5 ms·

I’ve been to the Disney cruise private island. It’s interesting, there’s almost no full time employees there. The ship crew gets off and works the island while

I’ve been to the Disney cruise private island. It’s interesting, there’s almost no full time employees there. The ship crew gets off and works the island while you are there. But even if you go on say an Alaska cruise, which is entirely in the USA, the “towns” that you stop in exist solely for the cruise ships. The stores are the same junk at every stop, often owned by the cruise lines, unless you walk to the edge and maybe get something local or family run.

Nursie 7y ago
Countries around the world seem to slowly be waking up to this - Cruise ships pollute like hell, make destinations crowded and less pleasant for residents and 'regular' tourists, and also attempt to capture all of the spending of their passengers anyway, limiting any economic benefits. European cities they frequent are some of the worst for SOx and NOx pollution on the continent and a single line, Carnival, emitted more than all of Europe's cars last year (by a factor of 10 IIRC). Barcelona has started to realise that hoards that rush off the boat, have lunch and rush back on are not worth the meagre boost it gives them. The cruise industry needs to clean up its act.
- conjectures 7y ago
  Also c.f. Venice.
  - laumars 7y ago
    Coincidentally I was in Venice for the first time 2 weeks ago. Absolutely beautiful place and I 100% agree with the locals complaints about cruise ships - it really does ruin the touristy parts of Venice. Thankfully you don't need to walk far to get a more authentic Venetian experience.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- maccard 7y ago
  > Carnival, emitted more than all of Europe's cars last year (by a factor of 10 IIRC). Something is always going to be the worst polluter. If the people who took a carnival cruise flew around the world instead, what would the impact be? (And what would happen to the fuel that those cruise ships are currently burning?) It's still a horriffic stat, but I'd love a nuanced discussion on it!
  - Angostura 7y ago
    These figures are from 2006 - so you need to factor in improvements in engineering since then - but The Guardian crunched some figures and said “According to our calculations, a cruiseliner such as Queen Mary 2 emits 0.43kg of CO2 per passenger mile, compared with 0.257kg for a long-haul flight (even allowing for the further damage of emissions being produced in the upper atmosphere” So the answer would appear to be “jump on the plane”.
    - clort 7y ago
      There might be a nuance missing, in that if you compare a plane journey vs a cruise you are of course not comparing like to like if you only consider 'CO2 per passenger mile' as aeroplanes are used to travel further than a cruise ship. I don't know the mileage that they actually cover on a cruise, but at 20kts they could cover 480 miles in 24 hours and bearing in mind that they are spending time in port it will be less than that. Lets estimate 300 miles per day, so a 2 week cruise could rack up ~4200 sea miles. => 1806 Kg of CO2 If I flew from Heathrow to Antigua for those 2 weeks, that would be ~8000 air miles. => 2056 Kg of CO2
      - Retric 7y ago
        Longer trips would take you to different locations. So, sure visiting Australia from Florida would result in more pollution, but that’s not the same experience as a Caribbean cruise.
      - Angostura 7y ago
        Alternatively, cruises tend to take meandering inefficient routes - comparable flights will always be shorter.
- Nokinside 7y ago
  The Baltic Sea and the North Sea are Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA) and Nitrogen Oxide Emission Control Areas (NECAs). Ships in these areas required to use SOx scrubbers and NOx, reducing devices in new ships. Limits have been gradually tightened. I think they are now as low as 0.10% m/m. Carnival Cruise Lines has ships outfitted with scrubbers and they operate in these Emission Control Areas. Lower emissions are gradually coming to other areas as well when scrubbers are retrofitted into older ships.
  - Nursie 7y ago
    Sounds good, and can't come soon enough! Personally I'd like it if my home city (Southampton, UK currently) would stop them idling their engines in port for power. Apparently we don't have the power infrastructure for them to plug in and run their systems from the local grid, so they just sit there churning this stuff out.

Nursie 7y ago

Countries around the world seem to slowly be waking up to this - Cruise ships pollute like hell, make destinations crowded and less pleasant for residents and 'regular' tourists, and also attempt to capture all of the spending of their passengers anyway, limiting any economic benefits. European cities they frequent are some of the worst for SOx and NOx pollution on the continent and a single line, Carnival, emitted more than all of Europe's cars last year (by a factor of 10 IIRC). Barcelona has started to realise that hoards that rush off the boat, have lunch and rush back on are not worth the meagre boost it gives them. The cruise industry needs to clean up its act.

conjectures 7y ago
Also c.f. Venice.
- laumars 7y ago
  Coincidentally I was in Venice for the first time 2 weeks ago. Absolutely beautiful place and I 100% agree with the locals complaints about cruise ships - it really does ruin the touristy parts of Venice. Thankfully you don't need to walk far to get a more authentic Venetian experience.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
maccard 7y ago
> Carnival, emitted more than all of Europe's cars last year (by a factor of 10 IIRC). Something is always going to be the worst polluter. If the people who took a carnival cruise flew around the world instead, what would the impact be? (And what would happen to the fuel that those cruise ships are currently burning?) It's still a horriffic stat, but I'd love a nuanced discussion on it!
- Angostura 7y ago
  These figures are from 2006 - so you need to factor in improvements in engineering since then - but The Guardian crunched some figures and said “According to our calculations, a cruiseliner such as Queen Mary 2 emits 0.43kg of CO2 per passenger mile, compared with 0.257kg for a long-haul flight (even allowing for the further damage of emissions being produced in the upper atmosphere” So the answer would appear to be “jump on the plane”.
  - clort 7y ago
    There might be a nuance missing, in that if you compare a plane journey vs a cruise you are of course not comparing like to like if you only consider 'CO2 per passenger mile' as aeroplanes are used to travel further than a cruise ship. I don't know the mileage that they actually cover on a cruise, but at 20kts they could cover 480 miles in 24 hours and bearing in mind that they are spending time in port it will be less than that. Lets estimate 300 miles per day, so a 2 week cruise could rack up ~4200 sea miles. => 1806 Kg of CO2 If I flew from Heathrow to Antigua for those 2 weeks, that would be ~8000 air miles. => 2056 Kg of CO2
    - Retric 7y ago
      Longer trips would take you to different locations. So, sure visiting Australia from Florida would result in more pollution, but that’s not the same experience as a Caribbean cruise.
    - Angostura 7y ago
      Alternatively, cruises tend to take meandering inefficient routes - comparable flights will always be shorter.
Nokinside 7y ago
The Baltic Sea and the North Sea are Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA) and Nitrogen Oxide Emission Control Areas (NECAs). Ships in these areas required to use SOx scrubbers and NOx, reducing devices in new ships. Limits have been gradually tightened. I think they are now as low as 0.10% m/m. Carnival Cruise Lines has ships outfitted with scrubbers and they operate in these Emission Control Areas. Lower emissions are gradually coming to other areas as well when scrubbers are retrofitted into older ships.
- Nursie 7y ago
  Sounds good, and can't come soon enough! Personally I'd like it if my home city (Southampton, UK currently) would stop them idling their engines in port for power. Apparently we don't have the power infrastructure for them to plug in and run their systems from the local grid, so they just sit there churning this stuff out.