Have you ever been on a submarine? It's brutal, particularly if you're over 1.6m and over 60kg 😂
I doubt someone would pay for a holiday on one, or they must be crazy.
Yeah I don't think many cruise lines are going to be too happy with a $12 billion bill for a new cruise ship
They don't need a lot of endurance, few days max, so refueling with hydrogen in several ports is quite viable
Also, now that you've said it, you know that the next luxury item for millionaires will be a cruise on a submarine 😂
With nuclear you basically pay your fuel bill up front. I can’t see this happening, ports will take some convincing to allow them in and remember cruise ships have people onboard, a lot would refuse to go on a nuclear vessel. Cargo is easier to convince, but cargo companies won’t go nuclear as they will never pay for it.
I very much doubt it. Far too expensive. And no need to go fully underwater 😂
They will go hydrogen.
Big cruise ships will never go battery electric, will have to follow their big submarine cousins with nuclear electric and refuel intervals in the years
Im with you Unkel. This is what sets Tesla apart from the rest - they are not just a manufacturer, but also a software company.
just sell a few visas in China and bobs their uncle
@liamog - "I'm sure eventually Cariad will pay off for VAG"
You're more sure than I am 😁
I'm sure eventually Cariad will pay off for VAG, but for the moment it's looking more like bringing the software in-house was a bad idea. Vehicle manufacturers have been integrators of OEM parts for years, moving to entirely in-house development is a much bigger task than expected.
in case you missed this
I know business owners who have sold their bev to themselves at a massive loss but then rebought it personally.
Middleman involved but most business owners want out of a bev that is a few years old.
Haha yes was talking about BIK, it's been a big topic this week with everyone I know in company cars trying to decide what to do 🤦
Cost and energy density. We never needed to be massively efficient as fossil fuels are so energy dense. Same as ICE cars and EVs just on a much larger scale.
Maybe, but still produces CO2, and it's got the same caveats associated with biofuels like land usage, CO2 emissions from production and cost
The reason the shipping industry uses bunker fuel isn't down to any kind of efficiency, it's because it's cheap and no-one else wants it
Here was me thinking they were switching over to gas turbine engines
You may both be right. Some new-ish ships have the ability to burn mgo when required by national regulations and switch to bunker fuel when in international water. They use some kind of scrubbers to reduce the airborne pollution emitted when burning bunker fuel but that’s a very recent change.
Edit: this has some info: https://mfame.guru/nclh-equips-70-of-its-fleet-with-innovative-environmental-technology/
We definitely supplied carnival, royal princess and msc with low sulphur 380 but the newer ships use mgo (marine diesel) I guess.
Methanol or Ammonia are options too.
Although ammonia has considerably toxicity issues.
My money is on Methanol to win the race due to the smaller storage obstacles to climb and it’s a cleaner fuel.
Interesting and thanks.
Seems like hyuandai are being clever as the equivalent kia and skoda cars are not getting the grant.
Seems like a loophole as its a tad dodgy.
That's the definition of it. The percentage is given by the distributor to Revenue. Typically this is around the 88-95% range, or it used to be. It's mostly to cater for discounts given. Perhaps these days it should be 100%, at least on EVs as discounts have gone the way of the dodo...
OMSP for brand new cars is generally set as a percentage of RRP
Bunker fuel for shipping was so bad that something like the top 100 biggest ships in the world produced more SOx than all passenger vehicles in the world combined. Truely shocking. And that at the same time that marine transport had a green label and was subsidised (by the EU a.o.) and favoured over road transport. Thankfully that is rapidly being cleaned up now.
I'm with @the_amazing_raisin that (long distance, large) ships will be the only form of transport likely to use hydrogen in future. All others will be battery electric
So hyundai must have the OMSP of the ioniq 5 at less than 50k. Yet dealers are charging 53.5k for it. Seems an odd admission of over charging if that's the case!
Oh hey u can have vrt off the car but we are already charging u too much for it.
Given with one hand and taken away with the other
OMSP is actually determined by the distributor of the car!
Well the ioniq 5 executive plus currently priced at 53.5k gets vrt relief plus grant. I can't figure it out and leads me to think it's gouging.
I think you got the acronyms confused. Is it BIK you think of?
So the VRT relief is due to expire at the end of next year is up to 5k for cars with Open Market Selling Price up to 40k and reduced up to 50k. Zero above that.
Open Market Selling Price is determined by Revenue and not necessarily the price on the invoice.
Grant is €60k.
VRT relief I’m lost with too.
It used to be lower i thought, around €35k ish, as it was the only way I got my old leaf, i3 etc into without any VRT.
We cruise with NCL and any ships we've been on are diesel electric.
No it's the full price pre all grants. You pay VRT on the balance above 50k, note this will be the balance above 35k from January and declining to 0 in the next few years
The ulysess has a flyer onboard advertising the amount of marine diesel it uses per round trip as if its actually proud of it.
Couldn't believe it when I seen it earlier this year.
And yeah the slow ferry belching out smoke was mad to see.
