this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
31 points (91.9% liked)

Solarpunk technology

2329 readers
136 users here now

Technology for a Solar-Punk future.

Airships and hydroponic farms...

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] toothbrush@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

also, see CargoLifter for a similar project around the year 2000 which raised crazy amounts of money and then failed completely because of fundamental problems.

[–] poVoq 1 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

They didn't fail due to technical problems. At least try to do proper research next time.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Running out of money is a fundamental problem.

[–] toothbrush@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

They ran out of money. After realising that their original idea wasnt really that realistic and building a cargo airship is really really hard.

[–] Bougie_Birdie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

I'm skeptical of the scalability.

On paper, it sounds like a good idea. Competing in air freight for medium speed / cost makes sense. Fuel for an airship is probably easier on emissions than bunker fuel used for freight ships.

Buoyancy is what I'm struggling with. We don't have an unlimited supply of helium. Thermal airships don't seem to be any faster than cargo ships. Hydrogen is too combustible.

So maybe this does have potential to carve out a small part of the market, but I can't foresee this being a huge disruptor in the global supply chain

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 10 points 17 hours ago

You don't use Helium. You use Hydrogen. Hydrogen cannot burn without oxygen. Hydrogen is too tightly packed in an airship to get sufficient exposure to oxygen. Therefore, even in case of a fire, much of the hydrogen just escapes without burning. Airplanes too fell from the sky when the industry was not mature. We didn't just ban airplanes outright.

[–] poVoq 14 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

That hydrogen is too combustible is largely a myth. The main problem with it is leakage through the hull membrane, but that is a solvable engineering problem.

[–] Bougie_Birdie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 16 hours ago

TIL, thanks

[–] egonallanon@lemm.ee 8 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (2 children)

Man people will try anything to anything except trains and boats.

[–] keepthepace 6 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Wait... We don't have trains and boats already?

[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 4 points 19 hours ago

But what about second trains and boats?

[–] egonallanon@lemm.ee 0 points 18 hours ago

We do but I'm essentially accusing this of being a gadgetbahn.

[–] evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world 0 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Or sometimes, they will reinvent trains and boats, but worse.

[–] Hupf@feddit.org 1 points 2 hours ago
[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

I have been told that for years but so far it hasnt happened. Its like fusion.

The words SpaceX and Hyperloop appeared in this article, thats an instant self own in my book.

[–] evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

Hyperloops business model is to scoop up funds meant to develop technology to combat climate change. It's Teslas business model, too. It definitely makes me skeptical right off the bat. It's just a matter of if the airships are like electric vehicles (oversold climate harm reduction, but likely still a harm reduction), or if they are like hyperloops (complete scams that can be defeated with high school level math).

[–] poVoq 6 points 22 hours ago

SpaceX is highly successful, but yeah Hyperloop is not the best reference, but I think cargo airships as a business is closer to SpaceX in terms of market fit.

[–] toothbrush@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

...no. Airships are *extremely" sensitive to wind. They could never promise delivery times that short when a bit of a gust on the atlantic could throw them absolutely completely off course. Airships can't start with "bad" weather. That is: slight winds. They cant land when there is wind. And many airships have been destroyed because of winds. Thats a fundamental problem that the hyperloop guys are going to fix just as much as they did fix the fundamental problems with the hyperloop.

[–] poVoq 7 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

These "fundamental problems" are not really problems for airships that only rarely touch down and can be loaded and unloaded with electric quadcopters which recently became available in suffient sizes.

Rigid hull airships regularly made transatlantic journeys with tight schedules, so your "gust of wind" problem is evidently wrong, and larger storms also effect airplanes starting and landing resulting in similar delays.

[–] moonlight@fedia.io 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I think it makes way more sense for airships to be anchored down while loading and unloading, so the buoyancy doesnt need to be constantly balanced.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 13 hours ago

On the face of it, your point is valid, just like on the face of it landing rockets is too complicated. Both are likely solved the same way - active management by responsive computers to negate environmental effects to behave in a stable manner in an unstable environment. This idea certainly wouldn't have worked 100 or even 50 years ago, but may be quite possible now.

[–] toothbrush@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Those transatlantic journeys with airships are no longer done for good reason. And that would have to be a massive fleet of electric quadrocopters with an extreme lift capacity to load an entire airship. That sounds very expensive!

But I hope you're right, the idea is really cool!

[–] poVoq 8 points 21 hours ago

Zeppelins largely fell out of use due to limited military application and because fuel was basically free back then due to abundant supplies. I think it is important to keep this historic context in mind.

As for electric quadcopters being expensive, yes, but the proposed business is end to end, so not like an airport that needs to be loaded and unloaded quickly with a large amount of cargo. So for the airships it will be rather pick and load individually replacing not only the airplane but also the trucks delivering the cargo to and from the airport.

It will likely need some good charging infrastructure on the ground to recharge these quadcopters, but the spread of electric cars makes this more realistic these days.

[–] Zier@fedia.io 0 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Please tell me Lou Perlman did not rise from the dead. *edited to fix error of "Ron" (oops) to Lou.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

He's still very much alive??

[–] Zier@fedia.io 1 points 5 hours ago

oops, fixed error. :)

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

Would it not be concerning that he raised from the dead, then?