backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 41 comment(s) - last by rpk.. on Mar 26 at 11:41 AM


When deployed, the skysail flies high above the Beluga Shipping craft, pulling it along, and saving $1,500/day in fuel costs.  (Source: AFP)
In order to improve fuel economy German company proves old technology beats the rest

When contemplating how to cut shipping costs and emissions created by the large amounts of fuel needed to be burned to transport cargo overseas, Europe could have turned to a "high-tech" solution such as solar power or hydrogen power.  Instead they chose a modernized version of a far older technology, which has been proven to work.

In late 2006, DailyTech reported that a German company, SkySail GmbH & Co. KG, was conducting test runs of its cargo ship-based sail design, which deployed a large kite to improve fuel economy.  Now, the maiden voyage of the first commercial adoption of the hybrid system just concluded and was ruled a resounding success.

Beluga Shipping, a German shipping firm, became the first commercial adopter of the technology.  The European Union helped to subsidize the adoption by chipping in 1.2 million Euros ($1.9M USD) as part of its LIFE program, which is designed to help fight climate change.  The sail was installed and measures
1,700-square-feet when deployed.  It flies above the ship like a kite and provides significant pull in windy conditions. 

The sail, comprised of high-tech fabrics and computer controlled to help orient it to maximize efficiency, performed beautifully on its maiden voyage.  The SkySail-equipped ship, Beluga SkySails, completed its first two month journey of 11,952 nautical miles from Germany to Venezuela.  Initial estimates were that the sail would cut the ship's emissions by up to 30 percent, and the Beluga Shipping CEO Neils Stolberg estimated the SkySail would save the ship $1,500/day in fuel costs.

Now that the voyage is over and the first data has been tabulated, the results are almost exactly as promised.  According to Beluga Shipping managing director,
Stephan Wrange, the ship used 20 percent less energy than it would have normally, without the sail.  As the normal fuel budget per day is $7,500, this means the device delivered on its promised savings of $1,500/day.  Further, this lower fuel burn cut the ships emissions as promised.  The ship's captain stated that the voyage opened up "“a new chapter in the history of commercial shipping."

While the device may seem expensive to deploy, it is highly durable, and will pay for itself in only a few years.  Assuming constant travel, and an average savings of $1,500/day, the sail would return the EU's investment in only 3.5 years.  Over the lifetime of ships, it could save shipping companies millions of dollars, and help conserve fossil fuel supplies.   Further mass production will help to drop the costs of the sail.

Beluga SkySails will return to sea to complete the second 2 month leg on its 12 month initial trial deployment, and will continue to collect data on the sail's contributions.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Great Idea lets move forward
By Grast on 3/24/2008 11:21:40 AM , Rating: 3
This is a great example of using resources. I belive the next step should NOT be further deployment of this type of sail. I believe these cargo ships needs to be redesigned with sails built into the ships.

I believe if multiple sails were used. A further reduction in fuel cost could be realised. I believe that most people have no idea of how much fuel is used to get products from place to place around the world. Everytime you get fresh fruits such as berrys and melons in the middle of winter, that friut was sent on a ship such as the one in the artical above.

This tech is a stop gap solution. The final solution should be redesigned ships with multiple computer controlled sails.

Later...




RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By Gul Westfale on 3/24/2008 11:26:31 AM , Rating: 5
i agree, but you must remember that these ships are built for a service life of several DECADES, and the driving force behind this is probably not environmental protection but long-term cost savings. so we won't be seeing more of these until it makes economic sense to re-equip older designs or to build newer ones... but i'm not holding my breath.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By ImSpartacus on 3/24/2008 12:12:57 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, most of the companies that will put these to use are going for the financial savings, not the fossil fuel savings. These ships don't wear out and get replaced every year, they have a long life span and companies will eventually retrofit sails like this for the savings.

The only problem is the heavy costs upfront and putting faith in untested technology. Although if these companies can persuade all these green environment agencies to give them funding upfront and let them pay it back, then it could work.

The agencies are paying for the fossil fuel savings and the companies are using it for the money saved. Win win.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By kenji4life on 3/24/2008 12:30:48 PM , Rating: 4
I know it's a new spin on the concept of wind powered sails, but this is hardly "untested technology".. Maybe if it was a solar sail. This is more akin to I dunno, thousands of years of using the wind to propel things. The only semi new thing about this is it's used to conserve fuel instead of being the primary means of propulsion, whereas a typical sailboat uses fossil fuel as a backup instead.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By RjBass on 3/24/2008 1:40:10 PM , Rating: 3
Agreed. How this isn't a proven technology is beyond me. What I am seeing here is a technology created and used thousands of years ago being brought back into the mainstream. It's a technology that crazy "Global Warming" nuts can get into and it's a technology that cost conscious corporations can get into. Saving money for them means cheaper products for us. Its a win win win.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By EE Pete on 3/24/2008 3:31:32 PM , Rating: 2
This isn't a proven technology. Don't confuse technology with established science.

