Poll: How important is a cruise line's commitment to the environment to you?

Thanks cheng, it was hard to sort out the pearls of wisdom from all the verbal diarrhea.

How's retirement treating you? Cruising as a passenger now?

Unfortunately, still have about 3 years to go. Working on taking down our small camp and putting up a year-round home on the lake, so still need some cash flow.

Do you feel that highly visible cruiselines are held to higher standards than let's say cargo ships?

I can tell you first hand they are not held to a higher standard. That's because the bar is set pretty high on standards to begin with, and all commercial traffic is held to that standard. 15 parts per million is the law concerning oily water discharge. That number does not vary based on industry.

However, what gets foreign-flagged commercial traffic jammed up the most in the US isn't that they dumped at sea. It's that they falsify or fail to maintain their oil record books.

Hi, we're wondering: How important is a cruise line's commitment to the environment -- whether it's the seven seas or ports of call -- to you when booking a cruise? Please vote in our poll and feel free to comment below. Thanks!

 

Carolyn

 

Carolyn Spencer Brown

Chief Content Strategist

Cruise Critic

I expect cruise lines to be doing all they can to be as environmentally friendly.:D

I think, like all households all cruise lines should be as environmentally friendly as they can. It is easy for each of us to say cruise lines should do this or that, but doing something begins with all of us at home in our every day lifes. IF each of us takes care of " our little part" of this world, what a better world it would be, but like most things in this world there is too much talk about it and very little action!

I agree with what Hflors said.

However, what gets foreign-flagged commercial traffic jammed up the most in the US isn't that they dumped at sea. It's that they falsify or fail to maintain their oil record books.

Wikipedia suggests that you just need to write down "11:50AM Cleaning cargo tanks". I was thinking that most things happening on a ship would be logged similar to that anyway. "Cleaning crew mess", "Testing anchors", "Checking temperature on containers 35 to 64", etc. Most restaurants I visit keep a visible log when the toilets were cleaned.

Why would one falsify the records if they didn't do anything wrong?

Aren't empty plastic drink bottles and beer cans all packed up and sent for recycling? What pollution are some of you talking about?

Wikipedia suggests that you just need to write down "11:50AM Cleaning cargo tanks". I was thinking that most things happening on a ship would be logged similar to that anyway. "Cleaning crew mess", "Testing anchors", "Checking temperature on containers 35 to 64", etc. Most restaurants I visit keep a visible log when the toilets were cleaned.

 

Why would one falsify the records if they didn't do anything wrong?

Sorry, as with most things Wiki, this is a bit simplistic. I make entries into our Oil Record Book every single day. You have to identify what the liquid is, where it was moved from and to, how it was handled, date, time, and in many instances the ship's position (lat and long).

To use the example of what Princess was fined for, let me explain. Bilge water is any liquid that accumulates in the bilges of a machinery space on a ship. This liquid may or may not contain any oil, but by definition it is considered to be "oily water". Therefore, it must be processed through a device known, creatively enough, as an "oily water separator", which will separate oil and water, and return the oil to a storage tank onboard, and only allow the water to be pumped overboard if it contains less than 15ppm of oil (though the measuring method is light refraction, so metal or rust particles, and even coffee will show up as "oil"). If the processed water contains more than 15ppm, it must be automatically recycled to the bilge water tank for further processing. These devices work well, and some I've seen on cruise ships work exceptionally well, but that level of effectiveness comes at a price of speed of processing. They are all slow, very slow.

Now, there are other liquids that a cruise ship engineering department deals with other than bilge water. One of these is "gray water", which is the drain water from the ship's sinks, showers, galleys, and laundries. Discharge of gray water directly to the sea without any treatment or processing is completely legal in about 90% of the world's oceans. In port, and for a distance offshore, and in certain areas like California coastal waters and some areas of Alaska, gray water is not allowed to be pumped overboard, but must be retained, or treated. Most cruise ships treat their gray water along with their black water (toilets) using Advanced Waste Water Treatment Plants, which treat water to near pure fresh water standards before pumping it overboard. But some will simply retain gray water in tanks, and then pump it overboard when legal to do so.

