Misc

Timeline: The World’s Biggest Passenger Ships from 1831-Present

Published

1 year ago

May 28, 2021

Carmen Ang

Article/Editing:

Iman Ghosh

The World's Biggest Passenger Ships

Breaking Records: The Biggest Passenger Ships since 1831

The Titanic lives large in our minds, but it’s probably not surprising that the world record for biggest passenger ship has been broken many times since its era. In fact, today’s largest passenger ship can now hold over 6,000 people—more than double the Titanic’s capacity.

This graphic by HMY Yachts looks at which vessels held the title of the world’s largest passenger ship over time, and how these vessels have evolved since the early 19th century.

Different Types of Passenger Ships

Before diving into the ranking, it’s worth explaining what constitutes a passenger ship.

Passenger ships are vessels whose main purpose is to transport people rather than goods. In modern times, there are three types of passenger ships:

Cruise ships: Used for vacationing, with a priority on amenities and luxury
Ferries: Typically used for shorter day trips, or overnight transport
Ocean liners: The traditional mode of maritime transport, with a priority on speed

Traditional ocean liners are becoming obsolete, largely because of advancements in other modes of transportation such as rail, automobile, and air travel. In other words, the main priority for passenger ships has changed over the years, shifting from transportation to recreation.

Now, luxury is the central focus, meaning extravagance is part of the whole cruise ship experience. For example, the Navigator of the Seas (which was the largest passenger ship from 2002-2003) has $8.5 million worth of artwork displayed throughout the ship.

A Full Breakdown: Biggest Passenger Ships By Tonnage

Now that we’ve touched on the definition of a passenger ship and how they’ve evolved over the years, let’s take a look at some of the largest passenger ships in history.

The first vessel on the list is the SS Royal William. Built in Eastern Canada in the early 1800s, this ship was originally built for domestic travel within Canada.

In addition to being the largest passenger ship of its time, it’s often credited as being the first ship to travel across the Atlantic Ocean almost fully by steam engine. However, some sources claim the Dutch-owned vessel Curaçao completed a steam-powered journey in 1827—six years before the SS Royal William.

In 1837, The SS Royal William was dethroned by the SS Great Western, only to change hands dozens of times before 1912, when the Titanic entered the scene.

Ship	Title held	Tonnage	Capacity
SS Royal William	1831 – 1837	1,370 GRT	155 passengers
SS Great Western	1837 – 1839	1,340 GRT	128 passengers, 20 servants, 60 crew
SS British Queen	1839 – 1840	1,850 GRT	207 passengers
SS President	1840 – 1841	2,366 GRT	110 passengers, 44 servants
SS British Queen	1841 – 1843	1,850 GRT	207 passengers
SS Great Britain	1843 – 1853	3,270 GRT	360 passengers, 120 crew
SS Atrato	1853 – 1858	3,466 GRT	762+ passengers
SS Great Eastern	1858 – 1888	18,915 GRT	4,000 passengers, 418 crew
SS City of New York	1888 – 1893	10,499 GRT	1,740 passengers, 362 crew
RMS Campania and RMS Lucania	1893 – 1897	12,950 GRT	2,000 passengers, 424 crew
SS Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse	1897 – 1899	14,349 GRT	1,506 passengers, 488 crew
RMS Oceanic	1899 – 1901	17,272 GRT	1,710 passengers, 349 crew
RMS Celtic	1901 – 1903	20,904 GRT	2,857 passengers
RMS Cedric	1903 – 1904	21,035 GRT	1,223 passengers, 486 crew
RMS Baltic	1904 – 1906	23,876 GRT	2,875 passengers
SS Kaiserin Auguste Victoria	1906 – 1907	24,581 GRT	2,466 passengers
RMS Lusitania	1907	31,550 GRT	2,198 passengers, 850 crew
RMS Mauretania	1907 – 1911	31,938 GRT	2,165 passengers, 802 crew
RMS Olympic	1911 – 1912	45,324 GRT	2,435 passengers, 950 crew
RMS Titanic	1912	46,328 GRT	2,435 passengers, 892 crew
SS Imperator	1913 – 1914	52,117 GRT	4,234 passengers, 1,180 crew
SS Vaterland	1914 – 1922	54,282 GRT	1,165 passengers
RMS Majestic	1922 – 1935	56,551 GRT	2,145 passengers
SS Normandie	1935 – 1936	79,280 GRT	1,972 passengers, 1,345 crew
RMS Queen Mary	1936	80,774 GRT	2,139 passengers, 1,101 crew
SS Normandie	1936 – 1946	83,404 GRT	1,972 passengers, 1,345 crew
RMS Queen Elizabeth	1946 – 1972	83,673 GRT	2,283 passengers, 1000+ crew
SS France and SS Norway (1962-1980)	1972 – 1987	66,343 GRT	2,044 passengers, 1,253 crew
MS Sovereign of the Seas	1987 – 1990	73,529 GT	2,850 passengers
SS Norway	1990 – 1995	76,049 GT	2,565 passengers, 875 crew
Sun Princess	1995 – 1996	77,499 GT	2,010 passengers, 924 crew
Carnival Destiny	1996 – 1998	101,353 GT	2,642 passengers, 1,150 crew
Grand Princess	1998 – 1999	109,000 GT	2,590 passengers, 1,110 crew
Voyager of the Seas	1999 – 2000	137,276 GT	3,138 passengers, 1,181 crew
Explorer of the Seas	2000 – 2002	137,308 GT	3,114 passengers, 1,180 crew
Navigator of the Seas	2002 – 2003	139,999 GT	4,000 passengers, 1,200 crew
RMS Queen Mary 2	2003 – 2006	148,528 GT	2,640 passengers, 1,256 crew
MS Freedom of the Seas	2006 – 2007	154,407 GT	4,515 passengers, 1,300 crew
Liberty of the Seas	2007 – 2009	155,889 GT	4,960 passengers, 1,300 crew
Oasis of the Seas	2009 – 2016	225,282 GT	6,780 passengers, 2,165 crew
Harmony of the Seas	2016 – 2018	226,963 GT	6,780 passengers, 2,300 crew
Symphony of the Seas	2018 – present	228,081 GT	6,680 passengers, 2,200 crew

