# Biggest ship in the world - Maersk Triple-E container ship **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [August 28, 2013, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351 "2013-08-28T00:25:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![deltasigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/1 "2013-08-28T00:25:49Z")
[This is pretty cool I thought](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/10203784/The-biggest-ship-in-the-world.html). > [@](#): > > A quarter-of-a-mile long, 195ft wide — equivalent to an eight-lane motorway — and 240ft high, the vessel, which began its maiden voyage earlier this month, is the biggest ship in the world. > . > . > . > No ship has ever been able to carry so many goods in one journey; the Mc-Kinney Møller has room for 18,000 containers, each of them 20ft long, 8ft wide and 8ft high. That’s enough space for 36,000 cars or 111 million pairs of trainers. But **[Maersk](http://www.worldslargestship.com)**, the ship’s Danish owner, will not just benefit from the economies of scale that spring from operating such a large vessel; it will also save money on petrol. Infograms and pics at link. ---
**Author:** ![Sunspace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunspace/32/1250_2.png) [@Sunspace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunspace)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/2 "2013-08-28T01:32:42Z")
That Maersk site is quite fascinating. ---
**Author:** ![deltasigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/3 "2013-08-28T01:53:59Z")
> [@Sunspace](#): > > That Maersk site is quite fascinating. It’s funny though that they’re hyping the ship as good for the environment when it still burns [bunker fuel](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_oil#Bunker_fuel) - the absolute dirtiest shit you can possibly burn. LOL. Of course all ships like that burn that crap so you probably can’t really expect them to do otherwise and actually sell one, but still, it’s a little funny. ---
**Author:** ![gotpasswords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c57346/32.png) [@gotpasswords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gotpasswords)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/4 "2013-08-28T12:23:39Z")
Newer marine engines have a variety of pollution control mechanisms such as exhaust scavenging and catalytic scrubbers, but to be even more basic, if the #5 or #6 fuel oil isn’t being used in ships, where would it be used? Is it better to use the fuel for a productive purpose, or to just store it somewhere? ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/5 "2013-08-28T15:02:56Z")
> [@](#): > > Maersk Triple-E container ship I always thought the Double-Ds were quite attractive. This will take some getting used to. ---
**Author:** ![Sunspace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunspace/32/1250_2.png) [@Sunspace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunspace)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/6 "2013-08-28T15:33:37Z")
> [@deltasigma](#): > > It’s funny though that they’re hyping the ship as good for the environment when it still burns [bunker fuel](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_oil#Bunker_fuel) - the absolute dirtiest shit you can possibly burn. LOL. Well, I think they mean it burns less fuel per containerload. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/7 "2013-08-28T16:02:32Z")
Holy ship! ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/8 "2013-08-28T17:23:55Z")
18,000 containers. That’s _863 million_ cans of baked beans. Who needs bunker fuel when you have that kind of natural gas? ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/9 "2013-08-28T18:31:18Z")
I would think you might have to spend substantial amounts of money on new loading facilities; if not won’t it take a very long time to load and unload? ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/10 "2013-08-28T18:47:00Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > 18,000 containers. The Telegraph article says they can unload 30 containers per hour. That’s 25 days, non-stop. :eek: > [@PastTense](#): > > I would think you might have to spend substantial amounts of money on new loading facilities; if not won’t it take a very long time to load and unload? The article also says that it’s too big for every port in the US. If this size class becomes popular, I suppose you’ll see US ports getting rebuilt, but it’ll take a lot of time/money for that to happen. ---
**Author:** ![deltasigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/11 "2013-08-28T19:03:04Z")
> [@Machine\_Elf](#): > > The Telegraph article says they can unload 30 containers per hour. That’s 25 days, non-stop. :eek: I can’t help wondering if this isn’t being built with an eye toward using it for the [new arctic shipping route between Europe and China](http://www.businessinsider.com/china-begins-using-arctic-shipping-route-that-could-change-the-face-of-world-trade-2013-8). That trip is estimated to take about 30 days, so you could fly a crew back to China, have them pilot a ship a second ship to port and dead head the empty or partially loaded ship (5 days to spare) back to the port of origin. I’m sure I probably missed something here though. In these scenarios I usually end up finding I need a wormhole or temporal distortion to actually make them work the way I though they would. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Quatro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bc8723/32.png) [@Mr\_Quatro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Quatro)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/12 "2013-08-29T22:13:53Z")
> [@deltasigma](#): > > It’s funny though that they’re hyping the ship as good for the environment when it still burns [bunker fuel](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_oil#Bunker_fuel) - the absolute dirtiest shit you can possibly burn. LOL. > > Of course all ships like that burn that crap so you probably can’t really expect them to do otherwise and actually sell one, but still, it’s a little funny. I am pretty sure cruise ships use the same fuel, bunker fuel, new engines can use different types of fuel, but bunker fuel is the cheapest and not always available in every port. Isn’t this the same ship that Wal-Mart uses, in fact don’t they have more than one ship of this same type? ---
