Maybe it’s about time we started figuring out alternative way to travel. Maybe something that doesn’t require burning fossil fuels.
this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2026
230 points (99.1% liked)
World News
56311 readers
3078 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Air ships should make a comeback Throw some solar panels on for electricity
because hydrogen is famously inert and helium is abundant?
Jet fuel isn't exactly inert either and we now have another 90 years of advances in technology since the Hindenburg.
Hydrogen is a 100 times harder to contain than jet fuel.
How to you get to that number?
Obviously the number is meant to be taken 99.99..% literally, which is the same as 100% by the way. And is not just another way of writing much much harder. That would be lame!
But to be fair, I rounded the 100 up from 99.7, which I found by adding 99 and 0.7.
So as you can see the math is solid.
But the problem with Hydrogen is not just that it is a gas, which is already inherently more difficult than liquids.
The real problem is that it is a gas basically consisting of only a proton with an electron. So the smallest possible atom, so small it can permeate any material that exist. The only difference is in how fast. When you then also at the same time want to make the container light weight, because if it's to heavy it completely defeats the purpose, then you have a recipe for problems.
There's a reason that despite the advantages, there has never been found a practical use for airships. It's not that we can't make them, they are just not any good for practical purposes.
Let's just... uhhh... go back to helium.
Helium is actually worse in many ways, it is expensive, and it is twice as heavy, so it requires more volume to carry the same weight.
Meaning it is more expensive, slower and more vulnerable to the winds.
Atmospheric air is 1.29 g/L. Helium is 0.18 g/L and Hydrogen 0.09 g/L.
So hydrogen can lift 0.09 g more per liter or 7% more than helium.
Not as bad as I thought, but still Helium is less efficient.
No need to go crazy, I just wanted to know where the number comes from.
But while we are here, Helium is the smallest atom at 31 pm, H is 53 pm and H2 is far off with 120 pm.
Funny how helium is smaller than hydrogen when it has 2 protons and 2 neutrons? Against hydrogen that is merely a single proton with an electron. Physics is weird sometimes. Although the explanation is simple that the 2 protons draw the 2 electrons closer, making the electron "shell" smaller.
But maybe this "size" isn't universal, maybe Hydrogen can squeeze more under pressure?
Google gives me this answer to the question "is hydrogen easier to contain than helium":
No, hydrogen is not easier to contain than helium. Hydrogen is harder to contain because its smaller, lighter molecules escape through materials faster than helium
So apparently hydrogen remains the more permeable gas, and hydrogen is also chemically very active, corroding nearly everything it comes in contact with.
Edit:
I figured it out, hydrogen is more permeable because it can interact chemically, making the electron shell near irrelevant.
To answer your remaining question: Helium is slightly easier to compress. Going from 1 bar to 300 bar at 20 °C the density of hydrogen goes from 0.08 to 20.8 kg/m³ (250x higher), helium is 0.16 to 43.2 (263x higher). In other words, the compressibility factor is slightly higher for hydrogen.
That’s why you put a vacuum in there. It’s made of nothing, so it doesn’t react, and there’s plenty of it in the universe. Besides, it’s also lighter than anything else you could throw in there.
Perfect. Now you only have to find a way to contain that vacuum that doesn't involve thick, heavy walls and we're good to go!
Fantastium fibers should do it.
You can also use unobtanium plates with adamantium rivets if you want to make it look cooler.
If there is ever a tiny hole you go from a small hydrogen leak (dangerous but repairable) to a collapse of the entire airship and instantly falling to the ground
No risk, no reward. You wanna fly the coolest airship or not.
Or environmentally friendly if leaked. And leaks will happen.
I am somewhat confident that we could get a reliable H air ship, to be fair.
kirov airshop
I have no reference for this?
Red Alert.
My first mp3 player (this was around 2002-ish) was power by an AA-batrery. The next year a model came on the market that was powered by an integrated, rechargable battery. I immediately bought that model, realizing it would instantly be worth the investment, because I would never need another AA-battery again.
Somehow the people in charge still haven't realized what 12 year old me was able to realize all those years ago.
So you are suggesting we power planes with mp3 players? I like that idea, where do I donate for the go-fund-me?
Hold my beer....
And here I am in 2026 craving for more AA battery powered devices because internal batteries are harder to replace and I have way too many chargers (USB helped there a bit)
So far, oil has been absurdly cheap. Because of that, various industries have been built on the idea of bringing stuff. If oil becomes more expensive, all those industries will suffer, because someone just pulled out one of the cornerstones.
Young me quickly then learned that integrated lithium ion batteries were not easily replaceable and degraded significantly after 1.5 years...
you know there are rechargable AAs right? also energy density, range, whatever look it up
This is the kind of unintelligent pseudo eco the people scare monger about.
Buying new shit cause it's branded as eco when you don't need it and could get the benefit without buying it anyway. Just buy rechargeables if you care about money. Or the environment.
The problem is weight. The energy density of fossil fuels is much higher than lithium batteries.
That's fantastic news.
Next do not sell any fuel to private jets...and then do cruise ships!
Maybe we can finally invest in more rail?
This is a suspiciously nice side effect.
I'm very anti-war, but whenever a wide swath of the airline industry has had to shut down, like in 2008 and 2020, it has historically translated to dramatically lower air pollution numbers.
Effects are only localized, since the war results in massive air pollution.
And water. There have been a number of oil spills from ship attacks.
Was ist just temporary, or long term? Because last I heard air travel is on an all time maximum no?
Drops in pollution are always temporary. The Epstein Class is insulated from the effects of their industrializing.
Side effect of having, basically, a wholly capitalist planet.
Cool, a few weeks less pollution, more in the long run. I don't really see why that is a good thing
Less oil in the market means less of it is available to burn and convert into CO2.
Not suspicious, serendipitous!
To be fair, the press kind of parrots the Lufthansa spokesman. In reality, this is probably more of a consequence of shutting down Cityline preemptively. It already was a losing business before fuel got expensive and on top of that, they had the strikes. The fuel prices are a convenient excuse to get rid of it earlier than planned.
It bothers me how many news sites just copy paste the press release with the corporate narrative without an inkling of actual journalism.
This article is the only one I've found that puts things into perspective:
Through its investigation, Pax Sentinel has uncovered that this "fuel shortage" narrative is a fabrication that ignores the findings of the European Commission. By citing global volatility, the executive board avoids acknowledging the lack of available crew and aircraft caused by its own internal restructuring.
Gotta love how that site has a dedicated brand called Luftscamsa, but that maybe is biased on the opposite end of the spectrum. Somewhere in the middle is the truth.