The Titanic was one of three ships in the Olympic-class line. Of the three, two of them sank—the Titanic in 1912, and the HMHS Britannic in 1916, during World War I. Some historians believe these ships sank as a result of their faulty bulkhead design.

Fast forward to today, and the Symphony of the Seas is now the world’s largest passenger ship. While it boasts 228,081 in gross tonnage, it uses 25% less fuel than its sister ships (which are slightly smaller).

COVID-19’s Impact on Cruise Ships

2020 was a tough year for the cruise ship industry, as travel restrictions and onboard outbreaks halted the $150 billion industry. As a result, some operations were forced to downsize—for instance, the notable cruise operation Carnival removed 13 ships from its fleet in July 2020.

That being said, restrictions are slowly beginning to loosen, and industry experts remain hopeful that things will look different in 2021 as more people begin to come back on board.

“[There] is quite a bit of pent-up demand and we’re already seeing strong interest in 2021 and 2022 across the board, with Europe, the Mediterranean, and Alaska all seeing significant interest next year.”
-Josh Leibowitz, president of luxury cruise line Seabourn

Up Next

How Powerful is Your Passport in a Post-Pandemic World?

Don't Miss

The Uses of Corn: Industries Affected by High Corn Prices

Click for Comments

Money

Mapped: The 3 Billion People Who Can’t Afford a Healthy Diet

More than three billion people across the globe are unable to afford a healthy diet. See which countries are most affected.

Published

8 hours ago

October 3, 2022

Govind Bhutada

The 3 Billion People Who Can’t Afford a Healthy Diet

While they aren’t often the focus of news media, hunger and undernourishment are problems plaguing millions of people every day.

According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), more than 3 billion people could not afford a healthy diet in 2020, an additional 112 million more people than in 2019. The increase was partly because of rising food prices, with the average cost of a healthy diet rising by 3.3% from 2019 levels.

As of August 2022, the FAO food price index was up 40.6% from average 2020 levels. Unless income levels increased by a similar magnitude, the healthy diet crisis is likely to have worsened, especially in low-income countries experiencing rampant food inflation.

Using data from the FAO, the above infographic maps the share of people unable to afford a healthy diet in 138 different countries as of 2020 (latest available data).

The Cost and Affordability of a Healthy Diet

According to the FAO, a healthy diet is one that meets daily energy needs as well as requirements within the food and dietary guidelines created by the country.

The (un)affordability is measured by comparing the cost of a healthy diet to income levels in the country. If the cost exceeds 52% of an average household’s income, the diet is deemed unaffordable.

