<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ship Emissions Got You Down? Look Up At SkySails</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/</link>
	<description>What is the future of fuel?  What&#039;s new?  What&#039;s next?  Since 2007, Gas 2 has covered a rapidly changing world coming to terms with its oil addiction.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 08:54:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sail-Powered Ships Poised to Make Comback? &#8211; Gas 2.0</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-60291</link>
		<dc:creator>Sail-Powered Ships Poised to Make Comback? &#8211; Gas 2.0</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-60291</guid>
		<description>[...] engine that can also run on propane. The ship will also be made from recycled metal and utilize the “Sky Sail,” basically a giant kite that helps tow the boat [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] engine that can also run on propane. The ship will also be made from recycled metal and utilize the “Sky Sail,” basically a giant kite that helps tow the boat [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-9992</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:40:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-9992</guid>
		<description>It seems to me that the difference between &quot;legitimate government function&quot; and &quot;subsidy&quot; is simply a matter of personal preference dressed up in the appearance of an objective statement. So far as I can tell, a railroad track plays the same role in train transportation as a road does in car transportation, yet people say that Amtrak is &quot;subsidized&quot; because the government expects Amtrak to pay for construction and maintenance of track (and then the government gives money to Amtrak), but somehow road transportation isn&#039;t subsidized because the government performs its &quot;legitimate function&quot; of paying for roads. This is absurd. The government heavily subsidizes the automobile-based transportation system. It&#039;s pure sophistry to argue otherwise by picking nits over what is or is not technically a subsidy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems to me that the difference between &#8220;legitimate government function&#8221; and &#8220;subsidy&#8221; is simply a matter of personal preference dressed up in the appearance of an objective statement. So far as I can tell, a railroad track plays the same role in train transportation as a road does in car transportation, yet people say that Amtrak is &#8220;subsidized&#8221; because the government expects Amtrak to pay for construction and maintenance of track (and then the government gives money to Amtrak), but somehow road transportation isn&#8217;t subsidized because the government performs its &#8220;legitimate function&#8221; of paying for roads. This is absurd. The government heavily subsidizes the automobile-based transportation system. It&#8217;s pure sophistry to argue otherwise by picking nits over what is or is not technically a subsidy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-32602</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-32602</guid>
		<description>It seems to me that the difference between &quot;legitimate government function&quot; and &quot;subsidy&quot; is simply a matter of personal preference dressed up in the appearance of an objective statement. So far as I can tell, a railroad track plays the same role in train transportation as a road does in car transportation, yet people say that Amtrak is &quot;subsidized&quot; because the government expects Amtrak to pay for construction and maintenance of track (and then the government gives money to Amtrak), but somehow road transportation isn&#039;t subsidized because the government performs its &quot;legitimate function&quot; of paying for roads. This is absurd. The government heavily subsidizes the automobile-based transportation system. It&#039;s pure sophistry to argue otherwise by picking nits over what is or is not technically a subsidy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems to me that the difference between &#8220;legitimate government function&#8221; and &#8220;subsidy&#8221; is simply a matter of personal preference dressed up in the appearance of an objective statement. So far as I can tell, a railroad track plays the same role in train transportation as a road does in car transportation, yet people say that Amtrak is &#8220;subsidized&#8221; because the government expects Amtrak to pay for construction and maintenance of track (and then the government gives money to Amtrak), but somehow road transportation isn&#8217;t subsidized because the government performs its &#8220;legitimate function&#8221; of paying for roads. This is absurd. The government heavily subsidizes the automobile-based transportation system. It&#8217;s pure sophistry to argue otherwise by picking nits over what is or is not technically a subsidy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-9991</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 03:00:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-9991</guid>
		<description>Why not Nuclear?



1) If Somali pirates can recover nuclear fuel without killing themselves from irradiation then more power to them (my guess is they can&#039;t). Nuclear fuel IS NOT WEAPONS GRADE ... but it will soon kill you if you touch it.



