Cruise ship pollution concerns in South Boston

Jason · August 23, 2001

Taking a cruise is one of the most popular vacations, but there is an environmental downside. The massive ships burn the dirtiest type of fuel, even when they’re sitting in port. And for something as large as a floating city, a ship needs to generate a lot of power, around the clock, running its own generators.

“It’s just not efficient to run those generators consistently, particularly when they are running on very polluting fuels like bunker fuel which is one of the most polluting fossil fuels,” said Ryan Black of the Sierra Club. “When you have residential areas like South Boston which is right down the street from the port here… you have issues of asthma, but also heart disease, cancer, and any other kind of respiratory illness.”

The cruise industry has never more been more popular around here. In 1986, there were just 13 cruise ships in Boston serving about 12,000 passengers. Last year those numbers jumped to 117 ships with more than 380,000 passengers.

One solution to avoid the generation of so much pollution in port is to have ships plug into shore power when they are docked. That requires some changes to the infrastructure, but ports like Los Angeles and Brooklyn have been able to start making those upgrades. If ships are powered off the grid, that electricity is increasingly renewable like wind and solar. Noxious emissions can be cut by 95% percent.

Congressman Stephen Lynch, who lives within walking distance of the port of Boston, is concerned about the level of pollution created by the ships. Lynch has filed bills in the last three years trying to get some federal assistance for a big project like upgrading the electrical infrastructure along the docks. “We need to have a partnership with Massport, the federal government, the port of Boston, the state. We need to work together. That is how this is going to work.”

Massport is currently building a system to let idling planes plug into the grid at Logan Airport, but when it comes to cruise ships, a spokesman issued this statement: “Shore power holds potential and we are looking closely at it, but none of the ships that call Boston are equipped to plug into shore power and it is unknown when they will have that technology on board.”

The federal government has mandated the removal of sulfur from bunker fuel next year, but Black of the Sierra Club say that is not a substitute for going to shore power. “That still leaves the problem of carbon, volatile organics, and fine particulant matter and it would be nice to know when our kids go outside they are not breathing some of the worse emissions that frankly, are found in our industrial society.”

A spokesman for the cruise ship industry says ships follow all current environmental rules and that the industry as a whole is working to develop less polluting technologies.

Massport estimates the cruise industry supports about 7,500 jobs in the Boston area.

By WBZ-TV Chief Correspondent Joe Shortsleeve

For more cruise news & articles go to http://www.cruisecrazies.com/index.html

Re-posted on CruiseCrazies.com - Cruise News, Articles, Forums, Packing List, Ship Tracker, and more

http://www.cruisecrazies.com

Click here to view the article

Mach · July 30, 2013

So be it. Move the ships from Boston... more options for those of us who sail from other ports.

We've seen issues like this in the past that ended up driving ships away. If Boston doesn't need the economic impact of cruise ships homeporting there other ports would love it.

Our homeport, Galveston, has residences within a few blocks of the port as you can see in this picture..

Like Boston, these residences are very old and many have historical designation. No one on Galveston Island complains about the ships and there's considerably more traffic at this port than Boston will ever see.

Some ports lobby the cruise lines for years to get ships and when they get them they try to pressure the lines into making concessions, usually financial. I say move.

Jan115 · May 18, 2012

I agree that there are many more ships in other historic ports spouting the same stuff from their funnels, so why is the Sierra Club picking on Boston? I like cruising from Boston, as it's less than an hour up the road, and would hate to see the ships driven out.

rogue · May 6, 2004

So be it. Move the ships from Boston... more options for those of us who sail from other ports.
We've seen issues like this in the past that ended up driving ships away. If Boston doesn't need the economic impact of cruise ships homeporting there other ports would love it.

It is not just homeporting there, there are quite a few ships that visit there throughout the year. Boston is a great port to visit with a load of both historical and cultural excursions. We will be there in 2 weeks. We would hate to see Boston fall off the cruising map.

Mach · July 30, 2013

So be it. Move the ships from Boston... more options for those of us who sail from other ports.
We've seen issues like this in the past that ended up driving ships away. If Boston doesn't need the economic impact of cruise ships homeporting there other ports would love it.

It is not just homeporting there, there are quite a few ships that visit there throughout the year. Boston is a great port to visit with a load of both historical and cultural excursions. We will be there in 2 weeks. We would hate to see Boston fall off the cruising map.

I agree that Boston is a great port. I love the city but, trust me, the municipal governments and port authorities will most likely bend over for the Sierra Club and start making unreasonable demands of the cruise lines that both homeport and call there.

Why do these folks attack the cruise lines? They're easy targets. Do you see the Sierra Club protesting flights out of Boston Logan for pollution? Nope and you can be sure that the airlines dump VASTLY more carbon and CO2 into the air than the ships do. As was mentioned in the piece above there are new regulations in place to reduce pollutants from ships and using shore side power is a far simpler solution than they claim but those truths won't do a thing to quiet them.