Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Horrible new scrubber funnels on Freedom class

Fairsky84

By Fairsky84,
in Royal Caribbean International

 Share

Recommended Posts

troykahack

troykahack

Posted
Posted
Not sure where you are getting your information, but all ships, regardless of whether they are installing scrubbers or not, have to meet the emissions standards set for the US ECA as of 1 January, 2015 (for the newer sulfur level of 0.1%). Yes, they are testing the scrubbers to get them to meet the ECA requirements, but until they do, they have to meet the standards by burning low sulfur diesel fuel within the ECA. Depending on how much time the ship spends in the ECA, the scrubbers will have a payback period of 5-6 years.

 

The only mention of 2020 is that the worldwide sulfur limit is set to reduce to 0.5%.

 

Not an expert on the regulation.... I thought it was those ships that ventured into within 200 miles of the US had to meet that standard, by 2020.

 

So, if it is really 2015, does Royal yet meet the requirements... from what I read, they are testing the scrubbers.... are they burning the low sulfur fuel?

 

What other countries require these emissions to enter within 200 miles...??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chengkp75

chengkp75

Posted
Posted
Not an expert on the regulation.... I thought it was those ships that ventured into within 200 miles of the US had to meet that standard, by 2020.

 

So, if it is really 2015, does Royal yet meet the requirements... from what I read, they are testing the scrubbers.... are they burning the low sulfur fuel?

 

What other countries require these emissions to enter within 200 miles...??

 

Nope, just like my ship, we have to either have a functioning scrubber or burn low sulfur diesel fuel as of 1 Jan 2015. Since our tanker is under time charter, and the charterer pays for the fuel, we have not gone the scrubber path, but burn diesel fuel exclusively. Royal must burn diesel fuel, and can only switch to residual fuel when outside the ECA.

 

The Baltic Sea is an ECA, since 2005, the North Sea is an ECA, since 2006 (those two dates may be switched). Canada is part of the North America ECA (the US ECA). The EU has adopted a sulfur limit of 0.1% for all ships while in port. The Med is being considered for an ECA, and some nations there are considering unilaterally declaring ECA's for their countries. Some states in Australia have passed sulfur limits, and Japan, Australia (nationally), and Norway are working on ECA's. China is working on one as well, hoping for implementation in 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bocker3

Bocker3

Posted
Posted
Not an expert on the regulation.... I thought it was those ships that ventured into within 200 miles of the US had to meet that standard, by 2020.

 

So, if it is really 2015, does Royal yet meet the requirements... from what I read, they are testing the scrubbers.... are they burning the low sulfur fuel?

 

What other countries require these emissions to enter within 200 miles...??

 

Dude, your Donald act is getting old. What other countries spend over half a trillion dollars on their military? What other countries allow mass shootings to go on every week? What other countries let banks open millions of accounts without customer authorization and don't jail those responsible - in fact, let them walk away with over $100,000,000? Shall I go on?

You seem to be saying if "they aren't doing it, we shouldn't". Well, let's apply that across the board then. Otherwise -- get back on topic -- this is a forum for CRUISES. If you want to talk about all this stuff -- go tweet Trump.

 

M

Link to comment
Share on other sites
woodyren

woodyren

Posted
Posted
Due to our regulations, it puts US based industries at a disadvantage to other countries that do not regulate. It costs us more to produce the same product with the added expenses and cost to meet the regulation.

 

The US continues to fail as our costs to build a similar like product is so much more than those countries that have very little regulation.

 

So I suppose you would be all for paying workers peanuts and abandoning working conditions and OH&S regulations as well?

 

There are many things that put progressive countries behind others when it comes to competition. That is exactly why I referred to them as progressive.

 

I guess those who are just focussed on the bottom line so they can take what they "deserve" would see things a little differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfaeric

alfaeric

Posted
Posted (edited)
The EPA was sued buy Friends of the Earth environmental group sponsored by WHO? Did our current administration fight it? Do you not get it yet?