Example: Both ion engines and chemical rockets work on the same principle: Newtons laws. Both utilize the well known fact that ejected mass from a mass causes both masses to move in opposite directions with speeds related to their respective inertias. But the technology is very different.

If you can spot the discrepancy in my example then I am positive you are capable of understanding what I mean :)

Anyway, using wind to propel things is a proven concept, but that in and of itself is not a technology. This sail doesn't use a mast, it uses lines and computers. Even if a computer system was installed on a tradition sail boat, it still would be an unproven technology.

Proven technology tends to have the engineering down. This is a new design with new systems. New research needs to be done, new equations need to be derived, etc.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By wushuktl on 3/24/2008 11:30:08 AM , Rating: 2
i think you're right. a redesign of the ship that would make the ship more efficiently use the power gained by the wind. i'm amazed at how much the one sail affected the ship. by just looking at the picture i would have assumed almost no affect and am very happy to be proven wrong.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By rpk on 3/26/2008 11:41:28 AM , Rating: 2
I am dubious about the data in this article. Either the figures were wrong or the cost savings seem way over stated. Fuel is a direct relationship to horsepower. The sail would have to be producing a lot of horsepower to reduce the fuel expended by 20 percent. On a small ship like this, 1700 sq ft of sail is not that much even at the elevated levels it is flown.

I could be wrong but on this one I am from Missouri and need to have it shown to me.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By rudy on 3/24/2008 11:33:36 AM , Rating: 2
That would cost more then the current solution. Which can probably be strapped on any ship with very little modification. The problem with this is it adds another item that can break down and will it be guaranteed to last 7 or more years to get a good return on the investment? The bigger hope is mass production and oursourcing it to china will bring the price down below a point where you can make money back in just 1 year and it will last 5 or more then it will be on most liners out there. It also will matter how difficult it is to maintain.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By therealnickdanger on 3/24/2008 11:42:31 AM , Rating: 3
Yeah, this has to stay as a "band-aid" solution for a long while. Once you start building sailing vessels of this size, you enter into a whole new level of costs that removes the benefits. I can only imagine the required keel depth for a tanker sailboat of this size - I imagine it would restrict its entry into many ports.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By kenji4life on 3/24/2008 12:37:02 PM , Rating: 2
Again this is not a "band-aid" solution.

Conserving fuel is a business decision made by these companies who have realized that the increase in fuel prices is affecting their profits. Now they will be able to offset their fuel prices so that they can buffer their bottom line more and possibly even pass the savings down. Now instead of increased transport costs to offset fuel costs, the companies that invest in this sail once again have the upper hand.


By therealnickdanger on 3/24/2008 2:27:32 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you 100%. I loosely meant "band-aid" in relation to rebuilding entire fleets of tankers as sailboats.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By MrBlastman on 3/24/2008 1:33:38 PM , Rating: 4
I don't think keel depth would be a large concern per-say given how larger sailing ships operate relative to your standard "pond" type that people utilize in lakes/oceans for recreational purposes.

Perhaps you are thinking of the centerboard or the fin keel? The protrusion that extends beneath the hull like a "fin" to stabilize the ship?

Larger ships do not utilize these "fins" in such a sense but more rely on a keel. Sailing ships at their pinnacle:

http://website.lineone.net/~dee.ord/19%20&%2020th%...

Definately do not demonstrate a large depth of keel.

The largest ship in the world, the Knock Nevis, had a depth of about 81 feet when fully loaded:

http://website.lineone.net/~dee.ord/19%20&%2020th%...

Taking a large sailing ship - the Barque of France, it has a ratio of 24.9:418 or .0596 ft. of depth per foot of length.

The Knock Nevis had a ratio of 81:1504, or .0539 ft. of depth per foot of length.

The U.S.S. Yorktown (CV-10) of WWII had a ratio of 34.2:820 or .0417

The 1850 Sailing Ship is 20:438 or .0457.

As you can see, there is no direct correlation to Sailing Ships vs. non-sailing ships and depth of keel. The depth can vary widely between many different ships.

I think this is a weak argument against exploring sailing technology further. Anything we can do to reduce or dependence on oil that is not absurd (aka Ethanol from corn fields - what a crock) I think should be explored further.

20% is 20%, I think they are on to something here. The article does not state the cost per sail per ship - I would like to know that rather than a lump sum.


RE: Great Idea lets move forward
By EE Pete on 3/24/2008 3:43:05 PM , Rating: 3
Why build the sails into the ship? It would add weight(not to mention the additional cost of the materials and maintenance) and possibly occupy space that would otherwise be used for cargo. With sails like this one you can harness faster, less turbulent winds, due to their deployment altitude.


Awesome!
By pauluskc on 3/24/2008 11:20:48 AM , Rating: 2
Now if we can all get our own windmills:

http://www.windsave.com/




RE: Awesome!
By therealnickdanger on 3/24/2008 11:48:35 AM , Rating: 2
Growing up in hilly, rural Wisconsin, many of our neighbors had electricity-producing windmills on their property - this was well over 20 years ago. Combine this with air-tight home design and geo-thermal piping, you can reduce your dependence on most of the power grid. Toss in some solar and you're likely independent.


RE: Awesome!
By jlips6 on 3/24/2008 12:11:19 PM , Rating: 2
That makes me feel a little bit better about this situation. I have a cousin who spent $40,000 on a tracking solar array for his house. He actually puts energy back in to the grid, but his electric bills stay the same. Why? DTE. (For those who don't live in or by detroit, this is Detroit Edison, the power company that holds the monopoly for EVERYTHING in the area.)They force him to pay bills on all sorts of things which essentially means he's paying more for his electricity than he was before even without the interest on his loan.
And of course there was the man who had to take down his windmill in his backyard because of NIMBY...
It sounds silly, but these two things are the biggest obstacles for personal use of alternative energy. I love alternative energy, and energy saving innovation, but I am depressingly pessimistic because my personal experience has been negative.


RE: Awesome!
By Mitch101 on 3/24/2008 12:47:44 PM , Rating: 2
In a way I wish we ran out of fossil fuels. Seems all we do is make things more efficient and they raise the prices to compensate. I'm sure this is good for the environment and I am all for it however we concentrate too much to extending what we have instead of finding and switching over to alternatives. Yes there is that whole NIMBY problem that people need to get over. Cable companies tried that NIMBY junk when Direct TV was a startup. Oh that disgusting 31" satellite's dish ruins your neighborhood. No it breaks that monopoly on price gouging the cable company would do.

I'm all for stuff like biodiesel and alternative fuel sources sooner than later but it needs to be available at my local gas station for me to take the switch seriously. I cant use it if I cant buy it easily.

I would also like to see solar panels and installation services that don't price gouge you the costs so they make some of your future savings on you today. I priced solar panels and knew the cost of the panels. The installers would have made an easy 5k for not even a days worth of work. If they were reasonable I would have done it.

Ill give you another example I priced out replacing a water heater it was $200 to replace a water heater with a water heater. I was quoted $1500 to replace the unit with a hot water on demand system. I would supply the unit this was just the labor part for install.

Water heater - In Pipe, Out pipe, Gas Line.
Water on demand system - In Pipe, Out pipe, Gas Line, Electrical outlet the only difference

So why is it $1300.00 more to plug in a water on demand system into an electrical outlet? Why is the savings a bonus check for the person installing it?

Can we get a consumer friendly install version of these devices? Or the green planet people get into the install services and offer reasonable install prices. I will go green when it doesn't cost me all my green. Protesters need to start working on the install companies that are keeping people from going green.


RE: Awesome!
By Squilliam on 3/24/2008 7:38:41 PM , Rating: 2
get an electrician to install the outlet.

then you can get it installed for $200 since theres no excuse.


A new sail boat! Wind is FREE
By wingless on 3/24/2008 11:16:43 AM , Rating: 2
What a great idea. Why use fuel when you can have wind do some of the work. Wind is free and mankind used it for a few thousand years so we know how to make it work. Actually with our advanced sail technology with newer, stronger materials and methods, a 21st century hybrid sailboat cargo ship may be a viable investment. We could revive the sailboat to decrease petroleum use. The look of one coming into port would be so nostalgic.




