350 tons of of chocolate and wine arrive on world’s largest cargo sailboat

https://untappedcities.com/2024/04/12/grain-de-sail-ll/

by geox • 2 years ago

127 137 2 years ago

tocs3• 2 years ago

I have wondered a lot bout using sail for shipping. If you are the shipper and you enjoy he sailing it seems like it could be a good idea. Just a way to pay for a lifestyle not a way to make boatloads of money. It would not make much of a dent in traditions shipping but more of a way to live a nice life.

solarpunk• 2 years ago

all in all it's gotta be cheaper to ship time-insensitive things via a vehicle that consumes no fuel. I'm curious if they can turn around and monetize their lack of emissions thru some kind of carbon markets or whatnot

tempay• 2 years ago

Only if staffing and maintenance costs are low enough.

chongli2• 2 years ago

The fuel burned by container ships is literally the sludge left at the bottom of the distillation vessel after all of the lighter petroleum fuels have been removed for sale. It is incredibly cheap fuel, extremely energy dense, but unbelievably dirty stuff.

Unfortunately, these ships only burn the nasty fuel in international waters so the process of getting them to pay for emissions would have to go through international maritime law, specifically MARPOL [1]. If you want an idea of how difficult that would be, check out the implementation and enforcement section of that page.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARPOL_73/78

toast03• 2 years ago

The crew consumes fuel. A large sailing vessel and a large container ship probably require a similar number of crew.

Labor cost per ton will be huge.

konschubert• 2 years ago

You have to beat 4K for a shipping container from Asia to the US.

No way.

playingalong• 2 years ago

Just by reading the article the impression is that it's both faster and should be cheaper (?). I get that only some type of cargo would fit or would make sense to load like this. What are the downsides?

moffkalast• 2 years ago

Margins in the shipping industry are typically rather low and it's offset by scaling well with container ships of proportions only limited by the canals they must traverse. This ship is positively microscopic in comparison. I would imagine it's only cost effective for very specific types of cargo.

There are hybrid options with flettner rotors and deployable kite sails for partial fuel savings on specific routes, but it's all rather experimental.

inetknght• 2 years ago

I would imagine it's only cost effective for very specific types of cargo

I imagine you're close to correct, but that some people might be willing to pay a premium for types of cargo that normally would not turn a profit. "Fine goods", as my local Specs puts it.

fsckboy• 2 years ago

the French could keep shipping mass produced crappy cars economically on big ships, and then small numbers of cars de luxe on these bougie ships, and advertise the... "car bon offsets".

yawpitch2• 2 years ago

Doldrums. Hurricanes. Impulsively murdered albatrosses. Kraken.

Also pirates, undead and otherwise.

Really the list goes on.

spudlyo• 2 years ago

Rum, sodomy, and the lash.

thejohnconway2• 2 years ago

Scale and throughput. Ships used to have cranes on deck and unload this way (look at pretty much any ocean liner, they had cranes on the forded for cargo). Containerisation improved throughput considerably, but added to latency. There is no way this is cheaper. Way more crew per tonne, the ship itself is almost certainly way more expensive for it capacity, and so on.

Not that I don’t think sailing is a bad way to move cargo, but I suspect if it does work, it won’t be small boats with crew.

krisoft2• 2 years ago

Containerisation improved throughput considerably, but added to latency.

I doubt the “added latency” part. How long do you think it takes to unload 11,000 twenty-foot container from a ship? Do you think anyone would move the contained stuff faster if it were just in a loose pile?

Quarrel• 2 years ago

It doesn't carry even a 10th of the cargo of the big windjammers of the 19th century (5000-8000 tons!).

Of course, setting aside the value of zero emissions which is their obvious selling point, it would otherwise be competing against big container ships (up to 200,000 tons!).

I assume that until they scale it for a few more generations that it'll be more a gimmick for low tonnage luxury items that just want the zero emission marketing claim. Even after scaling, I assume it couldn't be competitive for most bulk things.

Gare2• 2 years ago

Use wind power to produce methane, then use methane to power huge container ships.

Sailing by proxy.

kingkawn• 2 years ago

I got to see this boat when it docked in Brooklyn last year. Pretty cool setup and actually seemed feasible for shipping some things at low environmental impact.

mentos• 2 years ago

With starlink we could see completely autonomous drone sailboats for shipping coming soon?

chongli2• 2 years ago

How would you secure them? Pirates have already begun to be a huge problem in particular political/economic hot spots around the world. Autonomous drone sailboats would be ripe plums just waiting to be plucked.

I think one of the biggest issues is that these drones could ostensibly be jammed from beyond visual range and then disabled and captured during jamming. This would make it very difficult to detect the perpetrators via any sort of remote surveillance.

zoklet-enjoyer2• 2 years ago

There could be a convoy of drone ships, each with automated defensive system. The convoy would be patrolled by smaller/faster manned ships with security personnel looking out for pirates

stefan_• 2 years ago

I suppose there is no reason to make an autonomous cargo ship accessible to humans.

bragr• 2 years ago

There won't be fully autonomous ships for transoceanic shipping until all the maintenance can be done autonomously too. Perhaps you can eliminate most of the bridge crew, but the engineers aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

beAbU• 2 years ago

Starlink is not what's been holding back autonomous shipping, wind- or otherwise powered.

scrumper• 2 years ago

Hmm, what’s starlink needed for if it’s completely autonomous? Satellite internet covering oceans has been around for a while - but the hard part of fully autonomous sailing is not a low latency backchannel for telemetry :)

Some small, drone sailboats exist for ocean research in the 2-3m range. There are some designs and prototypes for larger vessels. A lot of the actual work of the crew on an ocean crossing is fixing stuff that breaks. No real way to AI that away, and the bigger you go the more likely things are to fail.

dylan6045• 2 years ago

For these drone ships, what are the operating parameters regarding weather, size of waves, etc?

rdtsc• 2 years ago

This could work for luxury goods if the products and the associated marketing reflects it.

It has to be on the label - “brought you by a sailboat across the Atlantic”.

I could imagine someone paying a large markup for it just like they pay for fancy wine or jewelry. As long as everyone involved in the business understands it and doesn’t drink their own kool-aid, which often happens.

evomassiny6• 2 years ago

This is their second boat,and they already do exactly that. So far it's been quite successful

newsclues• 2 years ago

I always thought there was a market for fleets of smaller wind powered ships for car transportation especially with EVs.

Plenty of opportunities with taxation to make this viable.

But I think we run into the issue of why cargo was centralized in the first place.

pimlottc• 2 years ago

They are definitely promoting it, there's a list of retailers [0] on their website for the goods they transport.

0: https://graindesail-overseas.com/search-retailers

m3047• 2 years ago

Here's an example:

"Barrels of Jefferson’s Ocean Aged at Sea® Bourbon travel aboard ships that visit ports all around the globe. The constant motion of the sea churns the whiskey, increasing its interaction with the wood of the barrel."

https://jeffersonsbourbon.com/jeffersons-ocean-bourbon/

hagbard_c5• 2 years ago

350 tons equals about 20 40ft containers at 18 tons cargo per container (usable capacity of ~67 m³) or 14 at 25 tons per container (maximum freight weight for a standard 40ft container) or 12 at 30 ton per container (maximum freight weight for 40ft reefer (cooling) containers). The average capacity for container ships traversing the oceans is around 5000 20ft containers (TEU) or 2500 40ft containers. That equates anything between 125 and 200 of these sailing ships for each average container ship. Most modern container ships are far larger at 12000 TEU capacity or more.

While this looks like an interesting approach for the types of cargo which caters to people who are willing to pay a premium for having their product transported by sail power - this coffee/chocolate/... was made with single-origin beans/... harvested by ... and shipped on a modern clipper - it is not a feasible solution for normal container shipping. Other types of wind-powered propulsion exist which can be used to reduce the fuel consumption for cargo ships which probably are more efficient in reducing shipping emissions than having large fleets of these 'freight yachts' traverse the seas.

ungreased0675• 2 years ago

I was a little sad to see that this is more eco-friendly performative than a serious attempt to disrupt the shipping industry.

With advances in material science, meteorology, and automation, I’m hopeful cargo sailboats can make a comeback.

reliablereason4• 2 years ago

Its not actually more eco friendly than placing the cargo on a container ship.

The fuel cost for moving one container over the Atlantic on a big container ship is about 30$. A container takes 30 tons. So 12 containers could move that cargo for a fuel cost of 360$, the scale is unbeatable; both economically and environmentally.

Things like this can only ever be a type of artistic thing rather than used for real shipping.

evomassiny6• 2 years ago

How is 360$ of fuel more eco-friendly than 0$ ? I don't get your argument

hn_throwaway_993• 2 years ago

This is not a method by which carbon emissions can be significantly reduced. It is essentially a marketing ploy to provide an option for virtue signaling consumers to show that they get their luxury chocolates and wine by sailboat.

I was going to start out this comment by saying "I don't mean to dump on well-intentioned entrepreneurs", but in all honesty I think I might. That is, at this point, anything that doesn't have at least a possible path to scaling up is just a simple sideshow, ignoring the massive changes that need to happen to get to a zero-carbon future. So this "use a little sailboat to ferry some expensive wine, coffee and chocolate across the ocean" may get good press (hence, the article) but it's not really a path to make any dent in our carbon dependency. I would contrast this with, for example, attempts to make "wind-assisted" cargo ships, e.g. https://www.offshore-energy.biz/worlds-1st-cargo-ship-equipp.... I'm not an engineer so I don't know if this approach will be scalable long term, but it's at least going in with an attempt to scale.

I just feel at this point that virtue signaling luxury products (affordable to a tiny portion of the populace anyway) is just a net negative because it allows some people to pretend they're "doing good" for the environment.

MuffinFlavored• 2 years ago

It is essentially a marketing ploy to provide an option for virtue signaling consumers to show that they get their luxury chocolates and wine by sailboat.

How much more does it cost to get something delivered this way via the "bad for environment traditional way"?

brabel• 2 years ago

The rich are responsible for a disproportionate amount of emissions. They fly more (often ridiculously more with their private jets), buy more, live in houses that take more energy than whole suburbs. If it becomes taboo for them to spend their fortunes on things that have high emissions and they're pressured to use this sort of innovative solution because of that, it may actually make a big difference.

Also, what's your alternative? Shouldn't anyone do anything just because in the grand scheme of things, it won't make a dent?

hn_throwaway_993• 2 years ago

Also, what's your alternative? Shouldn't anyone do anything just because in the grand scheme of things, it won't make a dent?

I was very clear in my alternative - I even posted a link to one such example real alternative in my post.

We should be very clear headed about the types of technologies that can actually reduce worldwide global emissions. Anything else should be completely ignored. Reducing carbon emissions isn't like cleaning up litter. If you clean up litter in your little town, you're left with a sparkling clean town, which is great, even if other towns don't do anything and look like a dump. With carbon reduction, if you find a way to reduce .00001% of emissions, it literally does nothing to affect overall climate and temperature. In fact, I think it can do more harm than good, as it is basically a way for people to pay off their conscience without doing anything that makes a difference.

pasttense012• 2 years ago

It's a question of what has the most bang for the buck. Using wind to generate electricity via big wind turbines has a vastly lower cost per ton of avoided carbon pumped into the atmosphere than using wind to move very small capacity sailboats across the ocean.