Here’s a look at the share of populations unable to afford a healthy diet, and the cost of such a diet around the world:

Country	Percent of population unable to afford a healthy diet	Cost of Healthy Diet (USD per Person per Day)
Burundi 🇧🇮	97.2%	$2.9
Madagascar 🇲🇬	97.0%	$3.2
Liberia 🇱🇷	96.8%	$3.9
Malawi 🇲🇼	96.6%	$3.1
Nigeria 🇳🇬	95.9%	$4.1
Central African Republic 🇨🇫	95.1%	$3.6
Guinea 🇬🇳	94.9%	$4.1
Angola 🇦🇴	94.3%	$4.5
Congo 🇨🇬	92.4%	$3.4
Sudan 🇸🇩	91.8%	$4.3
Mozambique 🇲🇿	91.5%	$3.2
Democratic Republic of Congo 🇨🇩	90.0%	$2.1
Sierra Leone 🇸🇱	89.2%	$2.9
Niger 🇳🇪	88.8%	$2.9
Zambia 🇿🇲	88.0%	$3.3
Tanzania 🇹🇿	87.6%	$2.7
Guinea-Bissau 🇬🇼	87.2%	$3.5
Ethiopia 🇪🇹	86.8%	$3.4
Rwanda 🇷🇼	86.3%	$2.7
Haiti 🇭🇹	85.9%	$4.5
Sao Tome and Principe 🇸🇹	84.7%	$3.6
Nepal 🇳🇵	84.0%	$4.4
Lesotho 🇱🇸	83.5%	$4.3
Pakistan 🇵🇰	83.5%	$3.7
Chad 🇹🇩	83.4%	$2.8
Benin 🇧🇯	82.9%	$3.7
Uganda 🇺🇬	82.2%	$2.7
Kenya 🇰🇪	81.1%	$3.0
Burkina Faso 🇧🇫	80.1%	$3.3
Laos 🇱🇦	79.8%	$4.1
Mali 🇲🇱	74.3%	$3.1
Bangladesh 🇧🇩	73.5%	$3.1
Egypt 🇪🇬	72.9%	$3.4
Eswatini 🇸🇿	71.8%	$3.4
India 🇮🇳	70.5%	$3.0
Indonesia 🇮🇩	69.1%	$4.5
Philippines 🇵🇭	68.6%	$4.1
Jamaica 🇯🇲	66.2%	$6.7
South Africa 🇿🇦	65.2%	$4.3
Myanmar 🇲🇲	65.1%	$4.2
Gambia 🇬🇲	64.0%	$3.1
Djibouti 🇩🇯	63.9%	$3.1
Botswana 🇧🇼	61.4%	$3.7
Ghana 🇬🇭	61.2%	$4.0
Cameroon 🇨🇲	60.7%	$2.8
Mauritania 🇲🇷	60.7%	$3.7
Fiji 🇫🇯	60.4%	$3.9
Suriname 🇸🇷	58.8%	$5.7
Namibia 🇳🇦	56.8%	$3.5
Bhutan 🇧🇹	53.0%	$5.0
Mongolia 🇲🇳	51.4%	$5.1
Honduras 🇭🇳	51.3%	$3.5
Iraq 🇮🇶	49.6%	$3.5
Kyrgyzstan 🇰🇬	49.6%	$3.2
Sri Lanka 🇱🇰	49.0%	$3.9
Senegal 🇸🇳	46.0%	$2.3
Guyana 🇬🇾	43.0%	$4.9
Armenia 🇦🇲	42.9%	$3.2
Tajikistan 🇹🇯	42.1%	$3.5
Cabo Verde 🇨🇻	38.1%	$3.6
Belize 🇧🇿	36.4%	$2.1
Gabon 🇬🇦	36.3%	$3.6
Nicaragua 🇳🇮	35.7%	$3.3
Algeria 🇩🇿	30.2%	$3.8
Vietnam 🇻🇳	30.0%	$4.1
Colombia 🇨🇴	26.5%	$3.1
Mexico 🇲🇽	26.3%	$3.3
Bolivia 🇧🇴	24.7%	$3.8
Palestine 🇵🇸	23.1%	$3.4
Ecuador 🇪🇨	21.4%	$2.9
Saint Lucia 🇱🇨	20.6%	$3.6
Peru 🇵🇪	20.5%	$3.3
Iran 🇮🇷	20.3%	$3.6
Tunisia 🇹🇳	20.3%	$3.6
Albania 🇦🇱	20.1%	$4.2
Brazil 🇧🇷	19.0%	$3.1
Dominican Republic 🇩🇴	18.3%	$3.9
Panama 🇵🇦	18.2%	$4.5
North Macedonia 🇲🇰	18.0%	$3.4
Paraguay 🇵🇾	17.8%	$3.5
Montenegro 🇲🇪	17.5%	$3.5
Thailand 🇹🇭	17.0%	$4.3
Costa Rica 🇨🇷	16.8%	$4.1
Morocco 🇲🇦	16.7%	$2.8
Serbia 🇷🇸	16.3%	$4.2
Jordan 🇯🇴	14.9%	$3.6
Mauritius 🇲🇺	13.5%	$3.6
China 🇨🇳	12.0%	$3.0
Trinidad and Tobago 🇹🇹	11.6%	$4.2
Romania 🇷🇴	8.8%	$3.2
Bulgaria 🇧🇬	8.5%	$4.1
Seychelles 🇸🇨	6.8%	$3.8
Moldova 🇲🇩	6.7%	$2.8
Chile 🇨🇱	3.8%	$3.4
Croatia 🇭🇷	3.8%	$4.3
Bosnia and Herzegovina 🇧🇦	3.7%	$4.0
Uruguay 🇺🇾	3.6%	$3.4
Russia 🇷🇺	3.5%	$3.4
Greece 🇬🇷	3.2%	$3.1
Italy 🇮🇹	2.9%	$3.1
Japan 🇯🇵	2.5%	$5.8
Hungary 🇭🇺	2.0%	$3.5
Spain 🇪🇸	2.0%	$2.8
Malaysia 🇲🇾	1.9%	$3.5
Latvia 🇱🇻	1.8%	$3.2
South Korea 🇰🇷	1.7%	$5.2
United States 🇺🇸	1.5%	$3.4
Maldives 🇲🇻	1.4%	$3.9
Estonia 🇪🇪	1.3%	$3.3
Kazakhstan 🇰🇿	1.2%	$2.7
Lithuania 🇱🇹	1.2%	$3.1
Slovakia 🇸🇰	1.2%	$3.2
Israel 🇮🇱	1.0%	$2.5
Poland 🇵🇱	1.0%	$3.2
Austria 🇦🇹	0.8%	$3.0
Australia 🇦🇺	0.7%	$2.6
Canada 🇨🇦	0.7%	$3.0
Malta 🇲🇹	0.7%	$3.8
Sweden 🇸🇪	0.6%	$3.3
Portugal 🇵🇹	0.5%	$2.7
United Kingdom 🇬🇧	0.5%	$1.9
Denmark 🇩🇰	0.4%	$2.5
Norway 🇳🇴	0.4%	$3.5
Cyprus 🇨🇾	0.3%	$3.0
Belarus 🇧🇾	0.2%	$3.3
Belgium 🇧🇪	0.2%	$3.1
Czechia	0.2%	$3.0
Germany 🇩🇪	0.2%	$3.0
Netherlands 🇳🇱	0.2%	$3.0
Finland 🇫🇮	0.1%	$2.7
France 🇫🇷	0.1%	$3.2
Ireland 🇮🇪	0.1%	$2.2
Luxembourg 🇱🇺	0.1%	$2.7
Slovenia 🇸🇮	0.1%	$3.1
Azerbaijan 🇦🇿	0.0%	$2.5
Iceland 🇮🇸	0.0%	$2.4
Switzerland 🇨🇭	0.0%	$2.7
United Arab Emirates 🇦🇪	0.0%	$3.1
World 🌎	42.0%	$3.5

In 52 countries, more than half of the population cannot afford a healthy diet. The majority of these are in Africa, with the rest located across Asia, Oceania, and the Americas.

By contrast, in four countries—Azerbaijan, Iceland, Switzerland, and the UAE—everyone is able to afford a healthy diet. The picture is similar for most European and developed high-income countries, where more than 95% of the population can afford a healthy diet.

When the percentages are translated into numbers, Asia contains the most number of people unable to afford a healthy diet at 1.89 billion, of which 973 million people are in India alone. Another 1 billion people are in Africa, with around 151 million people in the Americas and Oceania.

While hunger is a worldwide concern, it is particularly acute in African countries, which cover all of the top 20 spots in the above table.

Africa’s Deepening Food Crisis

In many countries across sub-Saharan Africa, more than 90% of the population cannot afford a healthy diet.

Sub-Saharan Africa is particularly susceptible to extreme climate events and the resulting volatility in food prices. Roughly one-third of the world’s droughts occur in the region, and some sub-Saharan countries are also heavily reliant on imports for food.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has deepened the crisis, with many African countries importing over 50% of their wheat from the two countries in conflict. The rising food prices from this supply chain disruption have resulted in double-digit food inflation in many African nations, which means that more people are likely to be unable to afford healthy diets.

The Horn of Africa region at the Eastern tip of Africa is particularly in turmoil. All the countries in the region are reliant on wheat from Russia and Ukraine, with Eritrea (100%) and Somalia (>90%) high up in the import dependency chart. Additionally, the region is facing its worst drought in 40 years alongside ongoing political conflicts. As a result, 22 million people are at risk of starvation.

Population Growth and Food Insecurity

In November of 2022, the global population is projected to surpass 8 billion people, and many of the fastest growing countries are also food-insecure.

By 2050, the global population is likely to increase by 35%, and to meet the growing demand for food, crop production will need to double. Given that agriculture is one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, this increase in crop production will also need to be environmentally sustainable.

As the impacts of climate change intensify and food demand increases, reducing food waste, building climate-resilient agricultural infrastructure, and improving agricultural productivity will all play a key role in reducing the levels of food insecurity sustainably.

Get our new “The World at 8 Billion” report and webinar by becoming a VC+ member

Energy

Visualizing the Range of Electric Cars vs. Gas-Powered Cars

With range anxiety being a barrier to EV adoption, how far can an electric car go on one charge, and how do EV ranges compare with gas cars?

Published

3 days ago

September 30, 2022

Govind Bhutada

The Range of Electric Cars vs. Gas-Powered Cars

This was originally posted on Elements. Sign up to the free mailing list to get beautiful visualizations on natural resource megatrends in your email every week.

EV adoption has grown rapidly in recent years, but many prospective buyers still have doubts about electric car ranges.

In fact, 33% of new car buyers chose range anxiety—the concern about how far an EV can drive on a full charge—as their top inhibitor to purchasing electric cars in a survey conducted by EY.

So, how far can the average electric car go on one charge, and how does that compare with the typical range of gas-powered cars?

The Rise in EV Ranges

Thanks to improvements in battery technology, the average range of electric cars has more than doubled over the last decade, according to data from the International Energy Agency (IEA).

Year	Avg. EV Range	Maximum EV Range
2010	79 miles (127 km)	N/A
2011	86 miles (138 km)	94 miles (151 km)
2012	99 miles (159 km)	265 miles (426 km)
2013	117 miles (188 km)	265 miles (426 km)
2014	130 miles (209 km)	265 miles (426 km)
2015	131 miles (211 km)	270 miles (435 km)
2016	145 miles (233 km)	315 miles (507 km)
2017	151 miles (243 km)	335 miles (539 km)
2018	189 miles (304 km)	335 miles (539 km)
2019	209 miles (336 km)	370 miles (595 km)
2020	210 miles (338 km)	402 miles (647 km)
2021	217 miles (349 km)	520 miles* (837 km)

*Max range for EVs offered in the United States.
Source: IEA, U.S. DOE

As of 2021, the average battery-powered EV could travel 217 miles (349 km) on a single charge. It represents a 44% increase from 151 miles (243 km) in 2017 and a 152% increase relative to a decade ago.

Despite the steady growth, EVs still fall short when compared to gas-powered cars. For example, in 2021, the median gas car range (on one full tank) in the U.S. was around 413 miles (664 km)—nearly double what the average EV would cover.

As automakers roll out new models, electric car ranges are likely to continue increasing and could soon match those of their gas-powered counterparts. It’s important to note that EV ranges can change depending on external conditions.

What Affects EV Ranges?

In theory, EV ranges depend on battery capacity and motor efficiency, but real-world results can vary based on several factors:

Weather: At temperatures below 20℉ (-6.7℃), EVs can lose around 12% of their range, rising to 41% if heating is turned on inside the vehicle.
Operating Conditions: Thanks to regenerative braking, EVs may extend their maximum range during city driving.
Speed: When driving at high speeds, EV motors spin faster at a less efficient rate. This may result in range loss.

On the contrary, when driven at optimal temperatures of about 70℉ (21.5℃), EVs can exceed their rated range, according to an analysis by Geotab.

The 10 Longest-Range Electric Cars in America

Here are the 10 longest-range electric cars available in the U.S. as of 2022, based on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) range estimates:

Car	Range On One Full Charge	Estimated Base Price
Lucid Air	520 miles (837 km)	$170,500
Tesla Model S	405 miles (652 km)	$106,190
Tesla Model 3	358 miles (576 km)	$59,440
Mercedes EQS	350 miles (563 km)	$103,360
Tesla Model X	348 miles (560 km)	$122,440
Tesla Model Y	330 miles (531 km)	$67,440
Hummer EV	329 miles (529 km)	$110,295
BMW iX	324 miles (521 km)	$84,195
Ford F-150 Lightning	320 miles (515 km)	$74,169
Rivian R1S	316 miles (509 km)	$70,000

Source: Car and Driver

The top-spec Lucid Air offers the highest range of any EV with a price tag of $170,500, followed by the Tesla Model S. But the Tesla Model 3 offers the most bang for your buck if range and price are the only two factors in consideration.