I don't see - ever - a vessel with that kind of battery capacity.
Puleeze! The figures I cited as estimates were just that: pulled them straight out of my ass. Thanks for providing some actual (I hope) information. However, I do not share your pessimism concerning battery-powered shipping. It's coming, maybe not "real soon now," but eventually. Battery technology is in the Dark Ages compared to internal combustion (or even external combustion) technology. It is VERY difficult to meet the energy density of fossil fuels without resorting to non-chemical means, such as nuclear fission.
If the human race survives this century (I am not very optimistic about that), it will need ever-increasing amounts of energy that fossil fuels simply cannot provide. For that reason alone we should seek alternative energy sources to fossil fuels. It has nothing at all to do with "saving the planet." Fossil fuels are even more useful as a source of the hydrocarbons that are essential to the synthetic organic chemistry used by modern society. It seems really stupid to me to "waste" them by simply burning fossil fuels, only for the energy stored in them long ago by our Sun through photosynthesis in plants consumed as food by all living organisms in the food chain. Oh, well... the problem goes away when humans harness what is essentially the infinite energy contained in star thermonuclear reactions. With enough energy, and a means to dissipate the heat waste produced when using any source of energy, any chemistry can be synthesized from basic elements. With enough energy, humans could direct our solar system on a tour through the Milky Way Galaxy... we are all going along for the ride as it is, so why not choose which way to go?
It takes "billyuns and billyuns" of years for our solar system to make just one orbit around the black hole that is at the center of our galaxy. Who knows what sort of interstellar gasses or left-overs of creation the solar system encounters on this journey among the stars? What effect does the interstellar environment have on the amount of energy intercepted by the Earth from the Sun? Is this effect cyclical? If so, what period occurs before the cycle of ice age-warm age-ice age repeats? If the Earth periodically cycles through warm and cold climate extremes, what can humans do to moderate the changes that occur?
Sometimes I may use sarcasm and other "word salad" tricks to try to make a subtle point, especially if the point is controversial, like the alleged anthropomorphic causes of global climate change: excessive CO
2 emissions from burning fossil-based fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. I noticed from the CO
2 levels detected over Hawaii during the 20th century that the levels were monotonically increasing. The concentration is very low, so any steady increase in concentration is probably caused by human activity. But that does not mean the correlation between CO
2 levels in the atmosphere and the climate of Earth have a causal relationship. I fear it's much more complicated than that.
Last time I looked, the oceans of the world have been around for a few billion years. During that time, everything that ever lived in the ocean died and eventually fell to the bottom, where tremendous forces turned formerly living tissue into a carboniferous soup that eventually became fossil fuel for humans to discover and use. This process of turning the soup back into fuel even occurred also on land as species died, continental plates shifted and buckled, and oceans levels rose to cover the land, before receding to their present levels. We have some fossil evidence that this occurred, yet AFAIK no one knows exactly when or how many times it has occurred. I think it continues to this day, that there is a huge quantity of "fossil fuel" sitting deep under the oceans just waiting for technology to catch up and tap some.
As for ocean shipping... not much has changed over the past few thousand years. Ships should be efficient since they float virtually without friction on water. It is only because of their draft, requiring water to be pushed aside in order to make head-way, that tremendous amounts of power and energy are required to move them around the world. The amount of energy required of course depends on how fast the ship moves from port to port. Sure, heavy seas will require more energy than calm seas, but the difference could be accommodated by NOT using Archimedes Principle to
float ships. Instead, use hydrofoils to
lift the ship ABOVE the water and just push air out of the way instead of pushing water.
I realize that it would be quite a feat to lift a filled tanker, or a fully-loaded containerized ship, out of the water high enough with hydrofoils for skipping over most of the water under the ship. The main problems that come to mind are speed and size: you need enough "lift" from the hydrofoil to get the ship above the water, and enough speed through the water to create the lift. And you better have clear sea lanes because this sucker is gonna be hard to stop once it gets moving. Once the ship's cargo hull is above the water, it should be smooth, low-energy, "sailing" after that. This type of ship would use very large electric fans for propulsion, with perhaps an underwater screw or two for harbor maneuvering related to docking and un-docking.
One of the main reasons we have nuclear-powered submarines is the need to remain underwater and out of sight of the enemy for long periods of times while underway, not just "parked" somewhere. The subs still need food for the crews, and this requires surface operations. Also, the inertial navigation systems need to be updated periodically by GPS satellites and that requires rising to at least periscope depth. There are relatively few ports where the USA feels both safe and welcome with its nuclear-powered ships, but perhaps a nuclear-powered ship, or several, could be used as "at sea" battery chargers or as a battery exchange service for commercial ships. Many possibilities are available if there is money and desire to be more competitive. Maybe use some oil platforms at sea to store charged-up batteries ready for swap. These platforms could even store the containers that would be lifted aboard the battery-electric vessel to re-supply it with food, fresh water, and perhaps fresh linens or laundry.
I have been invited to visit
Sandia's Z machine.
Good for you. It wasn't offered, and we didn't have time for, a tour when my boss and I visited Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) through the auspices of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA). I don't think they had a Z-anything up and running while we were there anyway. So, if allowed, please take some spiffy photographs and upload the pictures here.
I hope your visit goes better than mine: the people we met seemed (to me) to be embarrassed that a tiny private company in Dayton, OH was reviving and successfully using a GaAs PCSS that SNL had abandoned in the previous century. They asked a lot of questions, and we visited some of their labs, but SNL refused our offer to provide them with some of our prototype samples. Perhaps they wanted to make their own, since we fully revealed in the open literature how we did it. I think I saw a strong "Not Invented Here" attitude when we explained what we did and how we did it. One fellow even flatly denied that our device could possibly work. Well, that was his "understanding" and not factual. It does work and we presented photographic evidence taken by our sub-contractor in California. This trip, and SNL's report to DTRA, may have been what led to our fast-track contract to develop more prototypes to be used in modular, scalable, EMP simulators. DTRA seemed to lose all interest after we fulfilled that contract. A few years later UES decided they didn't need a particle accelerator or an engineer to run one. So I was "retired" in December 2014 at age 70.
The "heads up" that DTRA gave them probably revived their interest, but that was not my problem. I enjoyed our visit and had the opportunity to meet some of the brightest people we have to act as caretakers for our nuclear weapons stockpile and designers of future weapons. SNL shares real estate with the Air Force Weapons Laboratory in Albuquerque, NM which is responsible for the development of directed-energy weapons.
If you are up to visiting some of our National Laboratories, I can highly recommend Oak Ridge (ORNL) located near Knoxville, TN. Be sure to get on the tour for the Spallation Neutron Source. This is a truly impressive work of engineering with beam-time reservations available to the public. So start saving now for beam time, and cozy up to a large university with DoD conracts for financing. Maybe submit an unsolicited proposal and ask for Government funding.
The real question is did you tell your grandchildren
Of course I didn't tell my grandchildren. And I didn't read those horrible Grimm's Fairy Tales to my children either. Each generation does as it damn well pleases, learning nothing from the past. My generation may have made a mess of things, but it is the responsibility of YOUR generation to fix it... but I doubt that you can. Doesn't mean you shouldn't try. Let the human race go out fighting and screaming to the very end, never giving up, never reaching beyond the Moon, never mattering at all as far as the Universe is concerned. Or not. It's up to you, so let's get on with it. It is beginning to look like I am not going to live forever, with or without the help of Jesus or advanced AI. If that turns out to be wrong, I promise to come back and haunt all the slackers who gave up too soon.