now on'.

Can I buy some of that sustainable fuel for our boat please? If not, why not?