Smoking is such a nuisance on cruise ships

[v3cruiser]

They should have never gotten rid of the smoking/cigar lounges. Most are just unused rooms now specially on carnival or they are getting rid of the lounges entirely and moving in more staterooms. Poorly designed layout didn't help as you would have to walk through them much like the casino to get to spaces on other side.  People smoke and will bend the rules if necessary such as smoking on balcony when options are limited. I'll have a few cigars on a cruise(on the rear deck outside where it's still allowed,) reminiscent of the gilded years of transatlantic travel. It's not about smoking, but the people I meet and converse with even though a nice stogie and scotch in hand are a plus. Back when there were cigar lounges and men could discuss topics of the day and network. Things have obviously become soft and touchy-feely.  I think I'm due for a QE2 experience. 

[cruiseseal]

15 hours ago, Oceangal711 said:

while passengers hope to escape the dirty air of cities for some fresh sea air, the investigation found cruise ships are having a negative impact on the environment. One cruise ship can emit as much particulate matter as a million cars in a day. Levels of pollution on some cruise ships' decks are worse than in the world's most polluted cities. Sorry not so fresh or clean anywhere on a cruise.

Cite source please, I am pretty sure it doesn't apply to newer/larger ships. I am very sensitive to smells/pollution and I didn't notice any issues on ships I've been on (NCL Escape, NCL Gem, RC Anthem). The exhaust is very high above top deck and, unless there is a strong downdraft (which is almost never), it will never get to the top deck, not to mention lower balcony decks. On the last ship, Escape, I actually noticed that I practically couldn't see the exhaust when we were cruising at top speed. The air was always fresh on our balcony (except for those times when our neighbors decided to smoke). The deck was a different story, I often smelled smoke, even in the kids pool/play area, because of where the smoke areas were setup. Smoke areas should either be enclosed with exhaust released high above deck, or at the aft of the ship, since wind is almost always blowing if aft direction.

[chengkp75]

5 minutes ago, cruiseseal said:

Cite source please, I am pretty sure it doesn't apply to newer/larger ships. I am very sensitive to smells/pollution and I didn't notice any issues on ships I've been on (NCL Escape, NCL Gem, RC Anthem). The exhaust is very high above top deck and, unless there is a strong downdraft (which is almost never), it will never get to the top deck, not to mention lower balcony decks. On the last ship, Escape, I actually noticed that I practically couldn't see the exhaust when we were cruising at top speed. The air was always fresh on our balcony (except for those times when our neighbors decided to smoke). The deck was a different story, I often smelled smoke, even in the kids pool/play area, because of where the smoke areas were setup. Smoke areas should either be enclosed with exhaust released high above deck, or at the aft of the ship, since wind is almost always blowing if aft direction.

There are articles from German environmental groups and a British tabloid who have conducted "investigations" into this, and without stating what the environmental conditions were at the time (wind, humidity, ship speed, wind direction, ship course, etc), which any really scientific study would know and divulge as pertinent information, they took exactly one measurement and cited this as representative data.  

 

As you note, when going at a constant speed, so the load on the diesels are not changing, the exhaust is clear, and it is when an engine starts, or the load changes radically, like when docking, that diesels typically exhibit a black exhaust, just like trucks and buses when starting from a stoplight.  My suspicion is that these atmospheric "studies" take sampling when these kinds of conditions are present.

[Relax@Sea]

6 hours ago, cruiseseal said:

Cite source please, I am pretty sure it doesn't apply to newer/larger ships. I am very sensitive to smells/pollution and I didn't notice any issues on ships I've been on (NCL Escape, NCL Gem, RC Anthem). The exhaust is very high above top deck and, unless there is a strong downdraft (which is almost never), it will never get to the top deck, not to mention lower balcony decks. On the last ship, Escape, I actually noticed that I practically couldn't see the exhaust when we were cruising at top speed. The air was always fresh on our balcony (except for those times when our neighbors decided to smoke). The deck was a different story, I often smelled smoke, even in the kids pool/play area, because of where the smoke areas were setup. Smoke areas should either be enclosed with exhaust released high above deck, or at the aft of the ship, since wind is almost always blowing if aft direction.

Google this and you can read for yourself "cruise ship emissions". Note: I am not for or against this topic but try to be informed.

One ship equals:

CO2

83,676m cars

Sulphur dioxide

1.05m cars

Particle emissions

421,153 cars

NOx

83,678 cars

 

Edited November 18, 2018 by Relax@Sea

[AmazedByCruising]

 

1 hour ago, Relax@Sea said:

Google this and you can read for yourself "cruise ship emissions". Note: I am not for or against this topic but try to be informed.

One ship equals:

CO2

83,676m cars

Sulphur dioxide

1.05m cars

Particle emissions

421,153 cars

NOx

83,678 cars

 

 

I tried to google the first statistic of 83,676m cars but couldn't find it. But let's say the "m" is an error, and that it's reasonably to compare a ship and a car "per hour", and no car drives that long per day. Also let's assume that diesel used for a car isn't that different from diesel used for a ship, CO2-wise. You can only put so much C in a gallon.

 

A ship sails, let's say 10 hours a day. A car doing that, using diesel, would drive maybe 1000km. A small car would use 5 liters of diesel/100km, so 50lt/car/day. 83,676 cars would be using 4,183,800 of diesel/day. A 7 day cruise would mean that the ship would need to store 29,286,600 liters of diesel which is almost 30,000 cubic meters. 

 

Where can you fit 12 olympic swimming pools full of diesel in a cruise ship? If there are 3000 passengers on average, how are they going to pay for 10 cubic meters,  2641 gallons of diesel per passenger?

 

Not so long ago ships were literally pulled by a few people next to the canal. I may be miscalculating, but I don't see how you can possibly need an army of 80,000 cars, each stronger than a few horses, to get a ship to sail.

 

 

 

Edited November 18, 2018 by AmazedByCruising
adding image

[chengkp75]

The statistics are quoted incorrectly.  The CO2 is equivalent to 82,678 cars (not with a "m" for million behind it), the particle emissions is the 1.05m car figure, not SOX, NOX is the 421,153 cars, while SOX is actually 376m cars.  This is from the first result from googling "cruise ship emissions", which is the 2016 Guardian article here:  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/21/the-worlds-largest-cruise-ship-and-its-supersized-pollution-problem .  Scrubbers reduce SOX by 98%, and NOX and particulate by 70-80%.   Scrubber installation continues every dry docking of cruise ships since the 2016 article, so the data is somewhat outdated.  That article also claims that cruise ships burn "much more" fuel than container ships, when in fact, there are more container ships with 85Mw of main propulsion engine than there are cruise ships with that much propulsion, and these container ships also have 30Mw of diesel generators, mainly to power the vast numbers of refrigerated containers (1000+).  And since the introduction of slow steaming for container ships to save fuel, these engines operate at lower efficiencies than the flexible diesel electric plants of cruise ships.

 

The article also says that there can be up to 3 cruise ships in UK ports at a time, "with engines running 24/7" without mentioning that only one of the diesels will be running in port, as opposed to 4-6 engines while underway, hence lower emissions.  Also, in port, cruise ships use about 8-10Mw of power for hotel loads, while container ships with large refrigerated container loads will need 6-8Mw, and more if the ship has its own cranes for loading/unloading.  Finally, when ships, all ships, are in EU ports, including UK ports, the ships are required to burn low sulfur MGO (diesel fuel with 0.1% sulfur), not the 3.5% sulfur residual fuel the article uses as their basis for comparison.

[Oceangal711]

9 hours ago, cruiseseal said:

Cite source please, I am pretty sure it doesn't apply to newer/larger ships. I am very sensitive to smells/pollution and I didn't notice any issues on ships I've been on (NCL Escape, NCL Gem, RC Anthem). The exhaust is very high above top deck and, unless there is a strong downdraft (which is almost never), it will never get to the top deck, not to mention lower balcony decks. On the last ship, Escape, I actually noticed that I practically couldn't see the exhaust when we were cruising at top speed. The air was always fresh on our balcony (except for those times when our neighbors decided to smoke). The deck was a different story, I often smelled smoke, even in the kids pool/play area, because of where the smoke areas were setup. Smoke areas should either be enclosed with exhaust released high above deck, or at the aft of the ship, since wind is almost always blowing if aft direction.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/pollution-cruise-ships-po-oceana-higher-piccadilly-circus-channel-4-dispatches-a7821911.html

[Relax@Sea]

52 minutes ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

This is the site: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/21/the-worlds-largest-cruise-ship-and-its-supersized-pollution-problem This is were the data was copied from.

Cruise ships us Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) , Low Sulfur Fuel Oil (LSFO) and diesel oil each of those fuels produce different emission characteristics.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2018 by Relax@Sea

[susan1957]

I don't smoke, however I am VERY sensitive to perfumes, body lotions, and men's aftershave etc.  Do you think people would stop wearing these....hmmm. I doubt it....I think there should be 1 designated outdoor area on the ship for smoking....absolutely non indoors, ie casino, bars etc. 

 

[NLH Arizona]

2 minutes ago, susan1957 said:

I don't smoke, however I am VERY sensitive to perfumes, body lotions, and men's aftershave etc.  Do you think people would stop wearing these....hmmm. I doubt it....I think there should be 1 designated outdoor area on the ship for smoking....absolutely non indoors, ie casino, bars etc. 

 

If there was a rule about not wearing them on a cruise ship, I think the majority would not use them, but just like smoking, some would break the rules.

[AmazedByCruising]

59 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The statistics are quoted incorrectly.  The CO2 is equivalent to 82,678 cars (not with a "m" for million behind it)

 

Would you agree with my ball park calculations that the CO2 emission of a ship cannot even be near to the emission of 82,678 cars?

Edited November 19, 2018 by AmazedByCruising

[cruiseseal]

47 minutes ago, susan1957 said:

I don't smoke, however I am VERY sensitive to perfumes, body lotions, and men's aftershave etc.  Do you think people would stop wearing these....hmmm. I doubt it....I think there should be 1 designated outdoor area on the ship for smoking....absolutely non indoors, ie casino, bars etc. 

 

Never smelled a perfume from 20 meters away, or even 10 meters, and even so, perfumes are designed to smell pleasant, and aren't associated with any health risks. One cigarette can pollute a huge room with smell, not only that, cigarette smell just gets worse over time, and is virtually impossible to get rid of without replacing carpet/furniture, whereas perfumes wear off within a day or so.

[AmazedByCruising]

52 minutes ago, Relax@Sea said:

Cruise ships us Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) , Low Sulfur Fuel Oil (LSFO) and diesel oil each of those fuels produce different emission characteristics.

 

I just tried to calculate C02. There are only so many C-atoms that fit in a gallon of carbon based fuel, and that's how much CO2 molecules a ship can make from it. The amount of sulfur doesn't matter. 

[cruiseseal]

3 hours ago, Relax@Sea said:

Google this and you can read for yourself "cruise ship emissions". Note: I am not for or against this topic but try to be informed.

One ship equals:

CO2

83,676m cars

Sulphur dioxide

1.05m cars

Particle emissions

421,153 cars

NOx

83,678 cars

 

 

I believe you're completely off topic. We're not discussing pollution caused by ships, but rather, the air you breathe during the cruise. If you want to start a topic about pollution, and how we shouldn't support the cruise industry because it's bad for environment, I am sure that would be an interesting discussion, but a different one.

[cruiseseal]

3 minutes ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

I just tried to calculate C02. There are only so many C-atoms that fit in a gallon of carbon based fuel, and that's how much CO2 molecules a ship can make from it. The amount of sulfur doesn't matter. 

 

I believe Relax@Sea was referring to this article.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/21/the-worlds-largest-cruise-ship-and-its-supersized-pollution-problem

 

Not really relevant to this discussion though.

 

[AmazedByCruising]

3 minutes ago, cruiseseal said:

 

I believe Relax@Sea was referring to this article.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/21/the-worlds-largest-cruise-ship-and-its-supersized-pollution-problem

 

Not really relevant to this discussion though.

 

 

That article doesn't even mention CO2. I do see how you can get to scary articles by comparing apples to oranges.

 

Anyway, I agree it's not relevant to this thread.

[chengkp75]

9 hours ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

Would you agree with my ball park calculations that the CO2 emission of a ship cannot even be near to the emission of 82,678 cars?

Not really, and it would be a very imprecise calculation.  Remember, that fuels like diesel are formed by cracking or breaking down crude oil molecules.  Diesel fuel's molecular structure, as with all hydrocarbon fuels, will vary in it's actual molecular content depending on the source of the crude oil and the refining process used.  Typically, diesel fuels fall into the 18 Carbon atoms per molecule.  Residual fuel oils can run above 50 Carbon atoms per molecule, so there can be as much as 3 times as much Carbon in a liter of residual fuel as in diesel fuel.  Hence the varying energy contents of various fuels.  A modern cruise ship, say between 2500 to 6000 passengers, will burn about 200-400 mt (200,000 - 400,000 ltr) of fuel per day, at full speed (the variance is due to different total power figures between a 2500 pax ship and a 6000 pax ship).  So, a 7 day cruise can burn 1400-2500 mt of fuel, and you would always have a reserve, so I think a ship the size of Oasis has bunker capability of about 5000 mt.

Edited November 19, 2018 by chengkp75

[Casino Comp Chick]

9 hours ago, cruiseseal said:

One cigarette can pollute a huge room with smell, not only that, cigarette smell just gets worse over time, and is virtually impossible to get rid of without replacing carpet/furniture, whereas perfumes wear off within a day or so.

No it doesn’t wear off, it’s just that people body odor takes over at that point.

🤥

[Relax@Sea]

12 hours ago, cruiseseal said:

 

I believe Relax@Sea was referring to this article.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/21/the-worlds-largest-cruise-ship-and-its-supersized-pollution-problem

 

Not really relevant to this discussion though.

 

You asked to "Cite source"

[Relax@Sea]

12 hours ago, cruiseseal said:

Never smelled a perfume from 20 meters away, or even 10 meters, and even so, perfumes are designed to smell pleasant, and aren't associated with any health risks. One cigarette can pollute a huge room with smell, not only that, cigarette smell just gets worse over time, and is virtually impossible to get rid of without replacing carpet/furniture, whereas perfumes wear off within a day or so.

You are making a statement that is not necessarily true. Once again you are creating a scenario to go off topic.

You may want to start on new thread for how perfume affects aren't associated with any health risks.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19326669

[cruiseseal]

2 hours ago, Casino Comp Chick said:

No it doesn’t wear off, it’s just that people body odor takes over at that point.

🤥

It does wear off, unless you're right next to the person, you won't smell it the next day, and it doesn't make carpet, furniture, and everything else stink.

[cruiseseal]

5 minutes ago, Relax@Sea said:

You are making a statement that is not necessarily true. Once again you are creating a scenario to go off topic.

You may want to start on new thread for how perfume affects aren't associated with any health risks.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19326669

It's not off-topic, because perfumes are indoor smells that were compared to cigarettes. Your point about pollution is off-topic, because it doesn't affect the passengers of the ship during the cruise.

 

Also the study you mentioned doesn't focus on perfumes alone, but includes all fragrances, which includes room fresheners, cleaning products, etc.

Edited November 19, 2018 by cruiseseal

[Relax@Sea]

22 minutes ago, cruiseseal said:

It's not off-topic, because perfumes are indoor smells that were compared to cigarettes. Your point about pollution is off-topic, because it doesn't affect the passengers of the ship during the cruise.

 

Also the study you mentioned doesn't focus on perfumes alone, but includes all fragrances, which includes room fresheners, cleaning products, etc.

But you did ask to "Cite source"

[pete_coach]

Whew ....from a smoking nuisance thread to .....NoX to, Particle emissions to , Co2 to, HFO to, LSOF to, Sulfur Dioxide to, perfume to, aftershave to, body lotions to, body odors to.....I think this thread has certainly run the gamut of nose attacking substances. 🙂

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, pete_coach said:

Whew ....from a smoking nuisance thread to .....NoX to, Particle emissions to , Co2 to, HFO to, LSOF to, Sulfur Dioxide to, perfume to, aftershave to, body lotions to, body odors to.....I think this thread has certainly run the gamut of nose attacking substances. 🙂

Yep.