 

And you hit the nail on the head when you blamed the last administration. So you make your side obvious. You are for MORE Government regulations.... more restrictions on businesses....

 

I'm going by timing, that's all. Facts. Like the MARPOL rules, the EPA was sued over CO2 and lost back in the previous administration.

 

You really have no evidence that regulations are job killers, they are not.

 

For just the scrubbers:

A group of engineers and techs had to design, fabricate, test, and show that the concept would work on a large scale diesel.

 

Then another group had to design the system so that it would fit on the ship- and another ship based group had to also design the integration of the parts into the ship both for appearance and function.

 

Then two groups of fabricators had to make all the scrubber and and the ship integration as well as the ship design changes.

 

And then, finally, there's a group of people who are installing the parts onto the ship.

 

All of those are highly paid and highly skilled job.

 

So in that, where are jobs being lost?

 

I mentioned before that I work in a regulated industry- for a publicly traded multi-billion dollar company.

 

My job, as well as hundreds in my company and thousands in my industry are 100% to meet the regulations that have to be met for our product. All of our jobs are engineering jobs- which are high paying jobs.

 

While the industry is world wide, much of the manufacturing is located here in the US- both for domestic companies as well as foreign companies.

 

And ALL of the foreign countries that our product is made in are regulated as well.

 

There's no real impact on manufacturing location based on the regulations plus thousands of high paying jobs are a direct result of the regulations.

 

You can tell me that I'm wrong, but my paycheck and the others that do what I do totally disagree with your "feelings" and "beliefs".

 

Yes, I'm in favor of good regulations. Good ones are very good for jobs.

 

I get it just fine. You are the one who wants to ignore reality.

Edited by alfaeric
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tamalero

tamalero

Posted
Posted
Exactly, stricter regulations in US, our industry packs up and moves elsewhere. Administration job elimination program.

 

My point about China is the are still a very high polluting country regardless of what changes they have made. They are 10x the US.

As a Mexican, trust me.. we would prefer if these kind of industries didn't come to our side.

 

Politicians will always claim "they are jobs for everyone!" (very LOW paid jobs with very long hours, abusive bosses trying to shove the weight of production expectations to workers and polluting horribly)

 

You can google "maquiladoras".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trainman-2

Trainman-2

Posted
Posted
It's called more Government restrictions....

 

And we all know that government knows what is best for us!

 

But consider this. What is the total cost of installation and then the cost to operate and maintain them?

 

Can you guess who is gonna pay for this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chengkp75

chengkp75

Posted
Posted
And we all know that government knows what is best for us!

 

But consider this. What is the total cost of installation and then the cost to operate and maintain them?

 

Can you guess who is gonna pay for this?

 

The capital cost is about $1-1.5 million per engine, but the savings in fuel give a payback period of 5-6 years, depending on how much time is spent in the US ECA. After the payback period, it is all savings for the cruise line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cuizer2

Cuizer2

Posted
Posted
To me, it is hard to see the slide while looking at the side view of the ship.

 

If our current administration didn't order these regulations, the ship would not have changed. They can sail out of other ports without these scrubbers. So they just increase the price of a cruise out of the US. Hopefully one day we will be on equal footing with the other countries .

 

What the US does for a Green Planet matters not until the other polluting countries decide to adapt. Until then, it hurts US Jobs and business.

 

Somebody has to be first and lead the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cuizer2

Cuizer2

Posted
Posted

Well, I must admit, this has been very interesting reading. Not so much for the cruise related information, of which there was some. Not so much for the technical side of things, of which there was plenty. But for the education on global politics.

 

We can't get ten people from the same country, with somewhat shared goals and morals (and a shared interest in cruising), to agree air pollution. How are we ever going to get one hundred countries, with differing goals and morals, to agree on air pollution, or anything else for that matter?

 

BTW, I'm not bothered by the look of either the scrubbers, the slides, or the hull are on the NCL ships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Cruise Critic News & Features
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...