Retric• 2 years ago

This is basically pointless, but the economics of modern sailing ships can get closer than you might think. Historic sailing ships where 10x this size and carried 8,000 tons of cargo at close to the speed of slow steaming shipping. That’s only 1/15th of a Panamax ship, but 8,000 tons isn’t some inherent limit on sails it’s what you got from the technology of the time aka wood.

Modern weather forcasts, better hulls, more automation, and the economics get surprisingly close. So sure, today it’s pointless but PV looked like a dumb investment for decades before suddenly taking over the world.

toomuchtodo• 2 years ago

Also, currently about half of marine cargo is moving fuel around the world. As that volume decreases (energy transition), along with deglobalization also decreasing marine shipments, total volume potential for sailing is much more reasonable.

evomassiny6• 2 years ago

Could you elaborate on why this is not a method by which carbon emissions can be significantly reduced ?

This is only the second boat of a small company, they most likely don't have the ressources to get a bigger one. At this scale, the only way to make money is to move luxury products.

IMO it's a good start.

crote2• 2 years ago

The problem is that carbon emissions come from more than just fuel. You also have to take into account the construction of the ship, the crew, loading/unloading, and pre/post-transport.

Best-case scenario, you're looking at a crew of 4 who can transport 6x350T in a year, or 525T / person-year. Meanwhile a container ship has a crew of 20, but it can carry 240.000T, and do in the ballpark of 50 transatlantic crossings a year - so 600.000T / person-year. That discrepancy is large enough that even things like per-crew-member CO2 contributions starts to become relevant.

I'm all for decarbonizing shipping, but this boat is nothing more than a rich person's plaything. It'll contribute absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things. Maybe sail is viable, but at least put it on realistically-sized vessel like [0].

[0] https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/new-wind-powered...

thrance2• 2 years ago

I recall seeing their company on french national TV a few years ago.

If I remember correctly, they didn't claim that sailboats would be able to replace our global cargo fleet, but rather that in an energetically shrinking world they would provide a (luxury) alternative to shipping exotic goods (in a lesser volume, of course).

Also I don't think that there are any ways to both conserve trade capacity and reduce carbon emissions significantly. At some point we'll have to choose which is most beneficial between importing cars from Japan and not reaching +4°C.

fragmede4• 2 years ago

perfect is the enemy if the good

prmoustache3• 2 years ago

It would make more sense to roast the cacao and make the fine chocolates in the countries where cacao is harvested if you ask me.

danielharan2• 2 years ago

The chocolate has to be shipped cool, requiring more energy. That said: more and more producing countries are doing initial processing (roasting and grinding into liquor), and derivatives (powder and butter).

Processing cacao in North America means I have to pay to get rid of shell which could be brought back to farms. Hopefully one day I can buy good liquor.

prmoustache3• 2 years ago

Still less energy than shipping left and right 3 times

jylam• 2 years ago

"Everything from Grain de Sail brand fine chocolates and organic coffee to cosmetic products, wine, and French fashion house luxury goods were on board."

So luxury stuff that no one really needs to get from the other side of the world. There is nothing environmentally friendly about useless stuff shipped from a country 10.000km away. Cocoa and coffee obviously doesn't grow in France, so it already came for somewhere else very far away. Cosmetic products are either a scam or available locally, those are chemicals or plants that don't grow in France.

“We must change our mindset to products that last longer and generate less pressure on the environment.” Yes, so no luxury goods across the oceans. More local stuff.

That's textbook greenwashing. (full disclosure, I'm French, never seen a cocoa or coffee or cosmetic plant grow here)

zer00eyz• 2 years ago

You think luxury goods are the problem?

Theres 8 billion of us... Most of the population eats based on imports.

China, a billion people, only produces 60 percent of its own food. Africa, large portions of the Middle East survive on imported grain. Hell what started out as aid to Nigeria is now a delicacy and part of the culture: stock fish. An African nation identifies part of its culture with a Norwegian export.