2) Nuclear safety... there hasn&#039;t been a SINGLE nuclear accident in the 50 year history of US nuclear propulsion and they currently run 80+ nuclear ships/subs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why not Nuclear?</p>
<p>1) If Somali pirates can recover nuclear fuel without killing themselves from irradiation then more power to them (my guess is they can&#8217;t). Nuclear fuel IS NOT WEAPONS GRADE &#8230; but it will soon kill you if you touch it.</p>
<p>2) Nuclear safety&#8230; there hasn&#8217;t been a SINGLE nuclear accident in the 50 year history of US nuclear propulsion and they currently run 80+ nuclear ships/subs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-32601</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 03:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-32601</guid>
		<description>Why not Nuclear?



1) If Somali pirates can recover nuclear fuel without killing themselves from irradiation then more power to them (my guess is they can&#039;t). Nuclear fuel IS NOT WEAPONS GRADE ... but it will soon kill you if you touch it.



2) Nuclear safety... there hasn&#039;t been a SINGLE nuclear accident in the 50 year history of US nuclear propulsion and they currently run 80+ nuclear ships/subs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why not Nuclear?</p>
<p>1) If Somali pirates can recover nuclear fuel without killing themselves from irradiation then more power to them (my guess is they can&#8217;t). Nuclear fuel IS NOT WEAPONS GRADE &#8230; but it will soon kill you if you touch it.</p>
<p>2) Nuclear safety&#8230; there hasn&#8217;t been a SINGLE nuclear accident in the 50 year history of US nuclear propulsion and they currently run 80+ nuclear ships/subs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris DeMorro</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-9990</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris DeMorro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 21:06:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-9990</guid>
		<description>You guys are good. Keep up the debate but keep it civil, plenty of good points here.



Now, as for gov&#039;t subsidies, these days it seems the gov&#039;t is throwing money at damn near everything anyway. Why not something simple and economical like this? Again, I doubt that it will replace engines anytime soon, but considering how many boats there are and how much pollution they create, every little bit will help at this point.



If anything, it would help lower transportation costs or at least help offset the costs of using better, cleaner fuels.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You guys are good. Keep up the debate but keep it civil, plenty of good points here.</p>
<p>Now, as for gov&#8217;t subsidies, these days it seems the gov&#8217;t is throwing money at damn near everything anyway. Why not something simple and economical like this? Again, I doubt that it will replace engines anytime soon, but considering how many boats there are and how much pollution they create, every little bit will help at this point.</p>
<p>If anything, it would help lower transportation costs or at least help offset the costs of using better, cleaner fuels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris DeMorro</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-32600</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris DeMorro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 21:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-32600</guid>
		<description>You guys are good. Keep up the debate but keep it civil, plenty of good points here.



Now, as for gov&#039;t subsidies, these days it seems the gov&#039;t is throwing money at damn near everything anyway. Why not something simple and economical like this? Again, I doubt that it will replace engines anytime soon, but considering how many boats there are and how much pollution they create, every little bit will help at this point.



If anything, it would help lower transportation costs or at least help offset the costs of using better, cleaner fuels.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You guys are good. Keep up the debate but keep it civil, plenty of good points here.</p>
<p>Now, as for gov&#8217;t subsidies, these days it seems the gov&#8217;t is throwing money at damn near everything anyway. Why not something simple and economical like this? Again, I doubt that it will replace engines anytime soon, but considering how many boats there are and how much pollution they create, every little bit will help at this point.</p>
<p>If anything, it would help lower transportation costs or at least help offset the costs of using better, cleaner fuels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Cleland</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-9989</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Cleland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:18:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-9989</guid>
		<description>&quot;...(pointy end for TC).&quot;



AlanHowlett might benefit (everyone) from brushing up on his manners.  Notice how &quot;nic&quot; disagreed with me without being a jerk.  I&#039;m not poo-pooing the SkySail as you&#039;ll note in the &quot;The SkySail is a good idea...&quot; of my post.  On the contrary, I hope every ship that can use one, uses one when it can.



