undefined | Better HN

0 pointspinko6y ago0 comments

Read the caveats at the bottom of the article -- the ship owner who has to make the capital investment doesn't pay for the fuel, so there's a perverse disincentive to invest in this technology (assuming it works).

0 comments

mks6y ago

Maybe the SkySail could own the sail system and sell the "thrust" - basically charging a success fee for saved fuel. In a similar vein in how the airlines don't own the engines of their airplanes but rent them from manufacturer - https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/12528/jet-engin...

Of course this is an armchair thought experiment, but I am curious about your opinions.

ian06y ago

Not really a disincentive, if the person paying the fuel could pay less it for it while using fleet X it would surely be a competitive advantage to the fleets owner. Perhaps the keyword in the quote is "untested", with a unwritten "why bother unless I have to / other owners do it".

toss16y ago

Exactly. The key hurdle is getting the first ship fleet owner to invest in the technology. Once that's working, he'll have a competitive advantage offering renters lower fuel costs. He'll have some combination of higher booking rates or ability to charge higher prices, effectively splitting the gains

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

mks6y ago

Of course this is an armchair thought experiment, but I am curious about your opinions.

ian06y ago

toss16y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse