Entry tags:
Carbon Footprints
I was just chatting to my dad, who likes to do a cruise holiday every couple of years, and we were discussing the environmental impact.
I thought there was a fair environmental cost to cruises, but we were both surprised by what I found when I looked it up.
Cruises are far, far worse than flying. If you take a liner to your destination, your carbon emissions will be nearly double that of a similar flight (and the impact of that flight is bad enough that I've given up flying), and there is also a massive impact of sulphur emissions, sewage, oil contaminated water, rubbish, etc.
Add in the fact that many people fly to their starting destination, and cruises are an environmental disaster zone.
I thought there was a fair environmental cost to cruises, but we were both surprised by what I found when I looked it up.
Cruises are far, far worse than flying. If you take a liner to your destination, your carbon emissions will be nearly double that of a similar flight (and the impact of that flight is bad enough that I've given up flying), and there is also a massive impact of sulphur emissions, sewage, oil contaminated water, rubbish, etc.
Add in the fact that many people fly to their starting destination, and cruises are an environmental disaster zone.

no subject
I wonder, though, how much of those carbon emissions come from the power used in moving the ship, and how much from air conditioning and other on-board passenger services.
no subject
All those things are being carried along with them, unlike an aircraft where you just have one cramped seat and a share in a tiny kitchen that just heats food.
Yes, there's a big electricity consumption (which leads to air pollution issues at ports even when the ship is stationary), but I'm willing to bet that motive power is a large chunk of the total.
no subject
I remember two friends of mine producing an absolutely astronomical figure for The Canadian, the transcontinental train service, because you're on there for six days; it turns out most of this was an error between "the train refuels in six places" (which it does) and "the train arrives at these six places completely dry and takes on its full fuel capacity", which isn't even remotely true.
no subject
no subject
It's the distances involves that make it so bad.
Your example of the railway will still be bad, even though not as bad as your friends calculated. It's going all the way across Canada - that's an enormous distance.
The cost of aviation looks great per mile. but there are an awful lot of miles.
Our perception of the world has shrunk. In the days when it took a sailing ship six to fourteen weeks to go from England to America, we had a much better sense of just how far it was. Now we can do it in less than a day and it's just a short hop.
no subject
Don't have the same facilities as cruise ships either.
no subject
no subject
One should probably knock off the equivalent energy consumption caused by not spending those weeks in a luxury hotel, but hotels don't operate things like desalination plants or generate all their own electricity.
"When speed is reduced by 20%, fuel consumption is reduced by 40% per nautical mile" -- Modern cargo ships slow to the speed of the sailing clippers (The Guardian)