Posted by: cruise2 | 16 July, 2010

ECA Could Hurt Canadian Cruising

Emission Control Areas are going to affect the cruise industry and cruise ports within these areas. Under current regulations, cruise ships within 200 miles of the Canadian coast can use fuel that is 1.5 to 2.5 percent sulphur. The proposed cuts, set out in an agreement with the United States, would demand sharp cuts in sulphur over the next five years, to start in 2012. The sulphur limit will be 1 percent by 2012 and 0.1 percent by 2015.
Now, the first cruise line has announced that it might have to drop cruises from the UK to Canada if the new emissions regulations go into effect for cruise ships. Fred Olsen Cruise Lines said that the extra fuel cost of $17,000 a day would make it uneconomical for them to do so. Unlike container ships that can turn around and just leave the 200-mile coastal zone, cruise ships stay within that zone as they sail between North American ports – and at to-day’s cruising speeds it can take half a day’s steaming to get out of a 200-mile ECA area.
The same rules will apply to all Alaska cruises, whether leaving from Vancouver or Seattle, itself a huge trade. It is hard to believe that such a cack-handed result could be obtained from this movement, which was started by the US Environmental Protection Agency saying that 14,000 lives a year might be saved from reducing ships’ emissions. Where did they get this number?  And just how many lives could be saved by cutting smog in Los Angeles?

Enhanced by Zemanta
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories