Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
kangforpres

Environmental impact of cruising and tourism

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, HappyInVan said:

 

Solar power is the logical substitute for fossil fuel. Convert excess solar radiation into energy, and give it a kick-start by taxing users of fossil fuel.

 

Since you like sources, here is an article that talks about the relative "density" of various power sources:

 

https://phys.org/news/2018-08-renewable-energy-sources-space-fossil.html

 

Where it says that solar power can take up to 1000 times the space of a gas powered plant of the same power.  While it says that advances could see a 3-5 times increase in solar density by the mid century, that still leaves an awful lot of "ground" to make up, ground covered in solar panels.  And, while West Texas ranchers make a lot of extra bucks putting up wind generators on their sage brush covered semi-desert acres, while still running cattle on them, it is again a low density generator, and different from covering acres with solar panels where nothing can grow under them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HappyInVan said:

 

Don't direct your righteous anger at me. Look in the mirror.

 

There's no practical option that doesn't involve taxes and fines at some point. Solar power is the logical substitute for fossil fuel. Convert excess solar radiation into energy, and give it a kick-start by taxing users of fossil fuel.

 

Build flood defences. Gotta fund the projects. The public sector has to lead the way. Then, the private sector has its choices from the incentives and disincentives; including the carbon tax.

 

Think you can capture and store carbon. Give it a try!

 

Like I said. Its too little too late. The Chinese and EU and fully committed. Canada and Japan will follow. The big obstacle is that large consumer society whose freedom is 'precious'.

 

(49,641 posts to go)

 

Now that you've admitted that the real objective is the imposition of taxes and fines to remove the "big obstacle" that is "freedom",  please go on and describe exactly how many taxes and fines are required and the level of freedom that will be permitted.  Question:  That large consumer society that is the biggest obstacle, would that happen to be the USA?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Since you like sources, here is an article that talks about the relative "density" of various power sources:

 

https://phys.org/news/2018-08-renewable-energy-sources-space-fossil.html

 

Where it says that solar power can take up to 1000 times the space of a gas powered plant of the same power.  While it says that advances could see a 3-5 times increase in solar density by the mid century, that still leaves an awful lot of "ground" to make up, ground covered in solar panels.  And, while West Texas ranchers make a lot of extra bucks putting up wind generators on their sage brush covered semi-desert acres, while still running cattle on them, it is again a low density generator, and different from covering acres with solar panels where nothing can grow under them.

 

 

Apparently, you didn't  read very far, ""The very low power densities of biomass make it a difficult sell, especially since the land on which it is produced can sometimes be used for growing food instead," Beherens says. "To avoid competition, rooftop solar will be the best bet—providing clean power that doesn't compete with other land uses. Offshore wind will help, and future technologies such as algae farms may be another option to avoid land competition."

 

Solar power efficiency is currently low. Will improve. How else to reach zero GHG emissions by 2050, without using nuclear power?

 

Solar power is a manufacturing industry. The only source of energy that can increase exponentially indefinitely. It can stay ahead of the growing demands of the growing Asian middle class, and allow significant substitution of fossil fuel.

 

I figure that by 2040, if growth is compounded 30% pa, solar could provide 60% of 2040 global electrical demand. Allowing for the electrification of trucks and rail.

 

At an efficiency gain of only 3.5% pa compounded, you would need only 10x the current acreage for solar farms by 2050.

 

Each region will have to find its own mix of power solutions, with solar power receiving incentives. For example, British Columbia receives 95% of its power from hydro. With excess being exported. Hydro combines well with renewal energy. Hydro can be cranked up during the night when solar isn't operating.

 

LNG burns cleanly. But, the extraction and transport releases a lot of methane. In any case, fracking is a dirty business. Suggest you check the literature.

 

You're a mariner. You've seen eroded coastlines and increased storm intensities. Here's a simple explanation from Columbia University of why eastern coastal cities will get very wet.

 

https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2019/05/24/wind-shear-hurricanes-east-coast/

 

Edited by HappyInVan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

My ship operates entirely within the North American ECA, so we have been burning 1.0% sulfur fuel since 2010, and 0.1% sulfur fuel since January 2015.

 

Not sure what you are referring to with dumping waste in the ocean, when you ask if it would be simple to "require ships to transfer their waste ashore"?  At present, and for the last many years, that is exactly what has been required, for most waste streams onboard ships.  No garbage is allowed overboard with the exception of ground food waste.  Sewage must be treated to minimum standards (and most cruise ships go far beyond this).  Oily water must be treated to remove oil to minimum standards (and again most cruise ships go far beyond what most cargo ships do).  "Oily residues" or "slops and sludges" from operating marine engines (used lube oil, sludges separated from fuels, etc) are either incinerated onboard, or pumped ashore for re-refining or incineration ashore.

 

 

 

That's what I wanted to hear from a ChEng, not employed by Carnival. There are cruise companies who don't use dirty fuel. Who haven't been fined by the courts for air pollution. So, passengers who are health and environment conscious have an alternative.

 

And, there are facilities for shore-side waste disposal. Therefore, there is no excuse for illegal dumping. Not so simplistic as some would think.

 

Edited by HappyInVan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Since you like sources, here is an article that talks about the relative "density" of various power sources:

 

https://phys.org/news/2018-08-renewable-energy-sources-space-fossil.html

 

Where it says that solar power can take up to 1000 times the space of a gas powered plant of the same power.  

 

Actually, this is what the report said,

 

"They found that power densities can vary by as much as 1000 times, with biomass the lowest (at 0.8 W/m2) and natural gas the highest (at 1000 W/m2). Solar and wind power needs around 40-50 times more space than coal and 90-100 times more space than gas."

 

That's '90-100 times more space than gas" not 1000x. 

 

That's a disappointing error by the ChEng.

 

FYI, this article states that...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_the_Netherlands

 

“A large part of the renewable electricity sold in the Netherlands comes from Norway, a country which generates almost all its electricity from hydropower plants. In the Netherlands, household consumers can choose to buy renewable electricity. Since 2008, the amount of renewable energy used by household users has been increasing, rising from 38% in 2008 to 41% by 2009. and up to 44% by mid 2010.”

 

What other country can boast that half their households use renewable power?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, HappyInVan said:

 

What other country can boast that half their households use renewable power?

 

 

To put your question in context, and to be clear.. Are you asking what other country (the size of the Netherlands) can boast that, or what other country in general?

 

It does make a difference..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be on a one man crusade to green power. Where do you think all those solar panels come from? where do you think all those wind turbines come from? where do you think all the materials that make all those things come from? where are all those monster batteries that store energy come from? What about all those factories world wide that manufacture all these components and the people that work in them? Then you have to transport all those to the different places to install them, by ship, train & truck. Those materials all have to be mined in some pretty out of the way locations with transport in & out of site. We have half a dozen of those solar farms in the area we live and they gave up valuable  farm land and are not that pretty to look at. Enough with the taxes we're taxed to death as it is. Carbon tax don't do a thing, we get a rebate at the  end of the year so why tax us in the first place?  I don't deny that we are living in a changing world & climate change is for real. But I also live in the real world and people like you are living in your own little world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...