Okay, that's the background.

What happened on the Princess ship was that a gray water tank overflowed into the engine room bilges. At this point, this water is no longer "gray water", but "bilge water", even though it is the same water. As bilge water, it has to be processed through the oily water separator. This was many tons of water in the bilges, which most ships cannot handle effectively. One of the most effective means a ship has of dealing with oily water is to not have any in the first place, so "bilge maintenance" (taking care of small leaks quickly to prevent them becoming larger or producing large quantities of water over a long time) becomes key. The Chief Engineer decided that the "best" way to deal with this quantity of water was to pump it back to the gray water tank, and then dispose of it as gray water when able to do so, without any processing.

By definition, that gray water could have picked up oil from the bilges, but given the spotless way that cruise ships treat "bilge maintenance" it probably did not pick up more than 15ppm of oil. So, pumping it overboard as gray water may or may not have actually been a case of pollution (depending whether the water contained more than 15ppm of oil or not), but no one will ever know, since there was no monitoring device on the gray water discharge like there is on the oily water separator discharge. Key note here, no one will ever know whether any pollution happened or not.

What the Chief Engineer got in trouble for was not entering this overflow and subsequent discharge in the oil record book. This book has an entry code for "accidental or other exceptional discharges of oil", where you list the date, time, ship's position, quantity of oil discharged (in this case, the assumed now oily water), and the circumstances, reasons and remarks concerning the discharge. This type of entry is normally used when the ship experiences a breach in the hull, or a major piping failure, and the bilges are flooding faster than can be pumped to holding tanks, or the holding tanks are full, and for the safety of the ship, bilge water is allowed to be pumped directly overboard without processing. Whether or not this discharge would have resulted in a fine for Princess would be up to the various port state control agencies that review the ship's oil record book. But, even if fined for a potential pollution discharge, the fine would have been less (and not generated a deeper search of the entire cruise line fleet's oil record books for other possible violations) than the simple fact that the discharge was not recorded in the oil record book.

They did find other "inconsistencies" in Princess' oil record books, particularly with this particular Chief Engineer, but again, in most cases, no one will ever know if any pollution was caused, or whether a quantity of bilge water with suspended rust and paint flakes which just would not process was illegally pumped overboard, since the actions bypassed all monitoring equipment.

Given the technology available, there are always cases where bilge water may not pass the 15ppm light refraction test, with no oil actually present, requiring further processing. This leads to further time and cost (renewing filters more often), and can lead some to do certain actions that contravene the intent of the law. One example is to add clean sea water to the overboard discharge of the oily water separator to "dilute" the oil content below the allowable 15ppm. Does this create pollution? Legally, no, since the water stream leaving the ship is at the legal level of oil contamination. Does this violate the intent of the law? Yes, since you are adding water that would not normally be in the ship to your bilge water to make up for inadequate processing by your equipment. This is illegal.

Oh, and as a side note, if I fail to sign an entry in the oil record book, even though all the entries are present and legal, I can get fined $500 per signature.

Small example of reducing the overload of plastic bottles:

The Mein Schiff ships of the TUI cruise line discourage use of plastic bottles. There is a drinking water dispenser located next to the elevators with which you can fill your own bottle or the glass carafe provided in the cabin. If you forgot to bring your own bottle, you can buy a reuse water bottle in their shops.

We booked their excursions in Norway, no plastic water bottles were handed out in the busses. Norway is also working on making their environmental regulations more stringent. But the local guides handed out plastic water bottles in Dubai and the other desert destinations.

We don't drink bottled water at home, but the small bottles are a convenient size for carrying in a small backpack when we are out and about.

Sorry, as with most things Wiki, this is a bit simplistic.

Thank you again! It puts the Princess indicident in another perspective.

Is gray water not tested at all? It must contain shampoo, conditioners, detergents, cooking oil, sunscreen, ointments and even perchloroethylene from the laundry (if that's used on ships).

Black water contains poop, pee, and paper. I'd think nature could handle those better then the stuff in gray water.

