4 ms·

Cruise ships totally outclass cars as a source of pollutants. An example from across the pond: "The results show that the luxury cruise brands owned by Carniv

Cruise ships totally outclass cars as a source of pollutants. An example from across the pond: "The results show that the luxury cruise brands owned by Carnival Corporation & PLC emitted in 2017 in European seas alone 10 times more disease-causing sulphur dioxide than all of Europe’s 260+ million passenger vehicles." https://www.transportenvironment.org/publications/one-corporation-pollute-them-all https://www.transportenvironment.org/publications/one-corpor...

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
brenden2 7y ago
Interesting, thanks for sharing. Still, my point was that automobiles exist alongside people within cities, in near proximity. A diesel truck driving down my street is probably going to expose me to more harmful pollution than a cruise ship passing by 10 miles from me. So I guess to make my point another way: if you could trace the damage done to individuals in cities, I think the bigger fish to fry would be automobiles. Just to be clear, I'm not trying to discount any claims that cruise ships are causing unnecessary outsized pollution. Airplanes also cause a significant amount of pollution, but for some reason society generally accepts air travel because it's fashionable.
- greglindahl 7y ago
  Can you do better than guessing? Hint: Automobiles and trucks have had steadily tightened regulations for a long time. Ships burn much worse fuel than cars and trucks, and have only recently been regulated. And they aren't regulated in NYC. > “The oil that ships use has a lot more heavy metals in it that have a negative impact on human health,” said Adam Freed, who was the deputy director of the Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability in the Bloomberg administration. “We understood how important of an impact it could have.”
  - brenden2 7y ago
    Older diesel trucks are largely exempt from these regulations. There are a few loopholes that allow people to purchase older truck parts, refurbish them, and continue to operate them without needing to adhere to modern emissions requirements.
    - greglindahl 7y ago
      That's true in general, but not true near many large ports, for obvious reasons. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191029005379/en/100-Clean-Trucks-Powered-Renewable-Fuel-Operate https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191029005379/en/100...
TheCoelacanth 7y ago
> 10 times more disease-causing sulphur dioxide That is one specific pollutant. Cars produce more pollution when you look at all forms of pollution. Ships are a problem, but cars should not be let off the hook for the massive amounts of pollution they produce.
- washadjeffmad 7y ago
  They're not, it's just a reminder that vast amounts of the world's pollution is also being caused by large sea vessels, of which cruise ships are a variety. It's an oft neglected point in the global climate discussions because it's hard to associate their scale with a direct human impact like with cars. Tying it to a cruise ship around a populous city helps people bridge that mental gap.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

brenden2 7y ago

Interesting, thanks for sharing. Still, my point was that automobiles exist alongside people within cities, in near proximity. A diesel truck driving down my street is probably going to expose me to more harmful pollution than a cruise ship passing by 10 miles from me. So I guess to make my point another way: if you could trace the damage done to individuals in cities, I think the bigger fish to fry would be automobiles. Just to be clear, I'm not trying to discount any claims that cruise ships are causing unnecessary outsized pollution. Airplanes also cause a significant amount of pollution, but for some reason society generally accepts air travel because it's fashionable.

greglindahl 7y ago
Can you do better than guessing? Hint: Automobiles and trucks have had steadily tightened regulations for a long time. Ships burn much worse fuel than cars and trucks, and have only recently been regulated. And they aren't regulated in NYC. > “The oil that ships use has a lot more heavy metals in it that have a negative impact on human health,” said Adam Freed, who was the deputy director of the Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability in the Bloomberg administration. “We understood how important of an impact it could have.”
- brenden2 7y ago
  Older diesel trucks are largely exempt from these regulations. There are a few loopholes that allow people to purchase older truck parts, refurbish them, and continue to operate them without needing to adhere to modern emissions requirements.
  - greglindahl 7y ago
    That's true in general, but not true near many large ports, for obvious reasons. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191029005379/en/100-Clean-Trucks-Powered-Renewable-Fuel-Operate https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191029005379/en/100...

TheCoelacanth 7y ago

> 10 times more disease-causing sulphur dioxide That is one specific pollutant. Cars produce more pollution when you look at all forms of pollution. Ships are a problem, but cars should not be let off the hook for the massive amounts of pollution they produce.

washadjeffmad 7y ago
They're not, it's just a reminder that vast amounts of the world's pollution is also being caused by large sea vessels, of which cruise ships are a variety. It's an oft neglected point in the global climate discussions because it's hard to associate their scale with a direct human impact like with cars. Tying it to a cruise ship around a populous city helps people bridge that mental gap.