This isnt a "rich" problem the system is fucked from tip to tail. EVERYTHING needs to change, and we can do that now and figure out a way that is "fair" or we can just wait till it's fucked, and then famine and war solve the problem.

f154hfds• 2 years ago

I was tracking with you till the last sentence - why is this bad? I tend to think it's a good thing that 40% of Chinese people (580 million people) aren't starving. Britain hasn't been able to feed itself from domestic agriculture for 200+ years, would you have their population halved so that they don't need food imports anymore? I don't understand.

__turbobrew__• 2 years ago

Yes, the greenest luxury good is the one which is not consumed. The second greenest luxury good is the one made with supply chains close to home.

slothtrop• 2 years ago

Almost nothing is entirely local. Even with foodstuffs, fertilizer feed and other supplies has to be transported from great distances. Whether something gets to its destination in a less energy-intensive way locally depends on the product. Plus it's more land-efficient (and therefore less hard on environment) for farmers to sell to a wider area.

You can of course give up luxuries if you want, but it's a pointless race to the bottom. Emissions go up because demand goes up in the developing world, not because you ordered coffee and chocolate. And of course that surge in demand is a reflection of an improved quality of life, i.e. living more like the West.

Since climate change is a short-run imminent problem, I agree that interventions of some sort alongside the innovation race are warranted. Here though, some are more impactful and politically viable than others. There is some low hanging fruit that governments can take advantage of, such as green grants for improving home insulation, dissuading purchase of SUVs (the gas-powered ones), greatly improving public transportation and zoning reform, etc.

safeimp• 2 years ago

Cocoa and coffee obviously doesn't grow in France, so it already came for somewhere else very far away.

From the article:

After the ship leaves New York City on April 15, 2024, Grain de Sail ll will return to France, loaded with various goods. This is the first load of many for the Grain de Sail ll. In total, this vessel plans to sail the seas five times a year, trekking from France to New York and then down through the Caribbean, where the sailboat will dispatch humanitarian aid, working alongside local NGOs. The sailboat will also restock its coffee and cacao supply on its journey through the Caribbean. That supply is then brought back across the sea to France, where the coffee is roasted, and fine chocolates are produced.

You can find more details on their site: https://graindesail-overseas.com/q-a

agentultra• 2 years ago

Everyone is always concerned about scale.

But I sometimes wonder if we need to scale down. Are cargo ships full of essential goods or disposable items that will more likely than not enter a landfill without seeing any use at all? We’re really good at over producing items and goods that we don’t need or use.

It’s interesting to see businesses try things like this. It might not be efficient or affordable now. But someone had to break ground and move the needle somewhere.

There’s an interesting story in a similar vein behind the publishing of the card game, Earthborne Rangers. They wanted to print the game so that it was fully compostable. Save for the staples in the rulebook they succeeded despite industry veterans telling them it would be too expensive and not work. I’m glad they did it. I hope others will also try it.

cloverich• 2 years ago

This is where carbon tax helps. Having to pay the true cost of goods helps everyone make better decisions. Maybe, hopefully, it also pushes the needle towards higher quality, more essential items and hence less waste.

Yet, "make everything more expensive" is a challenging position to make progress on.

basisword• 2 years ago

Doesn’t this just drive up the cost for the people who are already struggling to afford these goods?

sva_• 2 years ago

We’re really good at over producing items and goods that we don’t need or use.

Overproduction of essential things like food is by design as it makes a famine much less likely.

About non-essential stuff, I would agree with you.

ianburrell• 2 years ago

One thing to keep in mind is that cargo ships are one of the most efficient ways of transport stuff. It is likely that any advantage from this sailing ship was lost driving the cargo to warehouse and then shipping it to destination. It is strange to worry about the cheap part of shipping and ignore the expensive parts.

Also, there are lots of disposable goods that are essential like food and toilet paper. Lots of food is shipped by container. What is the difference between a mango and an apple? Clothing is frequently shipped by container. How are you going to decide what clothing is frivolous fast fashion and what is essential?

rmah2• 2 years ago

At end of life, cargo ships are cut up into scrap steel. That scrap is then melted down and re-used to make new steel. I strongly suspect that, if you take into account the energy used to manufacture the ship, sailboats will turn out to have a far higher carbon footprint per ton-mile of shipping than normal cargo ships. Cargo ships, as dirty as they seem on a per-ship basis, are crazy efficient on a per ton-mile basis.

But all that aside, sailing cargo ships are nothing more than a curiosity. Their capacity is tiny, they are very slow, are limited in their routes, etc. And as far as I can tell Grain de Sail's business is NOT shipping. It's some sort of luxury wine & chocolates with an eco theme. I suspect the boat is just a way for the owner to have the company pay for his yachts (the boats only make 2 cargo trips a year) .

kryptiskt• 2 years ago

Up until WWII, Finnish shippers were competitive using sailing ships for long range bulk transport of grain, Eric Newby details one such voyage as a sailor in The Last Grain Race (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Grain_Race). I see no particular reason why sailing ships with a little optimization couldn't be competitive these days if they were back then, especially since the fuel prices comparatively is higher now.

tokai2• 2 years ago

Don't know about CO², but scrapping of cargo ships is a huge polluter. Places like Alang ship breaking yard are nightmarish on both the human and environmental level.

chris_wot• 2 years ago

The cost of scrapping a massive cargo to reuse its materials is going to produce an enormous amount of CO2.

Though, there are already sail technologies you can add to existing shipping. I’m amazed more haven’t been retrofitted, quite frankly.

boudin• 2 years ago

Do you have any number that can back up your claims? And any real info about the owners having yachts? If not, you should really delete your conspiracy shitty comment

1vuio0pswjnm72• 2 years ago

"Cargo ships, as dirty as they seem on a per-ship basis, are crazy efficient on a per ton-mile basis."

As I understand it, this reinforces the parent's comment about scaling down. Efficiency facilitates scaling up, increased demand, supply and consumption, and inevitably, increased carbon footprint and other environmental issues. The comment is not only directed at the footprint of "normal" cargo ships, it's directed at the footprint of the consumption that they enable.

When it is cheap and efficient to ship goods, then more goods will be produced, shipped and consumed; this has an enviromental impact. If it becomes more expensive and less efficient, then perhaps less goods would be produced, shipped and consumed, with reduced environmental impact.

gofixurcode2• 2 years ago

In the article it states they make 5 trips per year.

hn_throwaway_993• 2 years ago

Are cargo ships full of essential goods

This article is about a company transporting luxury coffee, chocolate and wine from France - hardly what I would call "essential goods". And given that coffee and chocolate doesn't grow in France, dollars to doughnuts the commodities for those products was originally brought to France on traditional cargo ships.

Totally agree with another commenter, this is simply greenwashing.

Thorrez• 2 years ago

then down through the Caribbean, where the sailboat will dispatch humanitarian aid, working alongside local NGOs. The sailboat will also restock its coffee and cacao supply on its journey through the Caribbean. That supply is then brought back across the sea to France

andrepd2• 2 years ago

The current economic system optimises and rewards this kind of overproduction. That's the simple truth. As long as this is the case fighting this issue is a losing battle

jdietrich• 2 years ago

Are cargo ships full of essential goods

Yes, for any reasonable definition of "essential".

https://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/countries/43/export-basket

https://comtradeplus.un.org/Publication/ITSY

fashion-nugget• 2 years ago

Keeping climate change mitigation separate and off-topic, no, that's absurd. Hand-wringing about too much success or too much efficiency is contrary to the nature of business. If scaling down were essential, it would need to be imposed by consistent regulation so all legitimate participants are held to the same standard. Instead, greater efficiencies, less pollution, faster transit times, and less costs are positive values to optimize for.

throwaway2562• 2 years ago

As an experienced pirate, I vow to attack this vessel and take her sweet cargo for mine own, you may depend upon it.

