Break-down of the Cruise Ship Caribbean Princess
The cruise ship, ‘Caribbean Princess’, a colossus of the cruise ship world, visited Cobh last week. Cobh is one of its regular pit stops. Having paid its respects, the 290-metre (950-foot) liner with 3,306 passengers and 1,158 crew members, set sail for Dublin. When the cruise ship had sailed 25 miles south-east of the capital, it broke down.
The ship’s engines failed. The ship drifted along the Wicklow coast for nine hours. It was a fearful and tragic scenario when the 17-deck tall, ‘grand class’ behemoth of the seas was aimlessly bobbing about, carried along by currents of air and water, with no clear purpose or goal carrying a population aboard that was ten times the village of Timoleague.
An easterly wind might have been blowing at the time. However, there was no easterly wind, thus ensuring the liner did not run aground off the Dublin or Wicklow coast. Thus, a tragedy of Titanic proportions was avoided.
Terrorist activity?
Soon after this incident, bizarre rumours circulated of terrorists having hijacked the vessel. The phenomenon of hijacking is not new. The UK vice-admiral told the Daily Mail that the next target for ISIS could be a cruise ship. After all, the Achille Lauro remains fresh in the memory of maritime security geeks.
Ship, amenities and passengers safe
Further, a book had been written recently by a former director of security for Princess Cruises, the US company that runs the vessel. Titled ‘Cruising for Trouble,’ the book specifically addresses the potential of a cruise ship as a target for Muslim terrorist. Luckily, none of these 3 were factors in the Caribbean Princess breakdown. It was due to a ‘technical glitch’. No one on board had been in any danger. Everyone was ‘safe and secure’ and the ship did not lose total power. Air conditioning, lighting and hotel services all continued to function even during this emergency.
Factors other than terrorism – Pollution? (emissions from the fuel burning)
Public concern at ‘ship pollution’ is growing.
- Residents’ groups in Greenwich, near London, are mounting a high court challenge. This is based on the concept of ‘ship pollution’ and on the fact that London has already exceeded its annual pollution limit. The outcome could have some repercussions for the liner trade in Cobh, Bantry and Dublin. The point at issue in Greenwich is council approval for the construction of a new wharf that will handle 55 cruise liners annually. Locals oppose the wharf and the increased liner traffic.
- As per reports from ‘Travel Industry Today’, the liners will burn about 700 litres of diesel an hour for six months of the year. Environmental consultants estimate this as an equivalent of 688 trucks permanently running their engines at Enderby Wharf in Greenwich. Larger ships would emit as many diesel fumes as 2,000 trucks a day. Greenwich residents complain that, as ships get bigger, the pollution gets worse.
- Fred Pearce, an environmental consultant to New Scientist, revealed some years ago that sixteen of the world’s largest ships can produce as much sulphur pollution as all the world’s cars.
- The environmental organisation Friends of the Earth argues that cruise ships are responsible for significant air pollution because of the dirty fuel that they burn even while at dock. The dirty-diesel engines provide electrical power to passengers and crew that, according to environmentalists, can lead to serious problems such as serious cardiovascular problems, premature death, acid rain, habitat destruction and climate change.
- As opposition to the new generation of ‘mega’ liners is strengthening in Britain, support for them is intensifying in this country. The Port of Cork, which last year catered for 57 cruise liners in Cobh, expects to increase that number to 75 visits a year by 2019. In the next two to four years, the port company hopes to welcome gigantic liners that are similar to the 1,188ft-long Harmony of the Seas, which can carry 6,780 passengers and 2,100 crewmembers.
Onus on the Port of Cork
It may be noted here that neither environmentalists working for Cork County Council nor the Port of Cork have advised the public on the pollution impact on Cobh of these vessels, despite the fact that they are effectively floating towns powered by the largest diesel engines in the world. The Port of Cork must now show good reason for promoting an industry that has huge pollution implications.
The State-owned company last year saw its revenue increase by 12.9% to €29.8m (largely from charges to port users, liners and property rental increases). Cobh overtook Dublin in terms of cruise business and, for the first time ever, the number of passengers from cruise ships went above the 100,000 mark.
The company also said that estimated tourist input to the local economy from cruise ships was about €4m a year. The Port of Cork gave no breakdown as to where most of the money was generated – Cobh, Cork, Blarney or Killarney. It is belatedly realising that it could become a pollution hot spot, as could Bantry should the liner trade continue to develop in that part of West Cork.
Technology for prevention/reduction of pollution
Cold ironing technology allows cruise ships at the dock to plug into shore-side power and receiving electricity to operate their refrigeration, cooling heating, and lighting systems without having to burn dirty fuel in ship engines.
Due to the additional expenses, few cruise lines are prepared to adopt the procedures. It seems that planning permission does not require a cleaner operation, nor do health feasibility studies have to be undertaken.The Royal Caribbean shipping line countered that the ‘cold ironing technology’ proposal with the argument that only six of the 490 ports that their cruise ships visit worldwide have shore power.
Question on hand for the Port of Cork
Let alone the arguments for or against, it is a fact that cruise ships at dock run dirty diesel engines to provide electrical power to passengers and crew.Should Cork County Council have demanded that the Port of Cork provide an onshore power supply for visiting liners so that the vessels could turn off their engines while berthed?
Did you subscribe for our daily newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Southern Star
