• BougieBirdie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    23 hours ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      21 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@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      23 hours ago

      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.