**Author:** ![deltasigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/13 "2013-08-29T22:17:51Z")
I think I already made that observation, as your quote plainly shows. My only point was that they’re hyping how environmently friendly the ship is, which by comparison isn’t completely misleading. But when you consider what they’re burning, and yes, what ALL ships of this type are burning, it’s a little ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/14 "2013-08-29T23:18:42Z")
From an Encyclopedia Galactica entry on the history of the first half of the 21st century: > [@](#): > > . . . but only two months after it was discovered that the rising sea levels destroying such population centres as London and New York City were caused not by climate change but by the displacement of Maersk’s fleet of giant ships, all were broken up, thereby revealing the greatest archaeological treasure trove since Pompeii. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/15 "2013-08-30T00:41:17Z")
> [@deltasigma](#): > > I think I already made that observation, as your quote plainly shows. My only point was that they’re hyping how environmently friendly the ship is, which by comparison isn’t completely misleading. But when you consider what they’re burning, and yes, what ALL ships of this type are burning, it’s a little ridiculous. Compares very favourably to air freight. ---
**Author:** ![deltasigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/16 "2013-08-30T01:08:56Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > Compares very favourably to air freight. [Only if you look at CO2](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1229857/How-16-ships-create-pollution-cars-world.html) > [@](#): > > As ships get bigger, the pollution is getting worse. The most staggering statistic of all is that just 16 of the world’s largest ships can produce as much lung-clogging sulphur pollution as all the world’s cars. > Because of their colossal engines, each as heavy as a small ship, these super-vessels use as much fuel as small power stations. Now granted, that quote is from 4 years ago and if things have improved such that these new engines won’t be that dirty (I haven’t looked at the Maersk site), I’ll be happy to see those specific citations. But that fact of the matter is that doesn’t apply to the existing fleet and likely won’t for a couple of generations to come. ---
**Author:** ![deltasigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/17 "2013-08-30T01:10:41Z")
That quote goes on to include > [@](#): > > But it burns marine heavy fuel, or ‘bunker fuel’, which leaves behind a trail of potentially lethal chemicals: sulphur and smoke that have been linked to breathing problems, inflammation, cancer and heart disease. Couldn’t edit since I get a blank window. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/18 "2013-08-30T04:09:02Z")
These vessels aren’t actually the biggest ships in the world, they are just the biggest in one dimension (length). The [largest tankers and bulkers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world's_longest_ships)are wider and can carry a much, much greater weight of cargo (over double). > [@deltasigma](#): > > I think I already made that observation, as your quote plainly shows. My only point was that they’re hyping how environmently friendly the ship is, which by comparison isn’t completely misleading. But when you consider what they’re burning, and yes, what ALL ships of this type are burning, it’s a little ridiculous. Maybe but you haven’t made good that point. I suspect you are asking yourself the wrong question. You need to ask yourself: “if these containers were carried some other way, how much pollution then?”. > [@Machine\_Elf](#): > > The Telegraph article says they can unload 30 containers per hour. That’s 25 days, non-stop. :eek: This is wrong. What they actually mean is they can unload 30 containers per hour _per crane_. They could have quite a number of cranes working the ship. The record [apparently](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Container_ship)is 734 container movements in an hour, set using nine cranes simultaneously. So if you work on say five cranes that’s five days to load or unload the whole ship. But bear in mind these ships almost never load and unload the whole lot in one go. They are carrying from multiple ports, picking up and dropping off along the way. So they would almost never take the whole five days. ---
**Author:** ![deltasigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/19 "2013-08-30T04:27:12Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > Maybe but you haven’t made good that point. I suspect you are asking yourself the wrong question. You need to ask yourself: “if these containers were carried some other way, how much pollution then?”. Not to be rude, but I don’t think I need to be asking myself anything. Bunker fuel is, without doubt or equivocation, the nastiest shit short of plutonium that you can burn. :smack: edit: you do realize I’m joking about burning plutonium - right? ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351/20 "2013-08-30T04:50:46Z")
> [@deltasigma](#): > > Not to be rude, but I don’t think I need to be asking myself anything. Bunker fuel is, without doubt or equivocation, the nastiest shit short of plutonium that you can burn. :smack: It may be nasty shit but the question is whether it would be more or less polluting to burn far, far more shit that is somewhat less nasty. It isn’t the no brainer you assume. Further, if bunkers aren’t burnt then that means in order to operate ships you have to burn something less nasty, like say diesel or gasoline or kerosene. So that means a whole heckava lot more of those need to be produced. All of which involves more drilling, more transportation and more refining. In short, have you worked it all, all the way through, to arrive at a considered conclusion as to what the alternatives to the current fuel would entail? Of have you just said “bunkers bad, get rid of bunker burning, end of problem?” [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-ship-in-the-world-maersk-triple-e-container-ship/667351.md?page=2)