Low sulphur fuel

[bazzaw]

I see that the matter of cruiseships using or not using low sulphur fuel in Sydney Harbour is in the news.

 

I recall when we went on P&O Oriana to the UK some years ago , the Captain literally stopped the ship in mid - English Channel and announced that the ships engines were changing over from bunker oil to some lighter grade fuel. He explained the difference over the loudspeakers - and we soon got underway again.

 

Barry

[cassamanda]

Saw that on the news tonight also. Poor Balmain trendies have been trying to voice there objection to having cruise ships in White Bay. StArted the first day it opened. They just found a new reason.

 

Its also one of the reasons that Rhapsody is leaving us i believe she does not use the refined diesel. Ships to Alaska all have to use low Sulphur fuel or fit expensive scrubbers.

[chengkp75]

Saw that on the news tonight also. Poor Balmain trendies have been trying to voice there objection to having cruise ships in White Bay. StArted the first day it opened. They just found a new reason.

 

Its also one of the reasons that Rhapsody is leaving us i believe she does not use the refined diesel. Ships to Alaska all have to use low Sulphur fuel or fit expensive scrubbers.

 

I wasn't aware of any emissions statutes in Australia. I'm interested in these things from a professional standpoint, so if anyone could provide a link to any law or environmental stricture in Australia, I'd appreciate it.

 

Virtually any diesel engine that runs on residual fuel oil can also operate on diesel fuel. The US ECA (Emissions Control Area) is not only for Alaska, but covers the entire North America coastline (US and Canada) out to 200nm, as well as Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the USVI. There are also ECA's in the North Sea, the Baltic, the Med (proposed), and while the ships are in EU ports.

 

For the previous poster, I'm surprised that the ship stopped in mid-Channel to switch. Generally, given the multiple engines on cruise ships, the transition is better done sequentially, and nearly every ship is capable of switching fuel while underway, without interruption of propulsion.

[chengkp75]

I've looked, and see that the low sulfur requirement is set for July 2016, but haven't found out whether it is an in port only, or a wider ECA like the US.

[cruisine21]

Saw that on the news tonight also. Poor Balmain trendies have been trying to voice there objection to having cruise ships in White Bay. StArted the first day it opened. They just found a new reason.

 

Its also one of the reasons that Rhapsody is leaving us i believe she does not use the refined diesel. Ships to Alaska all have to use low Sulphur fuel or fit expensive scrubbers.

 

Toxic and dangerous emissions belching out of cruise ships making Balmain residents sick. Maybe they need take a cruise to recover.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/nsw-state-election-2015-baird-government-vows-to-ban-highsulphur-fuels-from-cruise-terminals-20150310-140f1y.html

[chengkp75]

Toxic and dangerous emissions belching out of cruise ships making Balmain residents sick. Maybe they need take a cruise to recover.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/nsw-state-election-2015-baird-government-vows-to-ban-highsulphur-fuels-from-cruise-terminals-20150310-140f1y.html

 

So they are only targeting cruise ships? Not sure how that works in Australia, but in the US, the cruise lines would just say that cargo ships burn more fuel (more ships paying more visits) than cruise ships, and why don't they have to switch fuels? California has long had a stricter emissions regulation than the US, and required ALL ships either to switch to low sulfur fuel or plug into shore power within an hour of docking. The problem for cruise ships is the massive amount of high voltage power required to go "cold iron", and the cost of the infrastructure to the taxpayers.

[The_Big_M]

So they are only targeting cruise ships?

 

More information here:

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/mar/11/cruise-ship-pollution-nsw-liberals-pledge-to-enforce-low-sulphur-fuel

 

Note, these are only policy proposals by various parties leading to the upcoming election, and not in place nor even put forward as legislation yet.

[GUT2407]

One big issue seems the be that the geniuses that built White Bay didn't put in any electrical connections, so ships docked there have to run their engines to provide electricity.

 

Causing more pollution.

[chengkp75]

One big issue seems the be that the geniuses that built White Bay didn't put in any electrical connections, so ships docked there have to run their engines to provide electricity.

 

Causing more pollution.

 

As I've said, very few ports have the ability to power cruise ships. Cargo ships that are in the port of LA can connect to shore power at 480v, and draw the 700-1000kw power they need. A cruise ship, in order to have cables connecting to shore something smaller than mooring lines, operate at 10,000v and will draw 5-6Mw. Not sure how your long distance transmission lines work or where you step down for consumers in Australia, but in the US this requires some major urban planning, as many people don't like to be under the 10-40kvolt transmission lines.

[Kiwi Kruzer]

I wonder if thats the reason Pacific Pearl docks at the OPT. She is an old ship and my understanding is that when she was built , she was designed to use the cheap heavy oil. If you look at the port cams of her you can see the smoke coming from her funnells.

When she leaves Auckland ,we watch for her coming and we know when she is about to arrive near us as we follow the plume of smoke coming around the headland.

[chengkp75]

I wonder if thats the reason Pacific Pearl docks at the OPT. She is an old ship and my understanding is that when she was built , she was designed to use the cheap heavy oil. If you look at the port cams of her you can see the smoke coming from her funnells.

When she leaves Auckland ,we watch for her coming and we know when she is about to arrive near us as we follow the plume of smoke coming around the headland.

 

All cruise ships, even the most recent, are designed to burn heavy residual fuel, and do so today in most of the world. But, as I've said, virtually any diesel that is designed to burn residual fuel can burn diesel fuel as well. Now, whether or not the equipment is maintained in top condition to prevent smoking is a different thing altogether.

[bazzaw]

One big issue seems the be that the geniuses that built White Bay didn't put in any electrical connections, so ships docked there have to run their engines to provide electricity.

 

Causing more pollution.

 

Correct me if I am wrong - but Sydney OPT has no shore power and neither do the two cruise terminals in Brisbane.

 

The only time I have ever seen shore power being used is when I was in the Navy - then again the power that a small destroyer/submarine/patrol boat uses is vastly smaller than cruiseships

[chengkp75]

Correct me if I am wrong - but Sydney OPT has no shore power and neither do the two cruise terminals in Brisbane.

 

The only time I have ever seen shore power being used is when I was in the Navy - then again the power that a small destroyer/submarine/patrol boat uses is vastly smaller than cruiseships

 

Even in drydock, a cruise ship will run one generator, as no shipyard in the world is set up to provide the high voltage, high Mw requirements of a modern cruise vessel.

[gbenjo]

I wonder if thats the reason Pacific Pearl docks at the OPT. She is an old ship and my understanding is that when she was built , she was designed to use the cheap heavy oil. If you look at the port cams of her you can see the smoke coming from her funnells.

When she leaves Auckland ,we watch for her coming and we know when she is about to arrive near us as we follow the plume of smoke coming around the headland.

 

The Pearl does not dock at the OPT. She uses White Bay. The only time P&O uses OPT is when there is another ship at White Bay

[GUT2407]

Correct me if I am wrong - but Sydney OPT has no shore power and neither do the two cruise terminals in Brisbane.

 

The only time I have ever seen shore power being used is when I was in the Navy - then again the power that a small destroyer/submarine/patrol boat uses is vastly smaller than cruiseships

 

 

Well the Govt says that that is what is going to have to happen at White Bay.

Edited March 11, 2015 by GUT2407

[gbenjo]

Well the Govt says that that is what is going to have to happen at White Bay.

 

Maybe all the whinging Greenies in Balmain can hook there solar panels and wind farms up to White Bay and help out :rolleyes:

[GUT2407]

Maybe all the whinging Greenies in Balmain can hook there solar panels and wind farms up to White Bay and help out :rolleyes:

 

 

Now that's an idea, you might know, what happens at OPT or do the residents of The Rocks and Toaster get all fumed out?

[Tomo72]

Alan Jones is now pushing this barrow as he lives opposite OPT.

 

This will bring swift changes.

[cruiselover53]

Well the Govt says that that is what is going to have to happen at White Bay.

 

What the Government says 2 weeks before an election means nothing.I doubt whether any government will be prepared to outlay all that money.A better idea would be to level all the houses and replace with wind farms

[GUT2407]

Alan Jones is now pushing this barrow as he lives opposite OPT.

 

This will bring swift changes.

 

Well if the Parrots on the case it will become an election issue.

[gbenjo]

Alan Jones is now pushing this barrow as he lives opposite OPT.

 

This will bring swift changes.

 

And the ferries that run in and out of Circular Quay and around the harbour all day every day run on what????????? diesel I bet ..... lets get rid of them as well :mad::mad:

 

PS: Sorry Mr Jones that's ferries...not fairies.

[Tomo72]

I agree Gbenjo, but when he gets a bee in his bonnet he doesnt let up. Ask Mr Newman.

[The_Big_M]

I wonder if thats the reason Pacific Pearl docks at the OPT.

 

Pacific Pearl usually docks at White Bay (as with her sisters). In fact, she was even there today.

[The_Big_M]

Alan Jones is now pushing this barrow as he lives opposite OPT.

 

This will bring swift changes.

 

Ah, now we know why this has become a 'political issue' of late.

[The_Big_M]

 

Note, these are only policy proposals by various parties leading to the upcoming election, and not in place nor even put forward as legislation yet.

 

Today's latest is that both major parties will now run with the same policy, which is the Liberal's one. Essentially, all cruise ships at NSW ports from next year are to have maximum 0.1% sulphur content.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/nsw-state-election-2015-labor-signals-bipartisan-approach-to-cutting-use-of-high-sulphur-fuels-20150311-1415u4.html

 

As before, this is still just policy, not at legislation nor implementation yet.