chengkp75

If it was due to a weather cancellation, and not a mere crew scheduling problem from the airlines, then CBP will generally grant a waiver, as this is outside the cruise line's and airline's control.

It means that the ground fault circuit breaker measures the current in each wire going to your hair straightener. If the current in the "hot/black" wire equals the current in the "neutral/white" wire, then all is good. If more current is flowing in the hot wire than in the neutral wire, then some current is going somewhere it isn't supposed to go, like into your hand because the insulation has failed, and you are being electrocuted. When the breaker senses this, it shuts off the power.

Ground fault breakers don't measure difference in current between neutral and ground, it measures current in hot and neutral, and if there is a difference, then stray current is going someplace, either to ground, or through you.

While this is true for land based situations, it is really required for marine installations. As I've said, that breaker, if it does not interrupt the neutral leg, you can get an amount of current flowing between neutral and ground that is not regulated, except by the upstream, hard wired breaker, whatever its rating is. No, we're discussing maritime installations, which use 440v, 220v and 110v.

I didn't think they sold anything that would be used in a bathroom with just a two pin plug, so you may be right (I don't have enough hair to worry about using something for it). With the SCR controlled propulsion system, the AC sine wave is very dirty.

So, which is it? "A power strip must have a circuit breaker, that we are supposed to learn from reading "NEMA standards", or "NEMA does not require a circuit breaker"?

Sorry, not correct. The safest power strip on a cruise ship is a European 220v power strip, whether plugged into 220v or 110v outlet, with a circuit breaker that interrupts both legs.

What exactly are they "getting away with"? Tenders are not safety equipment, so not required. Many large ships, the Oasis class comes to mind, do not have lifeboat/tenders, and do not perform tendering operations. What "emergency" happened? At worst, it would have been an "operational delay" waiting until another ship left and Encore could dock and pick up the passengers. It was, in no way, an emergency.

If this is a "ceramic" type hair straightener, these have been reported as not working on ships. The reason is the electronics that convert the AC power to the DC that the ceramic heating element needs requires the neutral and ground to be at the same voltage, and this is not the case on ships. Generally, these straighteners merely won't turn on, but if there is a ground somewhere on the ship, it could have caused a reverse voltage on the ground/neutral, which blew out the semiconductors, which are not designed to handle this different voltage.

I'm aware of UL1363, and its limitations on shipboard applications. Probably the main reason that the codes require a breaker on the RPT (was aware of the name as well), is that even a "15 amp" outlet, as a NEMA approved outlet, is allowed to be used for both 15 amp and 20 amp circuits, so the upstream breaker could be a 20 amp breaker, and the cord for the RPT is only rated for 15 amps.

Natural gas powers 75% of Florida power plants, with fuel oil as backup. And, you'd be wrong about coal being cleaner than oil. Coal is by far the dirtiest fuel there is. So, that would take care of cooling while in port. How do you store this for when the ship is at sea? So, the port needs to finance the infrastructure to run piping out to where they can get to deep water? Water is not cheaper to take from port than to produce onboard. Shore power can be cleaner than ship's power, but again, only when in port, so how do you let the port do cooling while at sea?

Why does a power strip need a 15 amp breaker, when the outlet it is plugged into is protected by a 15 amp breaker upstream of the outlet? Also, what is the NEMA standard for power strips, a quick look didn't locate one, truly curious.

The problem is that the "green" production of hydrogen, by splitting water, is very expensive.

Well, the VP can ask if a certain process or equipment can be used on a ship, but the class society would ask for studies on feasibility, safety, emissions, etc, and then determine requirements to meet "best industry standards" and the requirements of the insurance coverers and to meet both international and national regulations. The class societies won't start the investigation into a new technology, but when presented with some evidence that it might be practical, they will develop standards that have to be met. The class societies could care less what passengers want, and really don't set their standards based on whether or not they benefit the business aspects of shipping. They are insurance underwriters.

Even a power strip with a "circuit breaker" only opens the "hot" leg, which does not fully address the problem of overloading due to the neutral on the ship not being at the same voltage as the ground, so even when the breaker trips, the power strip could still draw significant current. This is why the circuit breakers on the ship are two pole breakers.

And, as it says, the reactors are still under development for shoreside applications, let alone seaborne ones, and Ulstein doesn't say whether they have talked to class about whether this would get approved. As they say, many years in development, and no guarantee the ships would be built as proposed. The drones would be used for search, not rescue, and not sure how much they would help.

Typically, HAL phone reps don't know anything about the PVSA, which is why they frequently allow B2B cruises to be booked, which are then disallowed by the "compliance" department later. Not sure what your point is, this is still a violation of the PVSA. Now, HAL may have decided to swallow the fine, or the HAL agents are giving out incorrect information. HAL may allow boarding in Juneau, or not, and the OP may or may not be liable for the fine. When CBP gets the itinerary between Juneau and Seattle, that is when CBP will catch the violation, and levy the fine at the end of the cruise.

The only collapsible ones I see only have a "spin dry" feature, which only guarantees damp clothes with no dripping water, but this would still fall under the "no household appliances" ban. I would also be hesitant to say that any detergent is acceptable on the ship, even the so-called "biodegradable" sheets mentioned above. The ship's waste water treatment plant operates on a different system than a septic tank, or municipal system, due to the throughput rate, and these may affect the operation of the system.

Again, not correct. The OP's cruise is still a Juneau to Seattle "open jaw" cruise, which requires not just a "foreign port", but a "distant" foreign port. Distant foreign ports are defined by CBP as any port outside of North America, Central America, Caribbean, Bahamas, or Bermuda. The closest "distant" foreign port to Alaska is Cartagena, Colombia, or perhaps Russia.

No, they can't. If the passenger joined in Juneau, their cruise would be Juneau to Seattle (CBP does not care how a cruise is advertised or sold, just where the passenger gets on and gets off at the end). This is transportation between two US ports, and without a port call at a "distant" foreign port, it violates the PVSA. Both in that case, and in the case you mention of leaving prior to a foreign port call, the line is fined $765 per passenger, and the ticket contract grants the line the right to pass that fine to the passenger. If the "downlining" involved embarking at a Canadian port for an Alaskan cruise, then it would be allowed.

No hydrogen powered cruise ship regulations have been approved by the class societies, and the infrastructure to produce hydrogen is not exactly green either. Never going to happen. Every single passenger who develops cancer after a cruise on a nuclear powered cruise ship would be suing the cruise line. Not sure that any of your examples would be possible on cruise ships. At the worst, the ship would revert to conventional fuel, since the engines are "dual fuel" and burn 5% diesel fuel all the time anyway, and the regulations require a sufficient quantity of "conventional fuel" to return to port if the LNG system goes down. This is going to be a massive investment, to provide variable speed drives for all the fans and pumps for the HVAC system, not sure how long a pay-back period is going to be on this. As for the air filtration systems, this will actually require more energy. Again, variable speed drives are not cheap, and continue to take up "real estate" in the technical areas of the ship. Seriously? They haven't changed to LED lighting already? 15 years ago, NCL had LED lighting vendors offering to pay for the conversion of the lighting, in exchange for a percentage of the savings over several years. This is way overdue. Again, really? This has been used on NCL ships over 15 years ago, and has been available to merchant ships at least that long, so why is Carnival so far behind on this?

Frankly, until you know the extent of Canadian law in regards to UNCLOS and ISPS, you have no idea whether your complaint is valid or not. The primary motivating factor would be the ISPS plan for the port of Victoria, and what they decide is the security zone requirements for a foreign naval vessel, and whether there is or isn't a physical limit of public access to a vessel that may be of high risk. There would likely have been a continual "Pan, Pan, Pan" (urgent situation that does not pose an immediate danger to a vessel) radio call from CCG that a security zone has been established around the naval vessel, but most small boat operators don't bother to listen to VHF 16 to receive these calls, so they are not informed of the security zone. Aspects of UNCLOS, in regards to foreign naval vessels, would also impact what the security requirements are.

Chamorro's have always been a lucrative market for POA hiring. A lot of my long term engineering staff were from Guam.

So, where does Miami get the power to run the pumps that pump the geothermal water around the system (and that is not deep sea water, but water circulated to the deep ground, which is cooler), if there is no fuel burned? Where is the liquid refrigerant stored? How much is needed to keep the ship cool if you are not recirculating the refrigerant, but only using it once? Even better, where is the gaseous refrigerant stored? That would likely take the entire volume of the ship. How long would it take to pump this refrigerant on and off the ship. Then the liquid refrigerant needs to be compressed, so that it can absorb more heat when it flashes to gas, and where does this power come from? You are merely taking a refrigerant system that is self-contained on the ship, that uses sea water to condense the refrigerant, with one that is split between the ship and shore that uses geothermal cooling to condense the refrigerant, with all the attendant losses in efficiency in storing cooling agent and pumping from ship to shore and back. Geothermal heating/cooling (which I think is not common in Europe), uses water that is pumped down a hole in the ground, where it is cooled off by the earth (to about 50*F at 20 feet down or more), and then pumped to the cooling/heating coil for the house to directly cool the air, without any refrigeration system (and its attendant compressor, etc). That is what is efficient, is simply using the earth to cool/heat the water, over a refrigeration system, and this would not be possible on a ship.

Then they are burning through over $900k a week in fuel.