Now I'm Angry. She wants to ban cruising!!

[ontheweb]

14 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

 

The writer is expressing public perception. Public sentiment right now is that cruise ships are infested with germs and that it is crazy to go on cruise ships.

 

And that is a perception that our federal government is going out of their way to express between the CDC and proposed congressional investigations.

[clo]

1 hour ago, Charles4515 said:

 

The writer is expressing public perception. Public sentiment right now is that cruise ships are infested with germs and that it is crazy to go on cruise ships.

 

Across lots of industries it's a lot harder to get a customer back than to not lose them. And people will repeat the bad news more than the good, in my experience. What we hear, anecdotally, is 'what? are you nuts?' regarding going on cruises.

[ilikeanswers]

I read the article it is not outrageous, but it does not have any new ideas to offer. It focuses more on the environmental impact of the cruise industry rather than COVID19. The fact is the cruise industry has been incredibly aggressive in its expansion, tone deaf to criticism and also rather dismissive of their business relationships. They brought this negative media on themselves😕.

[ldubs]

10 hours ago, Charles4515 said:

 

The writer is expressing public perception. Public sentiment right now is that cruise ships are infested with germs and that it is crazy to go on cruise ships.

 

 

Well, I think that is probably my perception too, the key phrase being "right now".  

 

But that doesn't mean we should scrap all cruise ships and turn them into razor blades!  😲 😁😁

 

Edited May 9, 2020 by ldubs

[ldubs]

16 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

People around the world are noticing enviromental benefits to us pausing our lives, cleaner air, cleaner water, animal populations resurging, coral and sea beds regenerating. Obviously we cannot pause forever but perhaps it might give us some persepective on the impact we have on Earth and that maybe some modifications to our way of life might not be such a bad idea🤗.

 

Well said and I join you in hoping for some realistic modifications.  Sadly, unless we give up our position as the dominant species, we will always have an impact.  The key is how we manage that.  

 

 

[clo]

49 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

I read the article it is not outrageous, but it does not have any new ideas to offer. It focuses more on the environmental impact of the cruise industry rather than COVID19. The fact is the cruise industry has been incredibly aggressive in its expansion, tone deaf to criticism and also rather dismissive of their business relationships. They brought this negative media on themselves😕.

We took our first cruise in 2002 and have done a total of 8. Until I became active here - I know! - I was really unaware of how they 'misbehave.' They really have brought it on themselves And as an individual consumer I'm paying attention to this. I don't really like giving my money to things like this.

[Charles4515]

We took our first cruise in 2002 and have done a total of 8. Until I became active here - I know! - I was really unaware of how they 'misbehave.' They really have brought it on themselves And as an individual consumer I'm paying attention to this. I don't really like giving my money to things like this.

Misbehavior is built into our economic system so it would be almost impossible to avoid giving money to companies that misbehave. Granted the cruise companies in particular are deeper into misbehavior than other industries.


Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Charles4515]

Here is a story that makes me angry.

https://apple.news/Ab9B3XU21QmSkcitdlDxPJA


Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[K32682]

8 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Well, I think that is probably my perception too, the key phrase being "right now".  

 

But that doesn't mean we should scrap all cruise ships and turn them into razor blades!  😲 😁😁

 

 

Except that cruise ships have long had a reputation for spreading viruses among passengers.  COVID-19 just raised the stakes and the impact on cruisers caught on ships was far greater than anyone on an aircraft or land-based accommodation.   

 

Then there are lines that downplayed the severity of the virus, embarked on month-long cruises well into March, fought CDC health and safety guidelines and continue to strand crews in circumstances that will promote the spread of the virus among them.

 

All of this combined with the long-standing environmental and workplace concerns may dissuade a sufficient number of past passengers from cruising as often or ever again.  You may be shaving your morning stubble with a repurposed cruise boat sooner than you think.  

[AF-1]

After reading this article in post#1;  I have a question and maybe someone here can answer.  The article states that cruise ships dump their waste in the oceans, and run on diesel oil which I guess is bad.  My question is: what about the thousands of cargo ships sailing around the world?  Do all the cargo ships keeps their waste and don't dump in the oceans?  Do all the cargo ships in the world run on clean burning fuels?  I guess my main point is why does this article not compare cruise ship waste with cargo ship waste; or cruise ship fuel verses cargo ships fuel?  Anyone know what that was  not mentioned in this article?  Thanks for your answers.  Have a great weekend.

[evandbob]

35 minutes ago, AF-1 said:

After reading this article in post#1;  I have a question and maybe someone here can answer.  The article states that cruise ships dump their waste in the oceans, and run on diesel oil which I guess is bad.  My question is: what about the thousands of cargo ships sailing around the world?  Do all the cargo ships keeps their waste and don't dump in the oceans?  Do all the cargo ships in the world run on clean burning fuels?  I guess my main point is why does this article not compare cruise ship waste with cargo ship waste; or cruise ship fuel verses cargo ships fuel?  Anyone know what that was  not mentioned in this article?  Thanks for your answers.  Have a great weekend.

 

Chengpk will be the best person to answer your questions, but I'll just say that the waste from a 5 or 6,000 passenger ship is probably a heckuva lot more than what can accrue on a cargo ship, and I'll guess maybe still more than a few hundred cargo ships.

 

Might be like comparing the footprint of a tandem bicycle vs. a semi tractor 18 wheeler?

[Charles4515]

After reading this article in post#1;  I have a question and maybe someone here can answer.  The article states that cruise ships dump their waste in the oceans, and run on diesel oil which I guess is bad.  My question is: what about the thousands of cargo ships sailing around the world?  Do all the cargo ships keeps their waste and don't dump in the oceans?  Do all the cargo ships in the world run on clean burning fuels?  I guess my main point is why does this article not compare cruise ship waste with cargo ship waste; or cruise ship fuel verses cargo ships fuel?  Anyone know what that was  not mentioned in this article?  Thanks for your answers.  Have a great weekend.

Cargo ships are a necessity. Cruise ships are not a necessity. Have a nice weekend. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[clo]

4 hours ago, Charles4515 said:

Granted the cruise companies in particular are deeper into misbehavior than other industries.

Yep. So it seems. I can't solve all the problems but, as I age, I tend to spend my money differently

[cruisemom42]

Articles like this one are not worth getting upset over. The author has a strong viewpoint (no attempt at impartiality) and is throwing anything out that may stick.

 

For example, she conveniently doesn't mention that all cruise ships will comply with regulations in 2020 to ensure that they reduce sulfur emissions to a much lower level -- either by switching to a different type of fuel or by installing scrubbers. And this was all agreed to a decade ago (e.g., a reduction to 0.5 percent by 2020, down from 3.5 percent in 2010). One could argue whether they should have complied sooner or perhaps whether they should have focused more on use of lighter fuels and relied less on scrubbers -- but in the end they will comply.

 

Also, most of the research that the author quotes has been performed/funded by heavily biased organizations and many have been discussed and debunked for their methodology. Like this article, they set out with a point to prove and -- by god -- they were going to prove it.

 

Finally, in stories like this one, I always wonder why there is no comparison with individual vacations. Yes, travel by cruise line is not carbon-friendly. But if every person or couple traveling together on that one ship went off and booked an equal length vacation where they were driving and perhaps flying to reach similar destinations, would the carbon offset be much less, or possibly even greater?  Because surely not everyone is going to sit at home and go nowhere as the alternative to cruising...

 

 

 

 

Edited May 9, 2020 by cruisemom42

[navybankerteacher]

12 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Well said and I join you in hoping for some realistic modifications.  Sadly, unless we give up our position as the dominant species, we will always have an impact.  The key is how we manage that.  

 

 

I am afraid that any other logical candidates for the “position as the dominant species” would most likely also be carnivores — can you suggest a few that you would be happy reporting to?

[slidergirl]

3 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

Articles like this one are not worth getting upset over. The author has a strong viewpoint (no attempt at impartiality) and is throwing anything out that may stick.

 

For example, she conveniently doesn't mention that all cruise ships will comply with regulations in 2020 to ensure that they reduce sulfur emissions to a much lower level -- either by switching to a different type of fuel or by installing scrubbers. And this was all agreed to a decade ago (e.g., a reduction to 0.5 percent by 2020, down from 3.5 percent in 2010). One could argue whether they should have complied sooner or perhaps whether they should have focused more on use of lighter fuels and relied less on scrubbers -- but in the end they will comply.

 

Also, most of the research that the author quotes has been performed/funded by heavily biased organizations and many have been discussed and debunked for their methodology. Like this article, they set out with a point to prove and -- by god -- they were going to prove it.

 

Finally, in stories like this one, I always wonder why there is no comparison with individual vacations. Yes, travel by cruise line is not carbon-friendly. But if every person or couple traveling together on that one ship went off and booked an equal length vacation where they were driving and perhaps flying to reach similar destinations, would the carbon offset be much less, or possibly even greater?  Because surely not everyone is going to sit at home and go nowhere as the alternative to cruising...

 

 

 

 

I thought of the posting more of an opinion piece than an article.  Everyone is entitled to voice their opinion.  If it isn't your opinion, you may disagree by writing an opposition reply or just moving on.  True?

 

Traveling with a smaller carbon footprint than cruising is definitely possible.  That is where personal choice and how much you are willing to do comes into play.  Rent an electric vehicle and do a roadtrip (one of my ski rental vendors bought a fleet of electric vans and brought them over from Europe - they'd be great as a camping vehicle!!!).  Non-diesel trains.  See if you can check to see how "new" your airplane is (rather use a 737-900 than a 737-200 for example for more fuel-efficient engines).   If you are going to staying in hotels, research which ones are the "greenest." I haven't researched down to how much each would be in carbon, so I'm just spitballing.   Plus, I already purchase carbon offsets myself to help with what I produce.   Just my humble opinion. 

[cruisemom42]

38 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

I thought of the posting more of an opinion piece than an article.  Everyone is entitled to voice their opinion.  If it isn't your opinion, you may disagree by writing an opposition reply or just moving on.  True?

 

 

I'm fully supportive of opinion, but if it is an opinion piece it should be labeled as such. And facts should still be quoted correctly, if they are used to support one's opinion.

[clo]

2 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

I'm fully supportive of opinion, but if it is an opinion piece it should be labeled as such. And facts should still be quoted correctly, if they are used to support one's opinion.

It's a blog.

 

What is earther Gizmodo?

Earther Is An Earth Blog - Tech and Science Tips, Reviews, News And More. Gizmodo. Deadspin. Gizmodo. Jalopnik.

 

Earther Is An Earth Blog - Tech and Science Tips ... - Gizmodo

[cruisemom42]

 

 

1 minute ago, clo said:

It's a blog.

 

What is earther Gizmodo?

Earther Is An Earth Blog - Tech and Science Tips, Reviews, News And More. Gizmodo. Deadspin. Gizmodo. Jalopnik.

 

Earther Is An Earth Blog - Tech and Science Tips ... - Gizmodo

 

Okay, I stand (partially) corrected. My bad for not investigating.  

 

2 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

[I'm fully supportive of opinion, but if it is an opinion piece it should be labeled as such. -- deleted]  And facts should still be quoted correctly, if they are used to support one's opinion.

[clo]

27 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

3 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

[I'm fully supportive of opinion, but if it is an opinion piece it should be labeled as such. -- deleted]  And facts should still be quoted correctly, if they are used to support one's opinion.

Could we enforce that here on CC?

[ldubs]

10 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

I am afraid that any other logical candidates for the “position as the dominant species” would most likely also be carnivores — can you suggest a few that you would be happy reporting to?

 

Haha, nope I'm not ready to step down yet.  But if it does happen I wish the next dominant species the best of luck.  😃

[navybankerteacher]

3 hours ago, clo said:

Could we enforce that here on CC?

Are you INSANE? A requirement that opinions could only be posted if (at least tangentially) supported by fact would make this whole site as exciting as a late summer evening with the surrounding silence only broken by an occasional amorous katydid.

[ldubs]

14 hours ago, K32682 said:

 

Except that cruise ships have long had a reputation for spreading viruses among passengers.  COVID-19 just raised the stakes and the impact on cruisers caught on ships was far greater than anyone on an aircraft or land-based accommodation.   

 

Then there are lines that downplayed the severity of the virus, embarked on month-long cruises well into March, fought CDC health and safety guidelines and continue to strand crews in circumstances that will promote the spread of the virus among them.

 

All of this combined with the long-standing environmental and workplace concerns may dissuade a sufficient number of past passengers from cruising as often or ever again.  You may be shaving your morning stubble with a repurposed cruise boat sooner than you think.  

 

Yeah, good point about the stakes being raised.  At least before now we knew the exposure and considered it acceptable.  Facing Noro was one thing, but introduction of CV on cruise ships is a real game changer.  But I guess I'm really just stating the obvious.   

 

Environmental concerns get a lot of lip service, but I doubt any significant number of current cruise vacationers are going to change their vacation plans out of those concerns.   I don't mean changes shouldn't happen, I just don't think it will come from customers.  I hope I'm wrong, though.   

 

After this quarantine order is over I'm going to need a few good razor blades. 🙂 

 

 

[GlamorousGirl]

She doesn’t know what she’s talking about. I just completed a college course on travel and environmental and social impacts. Cruises are taking great measures, more than most companies, to minimize their carbon footprint.

[ontheweb]

6 hours ago, GlamorousGirl said:

She doesn’t know what she’s talking about. I just completed a college course on travel and environmental and social impacts. Cruises are taking great measures, more than most companies, to minimize their carbon footprint.

Do you really think that matters to the author of that article? Nothing short of all cruises stopping would please her.