Anti-cruise group flooding CDC to extend the no-sail order

Intr3pid

DIS Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2018
It looks like an anti-cruise group - allegedly Stand.Earth - is flooding CDC website with comments to extend the NSO. The CDC, of course, has been taking comments from the general public for consultation on how to safely restart cruising.


The group is providing its members standard talking points to submit to the CDC - although it's noteworthy that most points don't have much to do with COVID-19.
 
Last edited:

Snowwhyt

I've felt the Magic each time I visit!
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Could I bother you for a few details?
What day was the CDC announcement and for what time frame?
Have they extended the ban more than once?
How long was each ban?
 

Intr3pid

DIS Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2018
Could I bother you for a few details?
What day was the CDC announcement and for what time frame?
Have they extended the ban more than once?
How long was each ban?
Here is the history of the orders:
https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/index.html

Original NSO was on March 13 for 30 days. It was extended again for 100 days on April 9 and finally on July 16 until September 30.

As we have less than 8 days to do, we will probably see another announcement this week (or early next) for an extension till November or December.
 

  • Disney Cruise Line Shipboard Credits up to $1000!
    Just make your Disney Cruise Line reservation with Dreams Unlimited Travel and you’ll receive up to $1000 in shipboard credits to spend on your cruise!
    Click Here for Details

    Already have a Disney Cruise Line reservation booked?
    If you booked your DCL reservation within the last 30 days, Email us (DreamsCruise@DreamsUnlimitedTravel.com) to see if we can save you money, apply a Shipboard Credit, or recieve our Exclusive Gift!
    *Deposit paid. Not paid in full. Other Restrictions Apply.

  • Marc D

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 27, 2016
    It was reported that Carnival sent letters last week to their employees saying that the order had been extended into October already (and that they therefore could not renew their contracts). I found that strange since no public announcement was made.
     

    BartmanLA

    Mouseketeer
    Joined
    Apr 26, 2013
    That movement is against cruising in general, because of environmental and labor issues. The pandemic is just another way for them to disrupt the industry.
    Yes you could tell, they kept using the same phrases over and over in relation to the environmental issues. "cruises burn the cheapest dirtiest fuel there is" and "ships dump toxic waste overboard when at sea in violation of international law" etc... comments were repeatedly using such wording and demanding a end to cruising until "green" alternatives could be sourced.
     

  • EXCLUSIVE - Dreams Unlimited Travel Gift Basket!
    Book your Disney Cruise Line vacation through Dreams Unlimited Travel and receive an exclusive, complimentary Gift Basket. This Gift Basket is a result of client feedback as well as posts from DISboards.com; we call it our “What you didn't know you needed on a Disney Cruise Kit”.
    Click Here for Details

  • TiggerBouncy

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Mar 4, 2013
    Yes you could tell, they kept using the same phrases over and over in relation to the environmental issues. "cruises burn the cheapest dirtiest fuel there is" and "ships dump toxic waste overboard when at sea in violation of international law" etc... comments were repeatedly using such wording and demanding a end to cruising until "green" alternatives could be sourced.

    I had another thread on this (Should cruising return...).

    The information that they spread (as is often the case) is old, if not downright false. It is true that many older ships have horrible carbon footprints. Many of the newest ships use LNG, Fuel Cells, and some even have zero landfill cruises (everything is recycled or recovered).
     

    HiStitch626

    Tookie bah wah bah!
    Joined
    Sep 21, 2020
    I had another thread on this (Should cruising return...).

    The information that they spread (as is often the case) is old, if not downright false. It is true that many older ships have horrible carbon footprints. Many of the newest ships use LNG, Fuel Cells, and some even have zero landfill cruises (everything is recycled or recovered).
    Hopefully more ships, including DCL, will follow these protocols. In the future, monetary penalties for illegal dumping and fuel loss should be much higher.
     

    BadPinkTink

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Mar 13, 2015
    Honestly I wouldn't worry about these anti cruise groups sending in all these comments. The people compiling the comments for the CDC will not take any notice of them. It will be so easy to separate them from the genuine comments from individuals. The cruise industry are well aware of these anti cruise groups and they will be ignored.
     
  • TiggerBouncy

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Mar 4, 2013
    Yes, but the current fleet is still less environmentally friendly.
    This is true. And it's very doubtful they would ever be converted as the cost would be prohibitive - assuming the hull could even support it. But the answer to that isn't to just lay down a law that suddenly all those things can not longer be used. If that's the approach we are going to take, we should ban all trucks that are run off gas, and all cars that are not at a minimum hybrids (if not better) starting immediately. You own a car from 3 years ago? TOO BAD. Turn it in and maybe we give you a $5 credit toward buying a tesla.

    The industry wants to move to cleaner anyway. It's cheaper for them to be honest. Plus, they can parade around their green initiatives. I have no problem with encouraging them to move it along by making carbon credits more expensive. But it would be crazy to just suddenly out of the blue decide that as of tomorrow you can't operate.
     

    HiStitch626

    Tookie bah wah bah!
    Joined
    Sep 21, 2020
    This is true. And it's very doubtful they would ever be converted as the cost would be prohibitive - assuming the hull could even support it. But the answer to that isn't to just lay down a law that suddenly all those things can not longer be used. If that's the approach we are going to take, we should ban all trucks that are run off gas, and all cars that are not at a minimum hybrids (if not better) starting immediately. You own a car from 3 years ago? TOO BAD. Turn it in and maybe we give you a $5 credit toward buying a tesla.

    The industry wants to move to cleaner anyway. It's cheaper for them to be honest. Plus, they can parade around their green initiatives. I have no problem with encouraging them to move it along by making carbon credits more expensive. But it would be crazy to just suddenly out of the blue decide that as of tomorrow you can't operate.
    I agree. But while older ships are still sailing with older systems that may lead to pollution issues, the companies who run those ship should be more vigilant.
     

    Snowwhyt

    I've felt the Magic each time I visit!
    Joined
    Nov 2, 2008
    This is true. And it's very doubtful they would ever be converted as the cost would be prohibitive - assuming the hull could even support it. But the answer to that isn't to just lay down a law that suddenly all those things can not longer be used. If that's the approach we are going to take, we should ban all trucks that are run off gas, and all cars that are not at a minimum hybrids (if not better) starting immediately. You own a car from 3 years ago? TOO BAD. Turn it in and maybe we give you a $5 credit toward buying a tesla.

    The industry wants to move to cleaner anyway. It's cheaper for them to be honest. Plus, they can parade around their green initiatives. I have no problem with encouraging them to move it along by making carbon credits more expensive. But it would be crazy to just suddenly out of the blue decide that as of tomorrow you can't operate.
    So if they did that additional mid section(costly extension of ship) to the Dream class or Magic class, the hull still could not hold the LNG system?
     

    Starwind

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    May 7, 2014
    So if they did that additional mid section(costly extension of ship) to the Dream class or Magic class, the hull still could not hold the LNG system?
    No so simple. There are differences in storage, engine, safety and fire systems, many other systems and architecture. Plus the training and protocols for the "what if" something goes very very wrong as the nuances and responses to "very very wrong" have differences with LNG vs diesel. [tho training is probably the easy part of the grand equation].
     

    TiggerBouncy

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Mar 4, 2013
    No so simple. There are differences in storage, engine, safety and fire systems, many other systems and architecture. Plus the training and protocols for the "what if" something goes very very wrong as the nuances and responses to "very very wrong" have differences with LNG vs diesel. [tho training is probably the easy part of the grand equation].
    It *is* possible from what I understand. I did find reference to it from an old Carnival study: "Although the cruise industry has explored retrofitting older ships to handle LNG, Carnival's Strang said that is not likely because of the expense and need to take ships out of service for long periods. "

    Another problem with moving the LNG and why it takes time is that it's not widely available in ports. Cruise ships right now use Bunkering fuel as that's what cargo ships use, so it's what they can get their hands on. LNG has to be stored at ultra-low temperatures.

    Then, nothing is ever perfect. stand.earth actually doesn't support LNG. They want diesel instead of bunkering. But that's based on a completely non-scientific study done by one of their members with no basis in fact. So even after switching the the cleanest fuel available on the planet, stand.earth will still not be happy - and ironically - wants a less clean fuel to be used. <boggle>

     

    Starwind

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    May 7, 2014
    It *is* possible from what I understand. I did find reference to it from an old Carnival study: "Although the cruise industry has explored retrofitting older ships to handle LNG, Carnival's Strang said that is not likely because of the expense and need to take ships out of service for long periods. "

    Another problem with moving the LNG and why it takes time is that it's not widely available in ports. Cruise ships right now use Bunkering fuel as that's what cargo ships use, so it's what they can get their hands on. LNG has to be stored at ultra-low temperatures.

    Then, nothing is ever perfect. stand.earth actually doesn't support LNG. They want diesel instead of bunkering. But that's based on a completely non-scientific study done by one of their members with no basis in fact. So even after switching the the cleanest fuel available on the planet, stand.earth will still not be happy - and ironically - wants a less clean fuel to be used. <boggle>

    Interesting.

    See https://www.offshore-energy.biz/carnival-corp-retrofitting-to-lng-is-not-an-option/

    Then there is this article on the "crazy idea" of lengthening the ship by adding a prebuilt lng component in the middle and the pros and cons: https://safety4sea.com/retrofitting-cruise-ships-to-lng-by-elongation/

    And a slide presentation about converting to lng and the "crazy idea" with some more details and pictures that help explain the concept.

    Also

    Some googling turned up the Friends of the Earth website who does an annual "report card" on cruise ships.

    According to them, for Disney:

    "However, all of Disney’s ships burn fuel with a 0.1% sulfur content worldwide which is lower than what is required internationally, earning the company an A- in the air pollution reduction category. The Disney Wonder traveled to Alaska annually from 2011 to 2019 and received no violations of state water pollution standards. In addition, Disney does not utilize scrubbers on its fleet, giving Disney an A for water quality compliance." [ https://foe.org/cruise-lines/disney-cruise-line/ ]

    This organization goes even further than stand.earth though, https://foe.org/blog/what-would-a-clean-cruising-industry-look-like/ :

    Here are the top 5 things the cruise industry can do now to get to clean cruising:

    1) Climate Change: Stop contributing to climate change.

    (1.1) Publicly commit to achieving zero emissions across your entire global fleet by 2050 at the latest, with a 40% reduction in the first decade, followed by a minimum of 5% year-over-year reductions from 2030-2050. (1.2) Immediately progress towards your absolute greenhouse gas reduction targets by implementing a slow-steaming protocol across your entire fleet. (1.3) Halt liquified natural gas (LNG) investments, and redirect those resources towards zero emissions strategies, including research, development, and testing of sustainable fuels such as green hydrogen or ammonia. (1.4) In order to reduce unhealthy and climate-harming black carbon emissions, publicly commit to immediately cease the use and carriage of high sulfur fuel oil (HSFO) globally and the use of both HSFO and very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) in the Arctic. Switch to distillate/marine gas oil (MGO) and install efficient particulate filter systems or switch to other cleaner non-fossil fuels, technologies, or propulsion systems.


    So they are against LNG *and* diesel...

    They also encouraged their supporters to "Tell the CDC" to "Extend the No Sail Order for polluting and unsafe cruises!". They have a number of "Cruise Industry Restart Demands" that go well beyond pollution-related concerns at https://foe.org/blog/cruise-industry-restart-demands/

    So stand.earth is not alone in attempting to take advantage of the covid no sail order situation to leverage a broader anti-cruise agenda.

    SW
     

    TiggerBouncy

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Mar 4, 2013
    Interesting.

    See https://www.offshore-energy.biz/carnival-corp-retrofitting-to-lng-is-not-an-option/

    Then there is this article on the "crazy idea" of lengthening the ship by adding a prebuilt lng component in the middle and the pros and cons: https://safety4sea.com/retrofitting-cruise-ships-to-lng-by-elongation/

    And a slide presentation about converting to lng and the "crazy idea" with some more details and pictures that help explain the concept.

    Also

    Some googling turned up the Friends of the Earth website who does an annual "report card" on cruise ships.

    According to them, for Disney:

    "However, all of Disney’s ships burn fuel with a 0.1% sulfur content worldwide which is lower than what is required internationally, earning the company an A- in the air pollution reduction category. The Disney Wonder traveled to Alaska annually from 2011 to 2019 and received no violations of state water pollution standards. In addition, Disney does not utilize scrubbers on its fleet, giving Disney an A for water quality compliance." [ https://foe.org/cruise-lines/disney-cruise-line/ ]

    This organization goes even further than stand.earth though, https://foe.org/blog/what-would-a-clean-cruising-industry-look-like/ :

    Here are the top 5 things the cruise industry can do now to get to clean cruising:

    1) Climate Change: Stop contributing to climate change.

    (1.1) Publicly commit to achieving zero emissions across your entire global fleet by 2050 at the latest, with a 40% reduction in the first decade, followed by a minimum of 5% year-over-year reductions from 2030-2050. (1.2) Immediately progress towards your absolute greenhouse gas reduction targets by implementing a slow-steaming protocol across your entire fleet. (1.3) Halt liquified natural gas (LNG) investments, and redirect those resources towards zero emissions strategies, including research, development, and testing of sustainable fuels such as green hydrogen or ammonia. (1.4) In order to reduce unhealthy and climate-harming black carbon emissions, publicly commit to immediately cease the use and carriage of high sulfur fuel oil (HSFO) globally and the use of both HSFO and very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) in the Arctic. Switch to distillate/marine gas oil (MGO) and install efficient particulate filter systems or switch to other cleaner non-fossil fuels, technologies, or propulsion systems.


    So they are against LNG *and* diesel...

    They also encouraged their supporters to "Tell the CDC" to "Extend the No Sail Order for polluting and unsafe cruises!". They have a number of "Cruise Industry Restart Demands" that go well beyond pollution-related concerns at https://foe.org/blog/cruise-industry-restart-demands/

    So stand.earth is not alone in attempting to take advantage of the covid no sail order situation to leverage a broader anti-cruise agenda.

    SW
    They are asking too much and being unreasonable, IMHO. There is no way for the industry to comply with those demands. One of the things my company teaches in management class is that goals have to be achievable. You can't give someone goals they can't possibly meet and expect them to comply.

    These are not demands for safe cruising or responsible cruising. These are thinly veiled attempts to completely shut down the industry.

    LNG gas is at least something that is feasible today, exists and works. Do not even get me started on the Friends of Earth demands.
     
    Walt Disney World Resort Reservations Available Through End of 2021






    Connect

    Disney News and Updates

    Book your Disney Cruise through Dreams Unlimited Travel and receive a Shipboard Credit and an Exclusive Gift Basket!



    DECK PLANS


    STATEROOMS


    ITINERARIES






    SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY EMAIL
    Subscribe and never miss out on Disney News, Deals and Updates.





    Top