I&#039;ll admit I&#039;m no expert on sailing, but I

can hold my own in physics.  Do you really believe there would be any benefit from having the SkySail out if the wind is blowing, say +/- 70 degrees from travel direction.  The cosine of 70 degrees is 0.34, so 0.34 would be the component of the wind force moving the boat forward while 0.94 (sin(70*)) would go toward pulling it off course requiring a counter force...e.g with a rudder or by steering the engine propeller off the tangent...either way it&#039;s lost energy probably canceling out the gain from the wind in that case).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;(pointy end for TC).&#8221;</p>
<p>AlanHowlett might benefit (everyone) from brushing up on his manners.  Notice how &#8220;nic&#8221; disagreed with me without being a jerk.  I&#8217;m not poo-pooing the SkySail as you&#8217;ll note in the &#8220;The SkySail is a good idea&#8230;&#8221; of my post.  On the contrary, I hope every ship that can use one, uses one when it can.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll admit I&#8217;m no expert on sailing, but I</p>
<p>can hold my own in physics.  Do you really believe there would be any benefit from having the SkySail out if the wind is blowing, say +/- 70 degrees from travel direction.  The cosine of 70 degrees is 0.34, so 0.34 would be the component of the wind force moving the boat forward while 0.94 (sin(70*)) would go toward pulling it off course requiring a counter force&#8230;e.g with a rudder or by steering the engine propeller off the tangent&#8230;either way it&#8217;s lost energy probably canceling out the gain from the wind in that case).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Cleland</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-32599</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Cleland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-32599</guid>
		<description>&quot;...(pointy end for TC).&quot;



AlanHowlett might benefit (everyone) from brushing up on his manners.  Notice how &quot;nic&quot; disagreed with me without being a jerk.  I&#039;m not poo-pooing the SkySail as you&#039;ll note in the &quot;The SkySail is a good idea...&quot; of my post.  On the contrary, I hope every ship that can use one, uses one when it can.



I&#039;ll admit I&#039;m no expert on sailing, but I

can hold my own in physics.  Do you really believe there would be any benefit from having the SkySail out if the wind is blowing, say +/- 70 degrees from travel direction.  The cosine of 70 degrees is 0.34, so 0.34 would be the component of the wind force moving the boat forward while 0.94 (sin(70*)) would go toward pulling it off course requiring a counter force...e.g with a rudder or by steering the engine propeller off the tangent...either way it&#039;s lost energy probably canceling out the gain from the wind in that case).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;(pointy end for TC).&#8221;</p>
<p>AlanHowlett might benefit (everyone) from brushing up on his manners.  Notice how &#8220;nic&#8221; disagreed with me without being a jerk.  I&#8217;m not poo-pooing the SkySail as you&#8217;ll note in the &#8220;The SkySail is a good idea&#8230;&#8221; of my post.  On the contrary, I hope every ship that can use one, uses one when it can.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll admit I&#8217;m no expert on sailing, but I</p>
<p>can hold my own in physics.  Do you really believe there would be any benefit from having the SkySail out if the wind is blowing, say +/- 70 degrees from travel direction.  The cosine of 70 degrees is 0.34, so 0.34 would be the component of the wind force moving the boat forward while 0.94 (sin(70*)) would go toward pulling it off course requiring a counter force&#8230;e.g with a rudder or by steering the engine propeller off the tangent&#8230;either way it&#8217;s lost energy probably canceling out the gain from the wind in that case).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: russ</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/06/08/ship-emissions-got-you-down-look-up-at-skysails/#comment-9988</link>
		<dc:creator>russ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 19:03:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=2517#comment-9988</guid>
		<description>Subsidies, whether they be for farm products, oil, coal, ethanol, solar, wind or whatever are losers.



Liam - Don&#039;t confuse subsidies with the other stuff you included such as wars &amp; regulation - different ball game.



Alan - Roads are a government function and not a subsidy.



To me, the governments function is to support R&amp;D up to and including pilot plants. I do not know of any government running a business in an intelligent manner though I suppose there has been a few cases where it worked out OK, out of a million.



The US congress is trying to make an even bigger mess out of GM than even GM &amp; the unions managed to.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Subsidies, whether they be for farm products, oil, coal, ethanol, solar, wind or whatever are losers.</p>
<p>Liam &#8211; Don&#8217;t confuse subsidies with the other stuff you included such as wars &amp; regulation &#8211; different ball game.</p>
<p>Alan &#8211; Roads are a government function and not a subsidy.</p>
<p>To me, the governments function is to support R&amp;D up to and including pilot plants. I do not know of any government running a business in an intelligent manner though I suppose there has been a few cases where it worked out OK, out of a million.</p>
<p>The US congress is trying to make an even bigger mess out of GM than even GM &amp; the unions managed to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

