The US does not have a housing shortages. Like just about any “shortage” , perhaps famines, the cause is political and manmade. It is a distribution, or rather redistribution issue. At about 1000 sqft per capita, hard to argue there is a shortage. But if the top 10% take up 90%, breaking the Pareto Principle, of course, we will be in trouble. And we are.
Sail on container ship: looks like greenwashing to me. Anyone who actually learns anything about sailing, learns that wind power is a direct function of direction of travel angle vs. wind angle. Or in other words, you never get 100% of wind power unless the 2 are exactly the same.
But even in that case - that ship is super heavy. The heaviest sailing ships ever used commercially were in the 10K ton displacement range. They had steel masts and hulls and had sails pretty much covering the entire surface area around the ships - clipper ships essentially.
The ship in question is 11000 tons displacement so comparable to the last generation of sailing ships - but its capacity of 5000 tons is competing against fossil fuel powered ships with an average capacity of 100,000 tons ... so replacing 1 fossil fueld ship with 20 of these. Not the least bit clear this is going to be economically viable without truly enormous carbon tax credits or carbon emissions penalties on fossil fueled cargo ships.
Incompetent cynics: LOL.
Research after research has shown that the group of people most likely to have a realistic view of the world are those who are clinically depressed.
"Honestly, if drone racing is a sport then I’m also calling myself an athlete for publishing this newsletter every week."
I lol'd.
The US does not have a housing shortages. Like just about any “shortage” , perhaps famines, the cause is political and manmade. It is a distribution, or rather redistribution issue. At about 1000 sqft per capita, hard to argue there is a shortage. But if the top 10% take up 90%, breaking the Pareto Principle, of course, we will be in trouble. And we are.
Sail on container ship: looks like greenwashing to me. Anyone who actually learns anything about sailing, learns that wind power is a direct function of direction of travel angle vs. wind angle. Or in other words, you never get 100% of wind power unless the 2 are exactly the same.
But even in that case - that ship is super heavy. The heaviest sailing ships ever used commercially were in the 10K ton displacement range. They had steel masts and hulls and had sails pretty much covering the entire surface area around the ships - clipper ships essentially.
The ship in question is 11000 tons displacement so comparable to the last generation of sailing ships - but its capacity of 5000 tons is competing against fossil fuel powered ships with an average capacity of 100,000 tons ... so replacing 1 fossil fueld ship with 20 of these. Not the least bit clear this is going to be economically viable without truly enormous carbon tax credits or carbon emissions penalties on fossil fueled cargo ships.
Incompetent cynics: LOL.
Research after research has shown that the group of people most likely to have a realistic view of the world are those who are clinically depressed.
Obviously utopian PanGloss-ian types don't qualify.
‘Publishing Athlete’ lol, definitely a thing