Channel 4 - Secrets of your cruise

[CCFC]

Not watched the programme yet, did P&O give Ch 4 permission to film on Oceana?

 

Apparently not: "Dispatches went undercover on P&O Cruises, Britain’s most popular cruise operator."

 

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/secrets-of-your-cruise-channel-4-dispatches-2

[Eglesbrech]

Most comments on here just show that people have stuck their heads in the sand, of course it is a major problem - talk to the residents that live near the Southampton cruise terminals. The law needs to change to prohibit 3.5% sulphur oils being burnt by cruise ships. Yes it has been reduced in European/US waters to 0.1% which is still 100 times what our cars are allowed to use but in the poorly Caribbean anything goes.

Chanel 4 Dispatches is still available on Catchup or just read www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/jul/03/air-on-board-cruise-ships-is-twice-as-bad-as-at-piccadilly-circus

 

Thanks for posting the link.

 

P&Os response is slightly concerning in just how little they say. While its good that they can quote reductions in fuel usage, emissions and fitting scrubbers etc, it's worrying that they are not more actively denying some of the more extravagant claims which if accurate are really quite shocking. Depends if they have had time to look at the research and the science behind it yet.

 

While billed as undercover I assume that P&O knew the reporter was on the ship as the meeting with the passengers appeared to be in a public room not a cabin and obviously had lights and cameras etc so hard to hide.

 

The programme was not well made but if it does nothing else it may prompt passengers to ask more questions.

[daiB]

Thanks for posting the link.

 

 

 

P&Os response is slightly concerning in just how little they say. While its good that they can quote reductions in fuel usage, emissions and fitting scrubbers etc, it's worrying that they are not more actively denying some of the more extravagant claims which if accurate are really quite shocking. Depends if they have had time to look at the research and the science behind it yet.

 

 

 

While billed as undercover I assume that P&O knew the reporter was on the ship as the meeting with the passengers appeared to be in a public room not a cabin and obviously had lights and cameras etc so hard to hide.

 

 

 

The programme was not well made but if it does nothing else it may prompt passengers to ask more questions.

 

 

 

That meeting was not on Oceana. I do not recognise the room or any of the furniture.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[balf]

Turning the telly off seems to be the solution to the problem of some here. It's been well known for years that bunker oil is a very polluting fuel, used by nearly all merchant ships worldwide. Shooting the messenger won't make it go away.

 

David

[john watson]

I think the programme was a lot of,

Hot air.

 

This may well be true but please do not reveal where you think it is coming from.

 

Lol John

[Eglesbrech]

That meeting was not on Oceana. I do not recognise the room or any of the furniture.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

 

Thanks Dai, I was curious about that. They must have got the passengers together ashore then as they were dressed for the sun.

[jeanlyon]

I do wonder why cruise ships have to burn fuel when in port. Can't they run on a ground control unit like aircraft do? Or am I being untechnical

[terrierjohn]

I do wonder why cruise ships have to burn fuel when in port. Can't they run on a ground control unit like aircraft do? Or am I being untechnical

No I think your comment is very sensible, there ought to be a way of using electricity from ashore, thus enabling the onboard engines to be switched off.

Of course cost may well be a factor, although if the local authority wants to reduce pollution they could perhaps be persuaded to subsidise the cruise lines.

[Alcairns]

With regard to the issue that the Greenwich residents are protesting at - I was under the impression that most of the newer ships had connections that could hook them up to shore power thus avoiding the engines being run for the period of the ships call. This is certainly the case in some US Ports.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Saintston]

No I think your comment is very sensible, there ought to be a way of using electricity from ashore, thus enabling the onboard engines to be switched off.

Of course cost may well be a factor, although if the local authority wants to reduce pollution they could perhaps be persuaded to subsidise the cruise lines.

 

 

If you consider how much electricity you average ship would use, the logistical implications of making this available at the quayside would be massive. A cruise ship is using vastly more power than an aircraft on the ground.

[kalos]

I think the reporter let loose with a thermal image camera was on par with a cave man discovering fire.

Our trainee's at work are also mesmerised with them filming each others body's, to see who's the hottest guy.

 

So the reporter went for the wow factor thermal by filming a ships funnel .

 

She would have done better by filming an airliner doing a taxi to the runway as that looks more "wow" and its only a minimal amount of thrust

Edited July 4, 2017 by kalos

[BrianI]

I do wonder why cruise ships have to burn fuel when in port. Can't they run on a ground control unit like aircraft do? Or am I being untechnical

They already do in certain ports that are equipped to supply power. A hefty connection is required for a ship but it means they can shut down their on board engines.

Princess have already equipped most of their fleet to do this.

http://www.princess.com/news/backgrounders_and_fact_sheets/factsheet/Princess-Ships-Clear-the-Air-with-Shore-Power-Connections.html

Southampton may be going down this path shortly.

https://www.transport-network.co.uk/Council-wants-shore-power-to-tackle-docks-pollution/13881

Brian

[terrierjohn]

If you consider how much electricity you average ship would use, the logistical implications of making this available at the quayside would be massive. A cruise ship is using vastly more power than an aircraft on the ground.

I would have thought the average port was littered with substations, or at least had more than suffjcient to cope.

