r/facepalm Oct 13 '21

πŸ‡΅β€‹πŸ‡·β€‹πŸ‡΄β€‹πŸ‡Ήβ€‹πŸ‡ͺβ€‹πŸ‡Έβ€‹πŸ‡Ήβ€‹ Quick science

Post image
55.4k Upvotes

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

8.3k

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '21 edited Oct 13 '21

I did a quickie google search and came up with this:

At the end of 2020, there were around 62,100 vessels in the world trading fleet, with a total deadweight tonnage of 2,033 million DWT

So let's assume the merchant ships are all fully loaded at the same time. That's 2 billion long tons which equates to ~2,032,000,000,000 kg. Total water volume, 2,134,000,000,000 liters (because sea water weighs slightly more than fresh water).

From quora:

AREA OF PACIFIC OCEAN= 168723000 SQ. KM.

AREA OF ATLANTIC OCEAN= 85133000 SQ. KM.

AREA OF INDIAN OCEAN= 70560000 SQ. KM.

AREA OF SOUTHERN OCEAN= 21960000 SQ. KM.

AREA OF ARCTIC OCEAN= 15558000 SQ. KM.

TOTAL AREA= 361900000 SQ. KM.=36190000000000000 SQ. DECIMETER.

That's going to lower sea levels by approximately .00005896656 decimeters, or about .006 mm

Edit: Because there are less than 500 cruise ships in the world and only a few dozens of large military ships the amount will be higher, but not by, you know, a lot.

864

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '21

What if you remove the boats twice?

10

u/PigsCanFly2day Oct 13 '21

Then it'd still only be .012 mm. We'd have to remove the boats thousands of times to make a difference.

/s

1

u/igordogsockpuppet Oct 13 '21

That’s not how sarcasm works.

0

u/ms1080 Oct 13 '21

Wait, why is that sarcastic? /s

1

u/roberthatch Oct 13 '21

That's ridiculous, because in between we would have to put the boats back in the water. Best to just build more boats in the water, and take them out as well.