RE: A new sail boat! Wind is FREE
By BlackIceHorizon on 3/24/2008 11:28:38 AM , Rating: 2
I couldn't agree more. It seems like humanity has sometimes given up on reasonable, simple solutions in favor of "high-tech" progress. I'm all for technological solutions to the worlds' problems, but if complexity doesn't add anything, it is merely burdensome and inefficient. And yes, even this relatively high-tech sail is far less complex than the combination of an internal combustion system supplied by a global fossil fuel infrastructure.

The fact that it's quite economically viable this early in testing is pretty amazing. Like anything, a competitive R&D market and mass production could really do wonders for costs and efficiency. This sort of realistic, economically-driven innovation is exactly what we need to address our energy and environmental problems.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/24/2008 12:47:25 PM , Rating: 2
Well, this is a high-tech solution. It's a low-tech concept using cuting edge technologies, to produce a simple yet effecient solution to a problem. Still high-tech even if the concept is simple.


RE: A new sail boat! Wind is FREE
By drebo on 3/24/2008 3:57:16 PM , Rating: 1
Nothing is free.

How many toxic chemicals and fossile fuels were used in the production of this sail? Of the computers used to control it?

One thing the article fails to mention is the amount of time lost by using this sail instead of conventional engine. If we're saving 20% on fuel costs at an expense of a 30% longer voyage, that doesn't really seem like an efficient tradeoff to me. How much money do I lose because I now need to wait two months instead of a month and a half for materials? How much money do I lose because it takes 30% longer to ship finished goods to market?

I'm all for conservationism, but the answer isn't in the sun, the wind, or the ground. The answer to our (percieved and future) energy problems are nuclear power and shale oil.

You can't make forward progress by going backwards.


By Trippytiger on 3/24/2008 11:36:16 PM , Rating: 2
I'd imagine that no time is lost at all, since this sail is never the sole source of power for the ship. It simply supplements the engines by reducing the load. This allows them to be run slower at a given speed, thereby lowering the fuel consumption while keeping transit times the same.


nice
By Gul Westfale on 3/24/2008 11:16:48 AM , Rating: 2
i read about this in a local paper last week, and i think it's a good idea. well, a modern retake on a very old idea.

<insert pirate joke about hoisting sails and getting booty here>




RE: nice
By jlips6 on 3/24/2008 12:20:31 PM , Rating: 3
I know few pirate jokes about hoisting sails, but I do know one about a barber shop...

a pirate walks in to a barber shop and asks for a haircut. The barber notices that the pirate is pretty beat up. He has a hook for a hand, a peg for a leg, and an eyepatch, covering an eye that isn't there.

The barber can't resist, so as he's cutting the pirate's hair, he asks him: "How did you lose your leg?"
the pirate growls and says "Arr, Me crew and I were robbin' some ships off of the caribbean, and a lad chopped it off with a sword!"

the barber says "That's horrible! How did you lose your hand?"
The pirate looks embarassed and says: Arr, I got drunk in San Francisco and a fell on some tracks and a trolly cut me hand clean off!"

The barber says "uhg. That's awful. How did you lose your eye?" The pirate says: "arr, My ship was just leaving port when I heard a strange noise above me. I looked up, and a bird pooped in me eye!"

The barber says "that's pretty nasty, but how did that take out your eye?"
the pirate replies, "aye, it was the first day I had me hook!"


RE: nice
By 325hhee on 3/24/2008 12:25:04 PM , Rating: 2
One thing to keep min mind, how durable are these sails, since it has computerized tech in it, salt air, and rough weather would give it a substantial shorter life span than a traditional sail. I hope this sail/kite tech can make an overall difference in the long run. While cargo ships will still always need engines, any assistance to lower costs is a great plus.


RE: nice
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/24/2008 12:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
They are using composite materials and synthetic nanofibers, not real cloth. It should be able to handle it no problem.


A great thing.
By marsbound2024 on 3/24/2008 11:20:02 AM , Rating: 3
Now this one great thing about humanity, we can look at the past and not only learn from our mistakes, but also our achievements... and make them better.




RE: A great thing.
By eye smite on 3/24/2008 11:42:06 AM , Rating: 3
I'm betting as time goes by you will see more things like this emerge. Newer technologies allow older ideas to come forward in new ways. For instance, another possible fuel saving technique would be using a windmill at front of ship to generate electricity. No generator running off the engines would mean less load on the engine and less fuel burned, or even solar cells. In any case I'm sure things like this will continue to come out. Skyscrapers would be ideal candidates for windmills to generate their own electricity and give any feedback generated to electric companies for further discounts. Just have to change the direction that people think in.