Thank you again! It puts the Princess indicident in another perspective.

 

Is gray water not tested at all? It must contain shampoo, conditioners, detergents, cooking oil, sunscreen, ointments and even perchloroethylene from the laundry (if that's used on ships).

 

Black water contains poop, pee, and paper. I'd think nature could handle those better then the stuff in gray water.

By law, no, gray water does not need to be tested or treated in any fashion. However, most cruise ships will treat their gray water in the same treatment plant as the black water (it's co-mingled in a holding tank before the treatment plant) to far beyond the legal requirements for black water treatment. As I've said, the AWWTP will produce clear, fresh drinking quality water from black and gray water, and it is tested bi-monthly by third party testing labs.

Perc has not been used on ships in quite some time. Even when it was, and the same holds true for "dry cleaning" fluids used today on ships, this chemical must be taken from the machines, stored onboard, and disposed of ashore, as noted in the Garbage Record Book (there is a record book for everything), that must list everything, by type (glass, metal, plastic, paper/cardboard, batteries, paint, paint and rust chips, incinerator ash, hazardous chemicals (by name)) and quantity. This must also record the discharge to sea of ground up food waste.

Cooking oil must be either incinerated onboard, sent to the engine room "slops" tank for delivery to shore facility for disposal/recycling, or landed ashore separately. Most cruise ships tend to land their cooking oil (about 1-3m3 (250-750 US gal) per week for recycling into bio-diesel. Bio-diesel is why many delivery trucks in the US smell like french fries when they go past.

Unfortunately, still have about 3 years to go. Working on taking down our small camp and putting up a year-round home on the lake, so still need some cash flow.

Are you facing any "fun" environmental issue with that conversion? BIL had to do creative engineering (and expense) to overcome the first law of plumbing and site his leach field and maintain his existing proximity to the lake.

Small example of reducing the overload of plastic bottles:

The Mein Schiff ships of the TUI cruise line discourage use of plastic bottles. There is a drinking water dispenser located next to the elevators with which you can fill your own bottle or the glass carafe provided in the cabin. If you forgot to bring your own bottle, you can buy a reuse water bottle in their shops.

 

We booked their excursions in Norway, no plastic water bottles were handed out in the busses. Norway is also working on making their environmental regulations more stringent. But the local guides handed out plastic water bottles in Dubai and the other desert destinations.

 

We don't drink bottled water at home, but the small bottles are a convenient size for carrying in a small backpack when we are out and about.

This! Trying to fill a water bottle with ice and cold water on a cruise ship can be an ordeal.

Bermuda had similar water filling stations in the Ameria's Cup Village, and disposable bottles were not allowed. I have seen these filling stations in several European cities.

On one of our bus tours. We were able to get all the bottled water we wanted at no cost if we exchanged an empty with the tour director or driver. We were assured the bottles were recycled.

Could cooking oil be commingled with the oil used as fuel?

Are you facing any "fun" environmental issue with that conversion? BIL had to do creative engineering (and expense) to overcome the first law of plumbing and site his leach field and maintain his existing proximity to the lake.

Yes, Maine has some fairly strict Shoreland Zoning requirements, and our builder is working with the town's Code Enforcement officer to make everything work. We've owned the property for over 30 years, and the improvements we've made have all been with an eye towards maintaining or improving the lake's water quality, and the CEO is appreciative of our efforts and is willing to "work with us" granting a few "rounded" corners.

We've had a septic field uphill from us since I put the system in 30+ years ago, using a pump tank from the septic tank to the field. Pretty common around here. Big thing was that we were fortunate to have a back lot across the road where we could locate our well, the required distance from the leach field, while still having the leach field the required distance from the lake.

Could cooking oil be commingled with the oil used as fuel?

Cooking oil can, of course, be burned in a diesel engine, after all the original diesel engine ran on coal dust.

However, burning cooking oil, even mixed with fuel oil, can produce smoke and particulate emissions due to the different combustion characteristics of the fuel oil and cooking oil.

Biodiesel is made by reacting cooking oils with an alcohol to create fatty acid esters. Nearly every common diesel engine can burn a blend of 20% bio/80% hydrocarbon diesel. A problem with biodiesel is that the esters can deteriorate rubber seal rings and gaskets in the fuel system faster than hydrocarbon diesel. Another problem is that the fatty acid esters tend to attract water, and tightly bond to the water. Water in fuel causes lots of problems, most particularly the formation of sulfuric acid from the water and the sulfur in the fuel, which can lead to corrosion of fuel system parts and poor combustion as a result. The longer this kind of fuel is stored, the more water it attracts, so having this in large tanks on ships is not optimum. For this reason, when we send samples of the fuel we load for analysis, one of the tests is for fatty acids, which indicate the fuel was blended with a bio base stock.

By law, no, gray water does not need to be tested or treated in any fashion. However, most cruise ships will treat their gray water in the same treatment plant as the black water

Still puzzled about this. Why is the law so strict on black water? I really can't see an environmental issue with organic waste (including TP) coming from a toilet compared to food waste which IIRC ships can throw overboard legally.

Also, I guess that there's much more gray water than black water. When gray water can be dumped without legal problems, why would cruise ships bother to turn it into drinkable water before doing so? That must be a rather costly, and energy-consuming, operation.

Still puzzled about this. Why is the law so strict on black water? I really can't see an environmental issue with organic waste (including TP) coming from a toilet compared to food waste which IIRC ships can throw overboard legally.

 

Also, I guess that there's much more gray water than black water. When gray water can be dumped without legal problems, why would cruise ships bother to turn it into drinkable water before doing so? That must be a rather costly, and energy-consuming, operation.

Black water will contain aerobic and anaerobic bacteria from our digestive systems, and possibly bacteria and viruses from illness. These can cause damage to marine life, starting at the bottom of the food chain with the planktons and the like. This is why ships use chlorine or UV to kill off the bacteria we introduce into the waste water treatment system to digest the human waste before it can be pumped overboard. Dumping of large quantities of black water at sea is not as detrimental (due to ship motion through the water, and the open nature of the body of water) as when done in areas of slow moving water like rivers and harbors (and ships are stationary), and is still allowed if your waste water treatment plant goes down on you.

Gray water contains mainly soaps and skin cells, some food, and all of this is just nutrition added to the environment. Gray water is regulated in certain areas where the addition of nutrients can cause a depletion of oxygen in the water, with resultant kill off of marine life. Harbors, and Alaskan fjords are major examples.

Food waste is again merely nutrients added to the environment, and again cannot be pumped over when close to shore to allow for dispersion.

Yes, there is a lot more gray water than black water, but this actually helps the treatment plant operate efficiently. The black and gray waters are mixed in a holding tank before going into the treatment plant, thereby diluting the concentration of black water and allowing the bacteria to work faster, allowing the waste water to be processed almost instantly. Shore waste treatment plants, whether home septic systems, or municipal systems rely on retaining the waste water for some time to allow for separation of fats and greases, and to allow the anerobic bacteria time to digest everything. Ship's systems use aerobic bacteria (bubbling air into the plant) which work faster, and with the diluted black water, it can process a continuous flow, and better handle the greases and fats that take shore side plants a long time to treat. Ships with small crews will frequently introduce sea water into their black water holding tanks on a regular basis to keep the flow going more consistently through the treatment plant, in order to keep the bacteria vital. We also introduce enzymes to feed the bacteria, knowing that they tend to "starve" on the low flow through the unit.

Cruise ships will treat the gray water with the black for the above reasons, and because in order to cruise to certain areas (like Alaska) they cannot discharge untreated gray water, and because it increases their "green" visibility. All told, I would say that to operate an AWWTP, discharging clear water from the ship, for a ship of about 2400 pax and 1000 crew, processing 800-1000 metric tons of waste water per day, requires about 150 hp (111kw), which would amount to about 2% of the hotel load.

The enviroment is important to me and I do think cruise ships could do more:

-harsher action for staff that illegally dump things overboard (apparently this is common)

- dual fuel engines being a requirement

-the newish filters being a requirement

As much as I see cruise lines improving I think that cost does become a factor (its the same with the man overboard technology) so the only way to make them do it is by law.

I think environmentalists need also realise that a cruise is more than just a transport...its a hotel,a leisure complex and lots more. To say a ship emits more harmful things that however many planes and however many cars is not an accurate measure.

The enviroment is important to me and I do think cruise ships could do more:

 

-harsher action for staff that illegally dump things overboard (apparently this is common) This is not that common, but the few bad apples generate a lot of press

- dual fuel engines being a requirement There is a lot involved with getting LNG or dual fuel ships operating outside of what the cruise line can do, principally the bunkering infrastructure and local permitting

-the newish filters being a requirement Newish filters? Are you meaning the exhaust scrubbers?

 

 

As much as I see cruise lines improving I think that cost does become a factor (its the same with the man overboard technology) so the only way to make them do it is by law. The problem is that ships are international, so the only law that could apply would be to get all maritime nations to agree in forums like the IMO.

 

 

I think environmentalists need also realise that a cruise is more than just a transport...its a hotel,a leisure complex and lots more. To say a ship emits more harmful things that however many planes and however many cars is not an accurate measure.

And even as a mode of transportation, ocean shipping is far more fuel efficient than cars, buses, planes, or trains.

Black water will contain aerobic and anaerobic bacteria from our digestive systems, and possibly bacteria and viruses from illness. These can cause damage to marine life, starting at the bottom of the food chain with the planktons and the like. This is why ships use chlorine or UV to kill off the bacteria we introduce into the waste water treatment system to digest the human waste before it can be pumped overboard.

I didn't realize that germs were a real issue to plankton. Leftovers from medications would be my first guess, even on land it's nearly impossible to get those out of drinking water. Getting rid of germs by adding chlorine sounds as defeating the purpose :)

Yes, there is a lot more gray water than black water, but this actually helps the treatment plant operate efficiently.

What happens to the "product" itself? Is it stored?

All told, I would say that to operate an AWWTP, discharging clear water from the ship, for a ship of about 2400 pax and 1000 crew, processing 800-1000 metric tons of waste water per day, requires about 150 hp (111kw), which would amount to about 2% of the hotel load.

Those are interesting numbers generating a lot more questions which I hope you can answer :)

The amount of water used for one, 294 liter/person/day. A wild guess: showering, 2 x 50 =100 liters. Toilet, 3 times x 5 = 15. Laundry, 50? once a week= 7. Dishes, 1?. Drinking 1? Cleaning 10? Total 134 liters. What are those other 544 metric tons of water used for?

Also interesting is the 1.6KW/person. Last time I wondered why the steward had the TV switched on in my cabin as it felt like a waste of energy, but compared to 1.6KW it's nothing. Is it the AC that uses so much energy? And last question, how much is hotel load compared to propulsion?

I didn't realize that germs were a real issue to plankton. Leftovers from medications would be my first guess, even on land it's nearly impossible to get those out of drinking water. Getting rid of germs by adding chlorine sounds as defeating the purpose :)

 

While we can't regulate what the passengers send down the drain/toilet as far as medications, the ship itself is not allowed to dispose of expired medications other than incineration or encasement in concrete, or disposal ashore.

 

 

 

What happens to the "product" itself? Is it stored?

I guess you mean the "product" from the toilets? That is what is digested by the bacteria in the treatment plant. By the time the waste water leaves the biologic tanks of the treatment plant, 95% of the biologic load has been removed. What remains is mostly paper fibers, which while organic take time to digest, and the throughput of the plant does not provide enough time. The waste water then proceeds to have a coagulant injected, which causes the paper fibers to clump up, and then air is injected into the water to cause these clumps to float, where they are scraped off the surface. This sludge is then dried and incinerated.

 

Those are interesting numbers generating a lot more questions which I hope you can answer :)

 

The amount of water used for one, 294 liter/person/day. A wild guess: showering, 2 x 50 =100 liters. Toilet, 3 times x 5 = 15. Laundry, 50? once a week= 7. Dishes, 1?. Drinking 1? Cleaning 10? Total 134 liters. What are those other 544 metric tons of water used for?

 

I haven't broken down the water consumption before, but the toilets use 1 ltr per flush, showers are about 5-7 ltr/min, ship's laundry is going about 16 hours/day, every day (tablecloths and napkins, as well as towels are done daily, and getting the entire ship's bed linen done fills in the rest of the time over the week, and the machines are 150kg capacity, but I don't know the water usage). Cooking uses a lot of water, dishes use way more than 1 ltr/person/day.

 

Also interesting is the 1.6KW/person. Last time I wondered why the steward had the TV switched on in my cabin as it felt like a waste of energy, but compared to 1.6KW it's nothing. Is it the AC that uses so much energy? And last question, how much is hotel load compared to propulsion?

My figure of 2% is probably off, it was a quick number from my head. Per person usage is more like 2kw/hr. Hotel load for a ship the size I mentioned would be 7-8Mw, while Oasis probably weighs in closer to 10Mw. This includes the power needed in the engine room, just to keep the engines running, which would be 0.5-1Mw, depending on how many engines are running. AC chillers are 2-3Mw each, and 2 to 3 of them will be running, and add to that all the fans used to move the air around the ship. Galley and laundry power would be 1-1.5Mw. Propulsion, of course, varies by ship size, and the speed needed. Full power for Oasis, for example tops out at 60Mw. For a ship the size I'm using, propulsion would top out around 30Mw.

While we can't regulate what the passengers send down the drain/toilet as far as medications, the ship itself is not allowed to dispose of expired medications other than incineration or encasement in concrete, or disposal ashore.

I didn't mean deliberately throwing medications in the toilet, but the medications left in urine.

What do you mean by "encasement in concrete"? Is that an actual method used?

AC chillers are 2-3Mw each, and 2 to 3 of them will be running

Would using cold sea water be low hanging fruit to use less energy?

I didn't mean deliberately throwing medications in the toilet, but the medications left in urine.

 

What do you mean by "encasement in concrete"? Is that an actual method used?

 

 

 

Would using cold sea water be low hanging fruit to use less energy?

You mix up a coffee can of cement, place the meds in it, and let it dry. It is then legal to dispose of this at sea. It is used frequently for small amounts.

First off, you have no control over the temperature of the sea water at the time and place where the ship is. Secondly, you are now pumping corrosive salt water throughout the ship, to every single cabin, so you're going to have to pay vast quantities of money for copper-nickel piping, or put up with vast amounts of complaints about leaks when the plastic pipes let go. Third, there are not a lot of places in the world where the sea temperature is 8-10*C year round, which is the temperature that the chilled water is circulated at. And finally, since the chilled water is a closed loop, it is more efficient than an open circuit taking in sea water, cooling it further, and then releasing the water that has taken in some heat, but is still cooler than the surrounding ocean.

You mix up a coffee can of cement, place the meds in it, and let it dry. It is then legal to dispose of this at sea. It is used frequently for small amounts.

And ships follow that, quite laborious procedure, because the home port can't/won't take care of it?

First off, you have no control over the temperature of the sea water at the time and place where the ship is. Secondly, you are now pumping corrosive salt water throughout the ship, to every single cabin, so you're going to have to pay vast quantities of money for copper-nickel piping, or put up with vast amounts of complaints about leaks when the plastic pipes let go. Third, there are not a lot of places in the world where the sea temperature is 8-10*C year round, which is the temperature that the chilled water is circulated at. And finally, since the chilled water is a closed loop, it is more efficient than an open circuit taking in sea water, cooling it further, and then releasing the water that has taken in some heat, but is still cooler than the surrounding ocean.

I was thinking more of a heat exchanger to cool the (fresh) circulating water. To be installed in the bulbous bow for instance. Then I looked at this https://www.seatemperature.org/ and realised that the rest of the world isn't used to cold seawater as much as we are.