renewiltord• 2 years ago

We're so much faster these days than in the 1800s. That's pretty cool. Relatively fast boat!

bewaretheirs• 2 years ago

Another recent case of cargo by sail that may be a bit more practical:

ESA is now sending rocket subassemblies across the Atlantic (to their launch site in French Guyana) in a hybrid ship equipped with both sails and diesel; the linked article claims the sails reduce fuel consumption by 30%.

https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Transportation/Ar...

euroderf• 2 years ago

Sailing ships continued to be economic into the 1930s, for certain cargoes and routes. See Eric Newby, "The Last Grain Race".

graycat• 2 years ago

One explanation is an old one, MONEY. My understanding is that for a cargo ship of reasonable size, the diesel or black oil fuel to cross the Atlantic can be > $1 million. The wind? Free. And, with a well designed sailboat, the speed can be reasonably fast. And save on the purchase and maintenance costs of steam turbines and big diesel engines and their weight.

imglorp• 2 years ago

350 tons as compared to a heavy freighter with 50,000 or 100,000 tons cargo.

By all means let's get more sail area these big guys and save that 30% fuel, yes.

OJFord2• 2 years ago

I can't believe the answer to environmentally friendly wine and chocolate in New York, at least for the size of the market, is really to innovate on how to ship it from France..?!

The coffee and cacao is presumably making its second Atlantic crossing too.

And wait, coffee? What are they doing, just roasting it in France? And then it's at minimum 18 days stale by the time you buy it? That's not a premium good at all, and much less environmentally friendly than if it came directly from South America, roasted in New York or wherever. But then I guess you can't label it 'French Roast' or something stupid.

npongratz• 2 years ago

Confirmed in TFA:

The sailboat will also restock its coffee and cacao supply on its journey through the Caribbean. That supply is then brought back across the sea to France, where the coffee is roasted, and fine chocolates are produced.

So, the commodities are taken from the Caribbean region, to France, and back across the Atlantic to NYC.

arwineap• 2 years ago

Just to be clear, this is a typical sail cargo route because of the prevailing / trade winds

shepherdjerred• 2 years ago

And then it's at minimum 18 days stale by the time you buy it?

You generally don't want to use freshly roasted coffee anyway. It ideally gets some time to de-gas.

18 days, though, is towards the tail end of what you'd want.

https://fellowproducts.com/blogs/learn/understanding-degassi...

OJFord2• 2 years ago

Sure, but something like mail order 'freshly roasted' within your local country accounts for that and you're good to go; if I come back to a bag that's 18d post-roast from holiday or something I'll definitely taste the difference from the 2-3d at which I'd typically receive it. (Not in a good way.) Paying the surely enormous premium for roasted-in-France and zero-emission-sailboat-delivered coffee in NYC just doesn't make any sense to me.

tokai2• 2 years ago

It is really small compared to the iron-hulled sailing cargo ships of the beginning of the last century. I can't find any information on the construction, but it seems like a converted pleasure vessel. Seems like a smart fit for their products. But feels more like good marketing than any kind of shipping innovation.

ThinkBeat• 2 years ago

There is no reason to ship fermented grape juice in heavy glass bottles all around the world.

All so that snobby people can buy wine with the right label and source, so they can pretend to themselves and others that is it all about the taste¹

This is a good place for some serious climate taxes.

A small improvement would be to ship the wine in enormous "plastic bladders" on repurposed oil tankers. Then it can be poured into bottles at the destination.

But wine can be made nearly anywhere. Even in the toilet (Pruno wine)² So you dont need a lot of expensive equipment. If grapes are an issue other fruits and veggies can be used.

Every city should be able to produce lots of it, so buying local would be easy.

¹ https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-ta... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_wine_tasting#:~:text=Som....

² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruno

350 tons of of chocolate and wine arrive on world’s largest cargo sailboat

Related Stories