[claudiniusmaximus]

Princess cruises recently had a $40 million fine for illegal pollution. They had installed a secret waste pipe and hidden it from inspectors that deliberately leaked oily waste (5000 gallons of the coast of the UK) and also tampered with other sensors etc to get away with breaking regs.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/02/the-40m-magic-pipe-princess-cruises-given-record-fine-for-dumping-oil-at-sea

 

Friend of the Earth do an annual report card on cruise ships. P&O score Ds. Its fairly middle of the road from what I can tell. They score low on sewage treatment but better than most on air pollution.

 

http://www.foe.org/cruise-report-card

 

This was a hot topic on the celebrity forum last year. Someone pointed out that cruise ships are a tiny percentage of the ships that sail the ocean. The tens of thousands of Merchant ships are likely to cause vastly more pollution than a hundred or so cruise ships overall. But of course I can't quantify that.

 

The methane from cows farts cause more greenhouse gas than the co2 from all the cars on the planet at the moment (1.5 billion cows and methane is 23 times more harmful than co2). [emoji243][emoji230][emoji100]According to the United Nations, agriculture is responsible for 18% of the total release of greenhouse gases.

 

I'm not saying that cruise ships don't pollute - they certainly do - just that unless cruise ship pollution can be graded alongside a range of other pollution the info unearthed in the dispatches programme is meaningless.

 

(Except princess above, that is pretty appalling).

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited July 4, 2017 by claudiniusmaximus

[shot2bits]

Sorry, the whole programme was hogs vomit in my opinion. If you pointed a FLIR at my double glazed windows you would see heat escaping. We all know if you sit at the back of the ship you may get covered in soot. There were no revelations in this at all, when India, china etc take responsibility for reducing carbon emissions, I will consider changing my holiday plans. Until then..............

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Saintston]

I would have thought the average port was littered with substations, or at least had more than suffjcient to cope.

 

I don't think you're appreciating the scale of electricity used by a cruise ship. Its going to vastly outweigh a cargo ship of equal tonnage. Something with 5000 pax and staff on board with all the associated electricity is equivalent to a small town. There isn't that sort of electrical capacity just sat around waiting to be used. It would take substantial upgrades in ports with significant cost implications, and of course there would be the question of who pays. Its something that needs sorting, but not something quick, easy or cheap to sort.

[amajaa]

I guess if we didn't or couldn't cruise we would probably be flying somewhere so just as much impact on the environment.

[Saintston]

I guess if we didn't or couldn't cruise we would probably be flying somewhere so just as much impact on the environment.

 

Unfortunately, most research suggests that air travel is actually greener than cruising when it comes to CO2 emissions.

[john watson]

Unfortunately, most research suggests that air travel is actually greener than cruising when it comes to CO2 emissions.

 

I think you have to have an overall look at pollution and not just restrict observations to CO2 for example. An enormous amount of noise and problems associated with people getting to airports are just a couple of issues.

 

Industry in the Far East or former Eastern Bloc does not seem to have the same standards as in the UK. People who are advancing standards seem to pick on things that suit their argument but when something seems inconsistent such as cows, they avoid mention.

 

All tourism is going to have an impact and often local people trying to eek a living out of it at the location have a totally different set of priorities. Often you find a multi-national company has built the massive hotel and cornered the market in as many ways as it can find. I recall a well known cruise line having approved retailers in the port and advising passengers to only shop there with a cruise line refund back up system on faulty items. In other words ignore all other local shops and businesses.

 

Regards John

[terrierjohn]

I don't think you're appreciating the scale of electricity used by a cruise ship. Its going to vastly outweigh a cargo ship of equal tonnage. Something with 5000 pax and staff on board with all the associated electricity is equivalent to a small town. There isn't that sort of electrical capacity just sat around waiting to be used. It would take substantial upgrades in ports with significant cost implications, and of course there would be the question of who pays. Its something that needs sorting, but not something quick, easy or cheap to sort.

Despite your reservations if you check out the attachments in post 37 you will note its already happening and Southampton may be the first cruise port in the UK to install the facilities.

[mercury7289]

Yawn!

[jeanlyon]

They already do in certain ports that are equipped to supply power. A hefty connection is required for a ship but it means they can shut down their on board engines.

Princess have already equipped most of their fleet to do this.

http://www.princess.com/news/backgrounders_and_fact_sheets/factsheet/Princess-Ships-Clear-the-Air-with-Shore-Power-Connections.html

Southampton may be going down this path shortly.

https://www.transport-network.co.uk/Council-wants-shore-power-to-tackle-docks-pollution/13881

Brian

 

Brian, that's really interesting. I have wondered about it for a while. Sunbathing in port and looking up at smoke billowing out of the funnel got me thinking.

[Saintston]

Despite your reservations if you check out the attachments in post 37 you will note its already happening and Southampton may be the first cruise port in the UK to install the facilities.

 

As a local, I'm well aware Southampton want to, but as I've said it will need significant investment and upgrades.

[davenew]

I don't think you're appreciating the scale of electricity used by a cruise ship. Its going to vastly outweigh a cargo ship of equal tonnage. Something with 5000 pax and staff on board with all the associated electricity is equivalent to a small town. There isn't that sort of electrical capacity just sat around waiting to be used. It would take substantial upgrades in ports with significant cost implications, and of course there would be the question of who pays. Its something that needs sorting, but not something quick, easy or cheap to sort.

True, 5000 cruise pax using electricity is high usage, but whilst they are on the cruise, they are not using electricity at home, so surely there is no net gain in usage, and most probably a net loss.

[mercury7289]

Simples!

 

Yawn