Post-cruise thoughts
I've been thinking since we left the cruiseship. There is one thing fundamentally wrong about cruising. Oh, don't get me wrong - I had the time of my life, and I would do it again in a heartbeat. In fact, I'm tempted to sign up for a LONGER cruise next time. Heh.

However, the fact remains that cruising is an environmentally unsound activity. You see, those huge ships eat up a lot of fossil fuel. They burn fuel from the moment they leave one dock until they arrive in the next dock. (I assume, though I don't really know for sure, that they shut off their engines while docked.... right???) And those ships are phenomenally huge - if you haven't seen a cruise ship up close, it's very difficult to imagine the scale and size of them. But if you can imagine how big they are, you can understand that something that large must require a lot of energy to move.

Of course, they pass the economic cost to the passengers. In addition to the cruise ticket, most cruiselines hide a "fuel surcharge" into the final fare you pay, which is, we presume, the current cost of the fuel the ship eats in a day of cruising divided by the number of passengers they expect to have on board. (Since the larger ships have many thousands of passengers, it's quite telling that fuel surcharges are often over $10 per day. Sure, some of that is the rising price of petroleum.... but even allowing for that, and corporate greed which may be padding the bill a bit, this still implies a LOT of fuel burned. How far does $10 take you in your car? And remember that they probably get wholesale prices better than the per-gallon prices you get at the pump!)

But anyway, I'm not bitching about the economics of fuel burned, or how they charge passengers for it. That's a fact of life, nothing more. I'm talking about the environmental consequences of all that fuel burned. The economics are just a handy way to talk about it, since I don't happen to know facts and figures (even generalizations or guesstimates) in terms of gallons or barrels. I'm sure these numbers are huge!

So, one cruise ship burns this massive amount of fuel per day, and all the serious commercial cruise ships are running every single day, without fail. We don't have an exact number, but if we did, we could then multiply it by the number of cruise ships currently in service worldwide (another number I don't happen to have, of course... but it's a fairly large number, probably in the high hundreds), and, whatever the final result is would probably be so astounding as to make me faint.

Fossil fuel is a LIMITED resource!

See the problem yet?


Now, having experienced a cruise, I can say that I definitely don't want to see the cruise industry disappear. But neither do I want to see that kind of fuel wastage continue. It's quite a conundrum.


So, after turning this over in my mind for a long time, I came up with this idea. There are ways to power a ship without fossil fuel. A ship could, in fact, pioneer alternative energy.

Two alternative energy ideas immediately spring to mind as useful for a ship:
1. Solar panels, of course. The typical cruise ship is cruising in wide-open, sunny waters.
a. When nowhere near shore, it could extend solar panels out over the water (to the sides) - These panels could fold up when approaching land. sure, that might spoil the view a bit, which is a little less romantic and a lot less picturesque, and that's certainly an issue. But if the ship needs more energy, it's a viable solution.
b. solar panels would fit nicely on top of things or pasted to the side of the ship, too - there's a lot of surface above the water.
2. Wave energy (or the energy of water movement). While this field is fairly undeveloped, there are many ways, most experimental, but some tried and true, to harness the power of water movement.
a. One of the most interesting methods that I happen to know about is a sock or "snake" that somehow collects energy just by hanging out underwater and getting batted around by the waves. Attach a few of these to the underside of the ship, and you've got some power. (Note that this is experimental, and some critics have raised the possibility that such a device could actually affect the patterns of the waves.... though I think that's more of a worry for a larger device, and something sized to fit on the underside of a cruiseship shouldn't cause any more disruption than an eel or a large fish....)
b. There is also the older technology of a wheel (a waterwheel, I think they're called) on the back of the ship. I believe those are great for keeping a boat going once it is already under way.... And it's darn cute to look at, too! Nostalgia is design is in!
Note::: Yes, the old paddleboats pushed the boat and required power to make them move, but there's no reason why a paddle that collects energy instead couldn't be installed... is there???? Not that I'm an expert on these things....

Anyway.... those are just ideas that I could think of. I'm sure that there are many other possibilities that I haven't thought of, and it's likely that some of those are even better than the ones I've come up with. (Remember, I am not an expert in this field... or even anything close....)


So, having come up with this idea, I wonder.... could an idea like this transform the market?

You see, environmentally speaking, replacing fossil fuels with renewable and non-polluting energy is definitely an excellent idea.

For that matter, while it might be more expensive to build such a ship, it would be cheaper to run a ship like this, making it a more economical option. With less cost to run the ship, the ship could make more profit, and/or reduce the cost of the ticket (the real cost, including eliminating fuel surcharges).

Many passengers or potential passengers on cruise ships cite the price of the cruise (either total, or per day) as a significant factor in their choice of which ship to sail, or even whether to sail at all. This means more passengers, because the cruise could cost less than competitors who offer the exact same amenities but use fossil fuel. Or, the cruise could cost the same, but offer more amenities, making it more attractive because it gives you more for the same dollar.

So, for that reason alone, it seems to me that it ought to be a great idea for the market.


But, here's another issue, and one I don't know the answer to. What would potential passengers think?

In other words, if person A is going to sail on a cruise, but is not sure which one yet, would knowing that one cruise uses alternative energy matter to person A? (Yes, I know, it will matter to some people, and not to others... but HOW MANY?)

Or, perhaps I should frame the question as, how many people would give each of these answers:

A. I've never been on a cruise and I never will be, no matter what.
B. I would never cruise on a traditional cruise ship, but I would (or at least I might) cruise on a ship using alternative energy.
C. I would certainly cruise on a traditional ship, but I would prefer to cruise on a ship using alternative energy. This is true even if it costs me a little bit more or is less convenient.
D. I would certainly cruise on a traditional ship, but I would prefer to cruise on a ship using alternative energy. This is true as long as all things are equal or better otherwise - that is, the alternative energy cruise costs the same or less, the amenities I care about are the same or better, and the itinerary is as convenient as the alternative. I would still sail on a traditional ship if the alternative energy cruise was more expensive or otherwise inferior in some way, but I would prefer the alternative energy ship as long as it were able to match the traditional ship.
E. I'm up for it if it saves me money or is more convenient, but I care more about price, itinerary, amenities, or other factors than I do about the energy source used by the ship.
F. I wouldn't trust a ship powered by alternative energy, or I just don't like alternative energy on principle, and I wouldn't sail on one. I prefer the traditional ships.



Or, to make it a more personal question, if a company asked these questions, what would you say?


Anyway, I wonder what the distribution of answers would be, if someone undertook this survey on a massive scale.

It seems to me that such a cruise ship would be viable for people answering E, because I believe it would, indeed, save enough money for the company that it could cut ticket prices compared to other cruises with comparable itineraries and amenities.

However, an investor throwing around money would probably think it would be a better match for people answering B, C, or D. So, if the world has reached a point where the market overwhelmingly answers B, C, or D, then it's time for this idea.

Anyway, just some thoughts for an evening...