RE: A great thing.
By goku on 3/25/2008 1:08:26 AM , Rating: 2
That would be like putting a windmill on top of a semi truck, you'd be creating extra resistance and it'd be a waste of energy. What you'd need to do is create a more aero dynamic ship and one that cuts through the water more easily and weighs less.


Downsize?
By waltzendless on 3/24/2008 1:00:49 PM , Rating: 4
Think Skysail could make a mini version for my car? Gas prices are f***ing killing me.




RE: Downsize?
By jlips6 on 3/24/2008 7:46:01 PM , Rating: 2
you have a fascination with flying off the road? :p


These are KITES not sails
By KiteMan on 3/24/2008 1:38:01 PM , Rating: 4
Please take note that these are KITES, not standard sails. If you have not used a modern, steerable kite you may not be aware of the differences but please do some basic research before you assume they work as sails do. Kites do not generate the huge heeling forces that conventional sails of the same size do because the force they generate is applied to the boat at the base of the line not all along a vertical mast. Kites are up above the surface winds, in less turbulent and faster winds. (surface friction slows the wind near the surface of the ocean) When they are actively 'sculled' they can see higher than apparent wind-speeds and generate more pull than a static sail. The system is intended as a fuel saving device for EXISTING ships. While it would be great to see the shipping fleets of the world re-designed the life span of existing ships is quite long enough for this technology to be appropriate. The best kind of green tech is the sort that people WANT to use. Because it saves them money this is likely to actually be employed.




The other side of the coin
By Ringold on 3/24/2008 2:11:31 PM , Rating: 2
Since DT didn't mention a couple things;

quote:
But the innovative kites won’t benefit everyone. According to a company representative, the SkySails system isn’t meant for ships that travel faster than 16 or 17 knots because the efficiency of the system decreases as the speed of the ship increases. That means container ships, which average between 18 and 22 knots and represent the fastest-growing sector of the world’s fleet, won’t be able to use the technology.

And the impact skysails will have on reducing emissions is unclear. Although ships can use the SkySails system to reduce fuel consumption, they can also use the technology to increase speed. If the ship’s captain doesn’t throttle back the engine when the sail is deployed, the ship speeds up and its cargo gets delivered faster, but the same amount of fuel is burned.


http://www.geotimes.org/mar08/article.html?id=nn_w...

Also, good ol' America is also in the industry:

http://www.kiteship.com/

I think I also read, possibly in The Economist, that there is slight concern about how the structure of retrofitted ships would be impacted over the many years of potential use. That was a while ago I read about it though and possibly is no longer a concern, I don't know.




RE: The other side of the coin
By SunAngel on 3/24/2008 2:34:48 PM , Rating: 2
...also, how many captains would want to give up control of their ship to the uncertainty of the high seas. I would assume a ship traveling at 17 knots is less stable at high seas than a ship traveling at 19 knots.

...you say if high seas the captain would just go back to ship power...i'd say yes that is obviously, but you'd probably lose more valuable time getting back up to speed...putting cargo and life at greater risk.

...good idea, but possible commerce effects include longer shipping times, and questionable add-value

...probably a good idea for a ship that gets stranded out in the middle of the pacific.


Row, row, row your boat...
By Captain Orgazmo on 3/25/2008 5:36:16 AM , Rating: 2
In an effort to one-up the Germans, a firm from Rome, Italy, introduced another innovative ship propulsion technology that involves cutting little holes in the side of the hull, and installing rows of shackled men on benches pulling on long wooden poles with flattened ends curiously called "oars", synchronized to the pounding of a large drum by a fat bald sweaty man wearing a loincloth. A test run proved that while fuel consumption and CO2 emissions dropped, baked bean consumption and methane emissions increased.




RE: Row, row, row your boat...
By jlips6 on 3/25/2008 7:25:48 PM , Rating: 2
i wish i could rate you up, but I've already posted.
+1


Kites are better than sails
By bildan on 3/24/2008 1:58:48 PM , Rating: 2
Sails on deck mounted masts use low speed near-surface wind. Kites fly high above the ship in the higher speed wind layers aloft. Deck mounted sails are limited in area but as any kite flyer knows, kites can be ganged with many on the same line.

Kites are also more flexible than sails in that they can be steered to pull directly ahead.

It looks like adding two more kites would totally eliminate the need to use the engines.

This is an idea with legs.




and just how exactly...........
By phxfreddy on 3/25/2008 11:29:27 PM , Rating: 2
......do you orient this thing??? its on a string right?




"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings

DailyTech Poll
Do you use copy/paste on your smartphone? 




16 Comments












botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki