Carnival Corp Thinks Eco Friendly For Future, But Current Fleet Needs Help Too!

[thecruiserofships]

While Carnival Corporation is looking towards building eco-friendly ships in the future (kudos to the company for this), more steps need to be taken to make the current fleet more eco-friendly. On my Carnival Elation cruise, the ship constantly released thick dark black smoke from the funnel on sea days. I have never observed this much thick smoke before (I understand smoke is normal).

 

Here is a YouTube video of the ship releasing smoke pollution:

 

I just wish Carnival Corporation would take more steps to decrease the smoke pollution. During the muster station drill, they claim to be the environmental leader, but when you see smoke coming from the funnel all day long you can start to question the validity of their statement.

 

Any thoughts?

[falkcor]

i am certain you are aware that carnival corporation is investing $180 million to retrofit an initial 32 ships with scrubber technology:

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=5511

 

further, this is not in any manner isolated to carnival cruise line or ships under the larger carnival corporation umbrella.

 

i also believe this will only be the start, given tightening and more restrictive regulations which are on the horizon.

[chengkp75]

Ships and engines are mechanical and will break down from time to time. This looks to my professional eye to be either a bad fuel injector or a sticking fuel pump on one cylinder of the maybe 20-24 cylinders running on the various engines while at sea, though due to the low gas flow, it may also be the incinerator.

 

Unless someone reports seeing smoke, many times the engineers have no idea that it is happening.

 

As Falkor states, not only Carnival, but all cruise lines are investing in scrubbers, at a cost of about $1-1.5 million per engine. This is mainly to reduce SOX and NOX emissions, but will also help with sooting, though if this is in fact the incinerator, there is no scrubber for that. Sometimes the wrong stuff gets into the incinerator, or it is wet, and incomplete combustion happens.

 

Sometimes you have to live with the soot while you troubleshoot the engine to see what exactly is causing it, since you can't tell when it is stopped.

[Hoosierpop]

While Carnival Corporation is looking towards building eco-friendly ships in the future (kudos to the company for this), more steps need to be taken to make the current fleet more eco-friendly. On my Carnival Elation cruise, the ship constantly released thick dark black smoke from the funnel on sea days. I have never observed this much thick smoke before (I understand smoke is normal).

 

 

 

Here is a YouTube video of the ship releasing smoke pollution:

 

 

 

 

I just wish Carnival Corporation would take more steps to decrease the smoke pollution. During the muster station drill, they claim to be the environmental leader, but when you see smoke coming from the funnel all day long you can start to question the validity of their statement.

 

 

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

So, the smoke is bad....how bad exactly? Do you know how much the average emissions from a Carnival cruise ship affects the environment?

 

Unless there's some measurable effect, I'd rather keep cruise costs down.

[pretzellover]

But it looks so...icky...it must be causing global warning! Get a grip people. If you want to vacation carbon free, stay home and plant trees.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[chengkp75]

So, the smoke is bad....how bad exactly? Do you know how much the average emissions from a Carnival cruise ship affects the environment?

 

Unless there's some measurable effect, I'd rather keep cruise costs down.

 

As one who has to deal with ship's emissions professionally, and the hassles it means, let me say that there is definitely a measurable effect on the environment. Also, both the US government and and the IMO have decided that ship's emissions have adverse environmental effects and should be regulated.

[shof515]

anything with a diesel engine has an emissions problem. Here is a car with similar smoke:

[thecruiserofships]

anything with a diesel engine has an emissions problem. Here is a car with similar smoke:

 

I sure would hate to stand behind the tailpipe (I am sure someone would). Thanks for sharing!

Edited June 16, 2015 by thecruiserofships

[Hoosierpop]

As one who has to deal with ship's emissions professionally, and the hassles it means, let me say that there is definitely a measurable effect on the environment. Also, both the US government and and the IMO have decided that ship's emissions have adverse environmental effects and should be regulated.

 

 

And what is that measurable effect? And the fact that a government decides something should be regulated is meaningless.

 

As long as it doesn't raise prices, they can do whatever they want.

[chengkp75]

And what is that measurable effect? And the fact that a government decides something should be regulated is meaningless.

 

As long as it doesn't raise prices, they can do whatever they want.

 

So I guess we should roll back automobile emissions to lower car prices and remove scrubbers from power plants to lower electricity prices? Who really cares about acid rain anyway. You do understand that maritime emissions standards affect all shipping, not just cruise ships, and that 75% of the world's economy moves by ship?

[Hoosierpop]

So I guess we should roll back automobile emissions to lower car prices and remove scrubbers from power plants to lower electricity prices? Who really cares about acid rain anyway. You do understand that maritime emissions standards affect all shipping, not just cruise ships, and that 75% of the world's economy moves by ship?

 

 

I figured you couldn't answer the question as to the specific measurable effect the emissions have. I have no problem if Carnival wants to reduce emissions. As long as it doesn't raise prices, it's all good. This is about Carnival.

 

I'll say this, if they want to reduce emissions and at the same time, make ships totally smoke free, I'd pay extra for that. How's that for a compromise?

[chengkp75]

I figured you couldn't answer the question as to the specific measurable effect the emissions have. I have no problem if Carnival wants to reduce emissions. As long as it doesn't raise prices, it's all good. This is about Carnival.

 

I'll say this, if they want to reduce emissions and at the same time, make ships totally smoke free, I'd pay extra for that. How's that for a compromise?

 

I can answer the question, I just didn't feel it was necessary. You could have done this yourself. Even Wikipedia has an article on this, and while they are not always completely accurate, try this on for size:

 

"Of total global air emissions, shipping accounts for 18 to 30 percent of the nitrogen oxide and 9 percent of the sulphur oxides.[15] [16] Sulfur in the air creates acid rain which damages crops and buildings. When inhaled the sulfur is known to cause respiratory problems and even increases the risk of a heart attack.

 

3.5 to 4 percent of all climate change emissions are caused by shipping.[16] Air pollution from cruise ships is generated by diesel engines that burn high sulfur content fuel oil, also known as bunker oil, producing sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate, in addition to carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrocarbons. Diesel exhaust has been classified by EPA as a likely human carcinogen. EPA recognizes that these emissions from marine diesel engines contribute to ozone and carbon monoxide non-attainment (i.e., failure to meet air quality standards), as well as adverse health effects associated with ambient concentrations of particulate matter and visibility, haze, acid deposition, and eutrophication and nitrification of water.[20] EPA estimates that large marine diesel engines accounted for about 1.6 percent of mobile source nitrogen oxide emissions and 2.8 percent of mobile source particulate emissions in the United States in 2000. Contributions of marine diesel engines can be higher on a port-specific basis. Ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) is a standard for defining diesel fuel with substantially lowered sulfur contents. As of 2006, almost all of the petroleum-based diesel fuel available in Europe and North America is of a ULSD type."

 

Given that a ship spends about 10% or less of its time in a US port, that amount of pollution that the EPA estimates in the US would be much greater on the high seas. So I would say that there is a significant environmental as well as health effect from ships' emissions.

Edited June 16, 2015 by chengkp75

[Hoosierpop]

I can answer the question, I just didn't feel it was necessary. You could have done this yourself. Even Wikipedia has an article on this, and while they are not always completely accurate, try this on for size:

 

 

 

Of total global air emissions, shipping accounts for 18 to 30 percent of the nitrogen oxide and 9 percent of the sulphur oxides.[15] [16] Sulfur in the air creates acid rain which damages crops and buildings. When inhaled the sulfur is known to cause respiratory problems and even increases the risk of a heart attack.

 

 

 

3.5 to 4 percent of all climate change emissions are caused by shipping.[16] Air pollution from cruise ships is generated by diesel engines that burn high sulfur content fuel oil, also known as bunker oil, producing sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate, in addition to carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrocarbons. Diesel exhaust has been classified by EPA as a likely human carcinogen. EPA recognizes that these emissions from marine diesel engines contribute to ozone and carbon monoxide non-attainment (i.e., failure to meet air quality standards), as well as adverse health effects associated with ambient concentrations of particulate matter and visibility, haze, acid deposition, and eutrophication and nitrification of water.[20] EPA estimates that large marine diesel engines accounted for about 1.6 percent of mobile source nitrogen oxide emissions and 2.8 percent of mobile source particulate emissions in the United States in 2000. Contributions of marine diesel engines can be higher on a port-specific basis. Ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) is a standard for defining diesel fuel with substantially lowered sulfur contents. As of 2006, almost all of the petroleum-based diesel fuel available in Europe and North America is of a ULSD type.

 

 

 

Given that a ship spends about 10% or less of its time in a US port, that amount of pollution that the EPA estimates in the US would be much greater on the high seas.

 

 

Basically, you copied and pasted a bunch of words that still did not answer a basic question: what effect does the emissions from a Carnival ship have on the environment. Bottom line: I want to keep the prices low. If you want to have prices raised without a known, direct benefit, that's fine. It doesn't bother me. I just like to know my money is being well spent and not on some hope and a prayer.

[chengkp75]

Basically, you copied and pasted a bunch of words that still did not answer a basic question: what effect does the emissions from a Carnival ship have on the environment. Bottom line: I want to keep the prices low. If you want to have prices raised without a known, direct benefit, that's fine. It doesn't bother me. I just like to know my money is being well spent and not on some hope and a prayer.

 

Since you can't seem to figure out what statistics mean, I'm done here, which is why I didn't answer the question in the first place, since you obviously have a fixed mind set and nothing I say could change it.

[Hoosierpop]

Since you can't seem to figure out what statistics mean, I'm done here, which is why I didn't answer the question in the first place, since you obviously have a fixed mind set and nothing I say could change it.

 

 

You didn't answer it at all. But that's OK. I get that science is not to the point where this type of thing can be measured. Look at the terrible models used to measure climate change overall. My mind is fixed in that I want actual measurable results. Some want to make changes in hopes that some good may come out of it. I get that. But the topic at hand is what Carnival should do. And my opinion is, nothing that will increase prices if it doesn't produce measurable results.

[portocaller]

Basically, you copied and pasted a bunch of words that still did not answer a basic question: what effect does the emissions from a Carnival ship have on the environment. Bottom line: I want to keep the prices low. If you want to have prices raised without a known, direct benefit, that's fine. It doesn't bother me. I just like to know my money is being well spent and not on some hope and a prayer.

 

The problem is that when you receive the level of proof you require, a Carnival cruise will be the least of your concern.

[honestguy]

I can answer the question, I just didn't feel it was necessary. You could have done this yourself. Even Wikipedia has an article on this, and while they are not always completely accurate, try this on for size:

 

"Of total global air emissions, shipping accounts for 18 to 30 percent of the nitrogen oxide and 9 percent of the sulphur oxides.[15] [16] Sulfur in the air creates acid rain which damages crops and buildings. When inhaled the sulfur is known to cause respiratory problems and even increases the risk of a heart attack.

 

3.5 to 4 percent of all climate change emissions are caused by shipping.[16] Air pollution from cruise ships is generated by diesel engines that burn high sulfur content fuel oil, also known as bunker oil, producing sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate, in addition to carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrocarbons. Diesel exhaust has been classified by EPA as a likely human carcinogen. EPA recognizes that these emissions from marine diesel engines contribute to ozone and carbon monoxide non-attainment (i.e., failure to meet air quality standards), as well as adverse health effects associated with ambient concentrations of particulate matter and visibility, haze, acid deposition, and eutrophication and nitrification of water.[20] EPA estimates that large marine diesel engines accounted for about 1.6 percent of mobile source nitrogen oxide emissions and 2.8 percent of mobile source particulate emissions in the United States in 2000. Contributions of marine diesel engines can be higher on a port-specific basis. Ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) is a standard for defining diesel fuel with substantially lowered sulfur contents. As of 2006, almost all of the petroleum-based diesel fuel available in Europe and North America is of a ULSD type."

 

Given that a ship spends about 10% or less of its time in a US port, that amount of pollution that the EPA estimates in the US would be much greater on the high seas. So I would say that there is a significant environmental as well as health effect from ships' emissions.

 

your ability to regurgitate government propaganda is impressive. Global warming(oh wait it's climate change now since there has been no recorded warming in the last 10 years) Has not been proven, although if you listen to the news media(also very good at regurgitating government propaganda) it's settled science. When the government can get a handle on those pesky volcanos that produce why more toxic global warming climate changing gases(naturally) then all manmade methods combined I'll start paying attention.

[chengkp75]

your ability to regurgitate government propaganda is impressive. Global warming(oh wait it's climate change now since there has been no recorded warming in the last 10 years) Has not been proven, although if you listen to the news media(also very good at regurgitating government propaganda) it's settled science. When the government can get a handle on those pesky volcanos that produce why more toxic global warming climate changing gases(naturally) then all manmade methods combined I'll start paying attention.

 

Okay, one more foray. While both you and Hoosierpop focus on global warming and greenhouse gases, you both miss the point. A ship smoking, or burning high sulfur fuel, or installing scrubbers does nothing for the amount of greenhouse gasses the ship emits. That is simply based on the amount of fuel it burns. Get over the greenhouse gas issue, and forget the government conspiracy theories.

 

What scrubbers and low sulfur fuel will do (and your cruise prices have already seen increases due to recent requirements on low sulfur fuel in the US ECA, and will continue to do so as the demand for diesel fuel increases) is stop sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide pollution. We here in the northeast know that the reduction of these pollutants from power plants in the midwest has resulted in improved air quality in our area, so we tend to believe the science about this.

[sparks1093]

Okay, one more foray. While both you and Hoosierpop focus on global warming and greenhouse gases, you both miss the point. A ship smoking, or burning high sulfur fuel, or installing scrubbers does nothing for the amount of greenhouse gasses the ship emits. That is simply based on the amount of fuel it burns. Get over the greenhouse gas issue, and forget the government conspiracy theories.

 

What scrubbers and low sulfur fuel will do (and your cruise prices have already seen increases due to recent requirements on low sulfur fuel in the US ECA, and will continue to do so as the demand for diesel fuel increases) is stop sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide pollution. We here in the northeast know that the reduction of these pollutants from power plants in the midwest has resulted in improved air quality in our area, so we tend to believe the science about this.

 

Ayup:)

[kelkel2]

Anything with a diesel engine puts off smoke like that. Semi's, school busses, ships, etc...

I drive a diesel car, it's a volkswagen clean diesel and it doesn't put off smoke like that, but it's been engineered to not put off smoke and it was a pretty expensive car with expensive technology put into it. Audi and Volkswagen have been working very hard on their clean diesel engines. Not sure how well that technology translates to ships as I really don't know anything about shipbuilding other than looking at the pictures that are posted. Which isn't helpful at all in this situation. I am sure, however, in the future with wanting to make ships more "green" this is maybe something they can explore as far as technology for a ship. I have no idea what they are planning as far as being more green, but when there is a diesel engine involved occasionally smoke is going to happen, nothing you can do about it.

[chengkp75]

Anything with a diesel engine puts off smoke like that. Semi's, school busses, ships, etc...

I drive a diesel car, it's a volkswagen clean diesel and it doesn't put off smoke like that, but it's been engineered to not put off smoke and it was a pretty expensive car with expensive technology put into it. Audi and Volkswagen have been working very hard on their clean diesel engines. Not sure how well that technology translates to ships as I really don't know anything about shipbuilding other than looking at the pictures that are posted. Which isn't helpful at all in this situation. I am sure, however, in the future with wanting to make ships more "green" this is maybe something they can explore as far as technology for a ship. I have no idea what they are planning as far as being more green, but when there is a diesel engine involved occasionally smoke is going to happen, nothing you can do about it.

 

Generally, a marine diesel in a diesel-electric plant like a cruise ship will only smoke when started, in the few seconds it takes to get the combustion chamber up to temperature and the turbocharger spinning fast enough to provide more air than is required for complete combustion.