Largest Cruise Ship Inaugral Voyage

[jeanathon]

The "boat" clocks in at .2 nautical miles, and looks like an amusement park from above.
https://www.dw.com/en/worlds-largest...ail/a-68104785

[MicHughV]

I believe the fuel consumption is about 6" to the gallon.

[hpeer]

Where is it going, which ports do I need to avoid?

[Bowdrie]

I'm sure not a naval architect, but I think I know why "ships" like that are perhaps not allowed in the N. Atlantic in wintertime.
I always wonder what the stability curve looks like?

[hpeer]

My guess is the stability curve looks a lot like a tranverse secrion of the hull, upside down.

[DragonflyBob]

Sailing Anarchy had an article on their front page about this monster on how much greenhouse gases it will emit. It referenced an article about on the automotive website Jalopnik that had this:

“Unfortunately for the world, cruise ships running on natural gas sometimes leak methane directly into the atmosphere, which is around 80 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. A 2023 investigation concluded that ships switching to LNG was a net detriment to the climate. It doesn’t bode well, then, that Royal Caribbean has a history of dumping chemicals, and was given an “F” report card for its fleet by the non-profit organization Friends Of The Earth.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, an average cruise ship emits more soot per day than 1 million cars. In fact, cruise ships make up just one percent of the world’s large boats, but account for more than six percent of the world’s black carbon (soot) emissions. Black carbon isn’t good anywhere, really, but it’s particularly bad in the Arctic, where it settles on snow and ice, accelerating the rate at which glaciers melt.”

I wonder how many environmental NIMBY’s book vacations on cruise ships with no thought to the kind of damage these ships do to the environment as well as being eyesores of the worst kind.

[CaptTom]

Beyond ugly, I see some practical issues.

For one, I don't see a "promenade deck." You know, some place you can just stroll, walk or jog around the ship, in open air, looking out over the water. There's one open deck at the stern, but that looks like it.

Also, with all that amusement-park stuff on the upper decks, where can I go at night to just relax and look at the stars, while everyone else is down in the bars and casinos? Looks to me like a lot of them be up there with me, elbow-to-elbow, partying and riding the rides.

And, no, you wouldn't want to cross the Atlantic in that thing.

[Lee Jerry]

Wow! There's an awful lot of hate going on in this thread.

Originally Posted by MicHughV

I believe the fuel consumption is about 6" to the gallon.

At least half that fuel consumption goes to hotel loads.

Originally Posted by hpeer

Where is it going, which ports do I need to avoid?

There are probably at least two dozen websites that will give you the ship's itinerery.

Originally Posted by Bowdrie

...but I think I know why "ships" like that are perhaps not allowed in the N. Atlantic in wintertime.

Can you elaborate on this? For example, not allowed by whom?

Originally Posted by DragonflyBob

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, an average cruise ship emits more soot per day than 1 million cars.

That's a near meaningless statement. Cars and cruise ships do completely different things. Maybe a million RVs would be a better comparison.

Also, soot is only one component of air pollution. The "average" cruise ship has what, maybe 100,000 hp (probably less)? The Toyota Camry (best selling car in USA) has ~200 hp; let's conservatively say the average car is 150 hp. Who thinks the 100,000 hp in the ship produces more air pollution than the 150,000,000 hp in the cars? (Unless those cars are just sitting in the garage...that's another difference, the cruise ship is actually used.)

In fact, cruise ships make up just one percent of the world’s large boats, but account for more than six percent of the world’s black carbon (soot) emissions.

I assume this is referring to commercial ships (and excludes war ships). The large cargo ships are carrying 20 crew (and a bunch of cargo) at economical speed. The cruise ship is carrying several thousand passengers plus their crap, food to feed them, keep them comfortable (HVAC), entertain them, etc., at various speeds to make that day's schedule. Not real surprising which is more polluting.

I wonder how many environmental NIMBY’s book vacations on cruise ships with no thought to the kind of damage these ships do to the environment as well as being eyesores of the worst kind.

Should people not take vacations?

Originally Posted by CaptTom

For one, I don't see a "promenade deck." You know, some place you can just stroll, walk or jog around the ship, in open air, looking out over the water.

The jogging track is on the 5th deck.

Also, with all that amusement-park stuff on the upper decks, where can I go at night to just relax and look at the stars, while everyone else is down in the bars and casinos? Looks to me like a lot of them be up there with me, elbow-to-elbow, partying and riding the rides.

The biggest issue with regard to star gazing is the (nearby) light pollution. There are ususally places you can go that are quieter than others.

[Bowdrie]

Originally Posted by Bowdrie

I'm sure not a naval architect, but I think I know why "ships" like that are perhaps not allowed in the N. Atlantic in wintertime.
I always wonder what the stability curve looks like?

Originally Posted by Lee Jerry

Wow! There's an awful lot of hate going on
Can you elaborate on this? For example, not allowed by whom?

I only quoted myself, and I used the word "perhaps", like in "maybe".
I can't elaborate, maybe the insurance companies?
I know that many ships have "Plimsoll Marks" that show what the ships draft cannot exceed at various places/oceans on the globe.
I could easily be wrong, but I do wonder about their stability.
Oh, the word "hate" is very strong, I've not seen any real "hate" in this thread.
That some of us don't gush over the latest floating circus that appears to be a combination of Disneyland and Los Vegas that's set upon a car-carrier hull doesn't qualify as "hate".

[Mickeyrouse]

I can’t think of much worse punishment than spending a week on a boat with 10,000 people (7,500 passengers, 2,500 crew). It looks like a cruise at the lowest common denominator. Whole Pacific islands in WW II were invaded with fewer people. Only dreary nightmares can imagine the pollution in its wake.

[babyhauler]

My style would be more like rowboat across the Atlantic, but it doesn't matter what I think, my wife loves Royal Caribbean cruises, so I love them too. I'm sure someday I'll end up on this ship.

We do deeply discounted off season cruises. I spend my time on the flow rider, climbing wall and ice skating. Usually the lines are short. These ships also have terrific gyms. I also like watching sunrise/sunset on high up decks.

Tip- easy to get front row seats at the shows on the ships

Tip- in ports, skip all the excursions and just hire a taxi wherever you want to go. Some of the resorts you can visit from cruise ship ports are quite nice

The best things cruise ships could do to improve the experience is create regulations about who is authorized to wear bathing suits.

[Ryban]

The other thing to remember about cruises it that most people are flying in to town to board their ships, which has its own environmental baggage -- no pun intended.

Originally Posted by Lee Jerry

Should people not take vacations?

This is actually not a terrible question. I personally do feel guilty if I fly somewhere to only spend a week or two, and we don't do that very often. But we're also not going to solve our problems as a society by putting the onus on the individual. Absolutely make choices that lessen your impact, but do remember that the idea of the "carbon footprint" was popularized by oil companies to shift blame.

It's far more effective to enact policies that lessen everyone's impact, without having to goad unwilling people into lifestyle changes. Most of us are not selfless and when it comes down to it, the choices we make as individuals are largely going to be motivated by money and our own personal desires.

[Mickeyrouse]

I have never taken a cruise, and the more I learn of such monstrosities, I am increasingly less likely. I see nothing that resembles anything of a sea-going, maritime experience. Disneyworld looks like less hassle, no more expensive with less chance of seasickness or sinking, with maybe better food. I am reminded of what Samuel Johnson said about going to sea versus prison.

[hpeer]

Yes I HATE them.

I see what happens to the towns they come into.

You don’t have to hate them, thats your business.

I do, thats my business.

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Lee Jerry

Wow! There's an awful lot of hate going on in this thread...

I noticed that too. All of your points were exactly what was going on in my mind.

But, when in Rome and all... I did join in with a couple of quibbles. My point was that these "amusement park" ships aren't exactly set up for my preferred activities. One reason I can enjoy cruising even though I hate crowds is that I'm a contrarian. When everyone else is packed like sardines on the pool deck getting skin cancer, I'm down below in the air-conditioned spaces. And at night when they're in the bars and casinos, I'm out on deck enjoying the stars and the sea air. Unfortunately the cruise lines are getting smarter about keeping people out on deck at night now. Oh well.

As for the environmental impact, I'm with you on calling BS. Sure, some will cite numbers out of context for click-bait headlines. But the reality is that, just by living, we all contribute to the problem. The solution is to work toward implementing alternatives. For example, I don't fault policy makers for flying to an environmental conference by private jet. They're using today's technology to plan the implementation of tomorrow's.

Is the hobo living in a cardboard box under a bridge a hero, because he's using less energy than the scientist who drives every day to a job where they're researching and building clean energy solutions?

Sure, work toward a better future. But we all have to live our lives with what we have available today.