3308 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

The timing of those terminals was poor and coincided with the market crash.

 

Meanwhile Victoria has done absolutely nothing to beautify the atrocious eyesore that is Ogden Point since the 1960s. Not even in the 2010s when two other terminals appeared on the Island has Ogden Point changed. Now we're so full of ourselves, that we're telling the GVHA to curtail growth, install ground power, or else.

[aastra]

 

Meanwhile, the shore power issue remains regardless of where you try to push the ships. Nobody mentions it, nobody cares....

 

 

Victoria city council has passed a controversial cruise ship motion... that would limit the number of cruise ships allowed to dock in the city each year, and prevent any long term contracts from being signed...

"there are no jobs on a dead planet..."

 

Can you really save the world by possibly relocating a portion of an environmental issue to a new site ~70 miles away while otherwise leaving it exactly as is?

[aastra]

 

The timing of those terminals was poor and coincided with the market crash.

 

Victoria is immune to the larger economy? Or do the cruise lines satisfy their Jones Act obligations by visiting the ports that will make them the most money?

 

From that 2010 Globe and Mail article:

 

 

The band's business representative, Darryl Anderson, blamed the lack of traffic on a sharp decline in the number of cruise ships plying B.C. waters since the global recession hit 18 months ago.

"Ourselves and every other port on the coast with the exception of Victoria are in a really difficult market this year," he said. "Campbell River as the newest entry certainly feels the pain the most."

 

The band's business plan for the terminal, created in 2004 and 2005 when cruise-ship traffic in North America was growing by about 7 per cent a year, failed to anticipate how the industry would react to a sudden downturn, Mr. Anderson said.

Instead of exploring alternative ports on B.C.'s West Coast, such as Campbell River, Nanaimo and Prince Rupert, cruise-ship companies have responded by sticking with the tried-and-true option of Victoria in a bid to keep costs down, he said.

"In this economic climate, you're not going to displace business from an established port of call," Mr. Anderson said.

[aastra]

By the way, one time I asked why the Vancouver/Seattle/Victoria area doesn't have local cruises on smaller ships as per the Greek Islands model. Turns out there's at least one cruise line (American Cruise Lines) that offers such cruises.

 

 

Puget Sound and San Juan Islands Cruise

Travel to where the Cascade and Olympic Mountains meet the sea, forming the stunning Puget Sound and San Juan Islands archipelago. Cruise the clear blue waters to picturesque historic seaside towns such as Anacortes where you can partake in a traditional smoked salmon tasting.

As you journey through the San Juan Islands, witness abundant wildlife including whales, eagles, and seals. Enjoy the scenic beauty of the region on our customized shore excursions to Butchart Gardens with its flower-adorned archways and Olympic National Park where you will witness breathtaking vistas.

https://www.american...-islands-cruise

Edited by aastra, 20 October 2019 - 04:44 PM.

[Mike K.]

It's no secret we're a cheap port: there's nothing at the port to pay for.

 

And whatever happened to Victoria being a supply port?

[Sparky]

By the way, one time I asked why the Vancouver/Seattle/Victoria area doesn't have local cruises on smaller ships as per the Greek Islands model. Turns out there's at least one cruise line (American Cruise Lines) that offers such cruises.

The American Constellation was tied up in Port Angeles last week. Very small exclusive cruise ship. Looks quite nice. First class port hopping around the Puget Sound.

[Nparker]

Can you really save the world by possibly relocating a portion of an environmental issue to a new site ~70 miles away while otherwise leaving it exactly as is?

The CoV council believes my not using a "single use" plastic bag, will save the world from hundreds of additional coal-fired power plants being built in China.

[LJ]

except now imagine the potential cruiser in south carolina researching cruises.  she sees two leaving seattle around the same time.  both 7 days to alaska and back.  both roughly the same price.  but one stops in victoria.  she's heard all kinds of good things about victoria and it looks lovely when she googles it.  the other one stops in some canadian port she can't even pronounce let alone see much info about.  the victoria trip wins out.

Unfortunately in the future "she" is not going to hear all kind of good things about Victoria, it's going to be homeless bums, drug addicts and protesters.

[Stephen James]

I'm sure that Nanaimo would love to take the extra vessels if they are curtailed in Victoria.

 

Nanaimo has been trying for years to expand the cruise ship visits.  

oh yeah, because Nanaimo has been on everyone's list around the world to visit for years!

[Stephen James]

I certainly don’t feel good or bad for that industry, but their revenues are not a license to make demands purely on the basis of what they earn.

The City of Victoria generates $250 million in revenues from businesses and residents and every year they raise taxes at two or three times the rate of inflation, driven largely by the purse strings of the downtown business community, which is heavily dependent on tourism.

Would the City of Victoria be in a position to ask for ever increasing sums of money if it weren’t for the cruise ship industry? What about jobs in the City of Victoria? How many jobs would be lost if the cruise ship season were constrained to June-August, and 30% fewer vessels arrived?

We should consider ourselves fortunate that half a million people visit our city thanks to cruise ships. Edmonton doesn’t have that luxury.

Circular argument, lol and a distraction.

Not to mention, you seem to be suggesting that, despite how profitable they are, we should use my money, through taxes, to pay for their shore power?   So, no matter how much money the cruise industry makes, net-net, the very fact they would threaten to skip Victoria is reason enough to cave and do what they want?  This is a strategy?  

 

The "demand" made of the cruise ship industry is only that, like every delivery truck, car, bus, human being on the planet, we're all asked not to spew diesel fumes into a community when it's not necessary and, at the same time, carcinogenic and destructive to the planet.

This demand is being made of one of the most profitable, least taxed, industries that exist.  If we give our tax money for this we're dupes, being taken for a ride and deserve to pay for our stupidity.  

Not saying we won't be; plenty of examples in the past.

[Mike K.]

Circular argument, lol and a distraction.

Not to mention, you seem to be suggesting that, despite how profitable they are, we should use my money, through taxes, to pay for their shore power?   So, no matter how much money the cruise industry makes, net-net, the very fact they would threaten to skip Victoria is reason enough to cave and do what they want?  This is a strategy? 

 

Isn't it what we want?

[Stephen James]

Isn't it what we want?

I want the cruise industry to shut the engines off and connect to shore power and I think they should use their considerable profits to pay for it.

[Mike K.]

I think we all want the same things, but where we differ is how we're going about getting them.

 

I don't think the City of Victoria curtailing the growth of the industry, while demanding immediate shore power, is a smart move. Even the mayor stepped back her demands when she realized how damaging her earlier stance could actually be.

[Stephen James]

June 2019: 

"Carnival Corporation was fined $20 million for violating its probation for environmental offenses that led to a $30 million fine in 2017. The company logged 800 offenses of its conditions of probation in the first year -- many of these (such as discharging plastics) is even worse than the original offenses leading to the $30 million fine. Looking at it from Carnival's perspective, the $50 million total in fines is about 0.7% of their total profit on which they pay no corporate income tax. The fine is similar to a person earning $100,000 being fined $700. Kind of tickles your feet, rather than a slap on the wrist."

May 2019:  (this is Norway going after NCL!)

"Maritime Executive reports the Norwegian Maritime Authority has fined Greek cruise ship operator Global Cruise Lines Ltd. a total of $80,000 for using 0.17 percent sulfur fuel in a 0.10 percent sulfur ECA zone. In March, new Norwegian environmental requirements for emissions in several protected fjords - the Nærøyfjord, Aurlandsfjord, Geirangerfjord, Sunnylvsfjord and Tafjord - entered into force. The fine for Global Cruise Lines is the first issued in connection with the new, stricter rules. On April 16, the NMA received reports about smoke emissions from the cruise shipMagellan, which was berthed in Flåm. NMA surveyors boarded the ship when she arrived at Geiranger the next day, and they measured the sulfur content of the ship’s fuel to be 0.17 percent, or 0.07 percentage points above the regional limit. Tracking of the vessel's AIS signal showed that the vessel made ports of call at Eidfjord and Flåm in the days preceding the port of call at Geiranger. Both of these ports are located within the North Sea ECA, where the maximum allowable fuel sulfur content is 0.10 percent. NMA said that the extent of the violation is significant because the ship sailed a long distance within the emission control area using a fuel with an excessive sulfur content. As an aggravating factor, Norway's new rules concerning the world heritage fjords were violated."

September 2018:

"The Alaska DEC issued the following 2 Notices of Violation for 2018:
Westerdam - Unauthorized discharge of 22,500 gallons of untreated graywater in Glacier Bay (September 11)
Seven Seas Mariner - Chlorine Daily Maximum (September 5 )"

 

- I refer you back to profit.  As a libertarian, free-market capitalist in this area, I have no issue with profit but handouts are bullshit and this industry is at the bottom of the list of deserving "contributors."

[Mike K.]

The government sets the fines not the cruise line.

 

Nobody is talking about handouts. But if the City of Victoria is threatening to curtail the industry's growth unless vessels have shore power (only 50% of which can actually utilize shore power), that's a bad move for a city dependent on tourism and the cruise industry.

 

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

[Stephen James]

The government sets the fines not the cruise line.

 

Nobody is talking about handouts. But if the City of Victoria is threatening to curtail the industry's growth unless vessels have shore power (only 50% of which can actually utilize shore power), that's a bad move for a city dependent on tourism and the cruise industry.

 

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

This is not a new issue and there's been 0 progress.  (see the cruise industry's track record for clues to why.)

 

The growth is already curtailed by the lack of infrastructure and the city is saying, reasonably, that the next capital expenditure needs to be shore power.  If we don't require it the industry will not do it.  Instead, the industry will use every tactic not to pay for it and the most dramatic is to threaten to stop traffic.  How much less traffic is there in Juno, every European port that requires shore power, Seattle? 

 

Does our council know how to collaborate/negotiate?  No.  Does the cruise industry collaborate/negotiate?  Never have til now.  The evidence of very bad economic, social and environmental behaviour is overwhelming and it's pretty clear a heavy hand is the only remaining tool.

[VIResident]

The government sets the fines not the cruise line.

 

Nobody is talking about handouts. But if the City of Victoria is threatening to curtail the industry's growth unless vessels have shore power (only 50% of which can actually utilize shore power), that's a bad move for a city dependent on tourism and the cruise industry.

 

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

 

Perhaps the GVHA board/president/exc. dir. should have addressed this years ago.  Perhaps they should have had a plan in place i.e. set bar, put action items into place, monitor and record etc.  We are ripe for the same type of criticism lobbed onto us on this as we were on sewage.  Right or wrong makes no difference - its the way of the climate crises.  Full stop.   

Edited by VIResident, 21 October 2019 - 07:31 AM.

[Mike K.]

It sounds like they already have.

 

But shore power for these vessels is a relatively new thing, it's not like it has been a lingering to-do since the 80s. And only half of the vessels that dock at Ogden Point can actually use it.

 

At the crux of my argument is while the City of Victoria wants to curtail the industry immediately and only allow it to continue growing when shore power is brought online for three vessels (no easy feat, not cheap, and it will take years to bring online even one connection) the cruise industry will have no choice but to pivot to where it can grow.

[Mike K.]

June 2019: 

"Carnival Corporation was fined $20 million for violating its probation for environmental offenses that led to a $30 million fine in 2017. The company logged 800 offenses of its conditions of probation in the first year -- many of these (such as discharging plastics) is even worse than the original offenses leading to the $30 million fine. Looking at it from Carnival's perspective, the $50 million total in fines is about 0.7% of their total profit on which they pay no corporate income tax. The fine is similar to a person earning $100,000 being fined $700. Kind of tickles your feet, rather than a slap on the wrist."

May 2019:  (this is Norway going after NCL!)

"Maritime Executive reports the Norwegian Maritime Authority has fined Greek cruise ship operator Global Cruise Lines Ltd. a total of $80,000 for using 0.17 percent sulfur fuel in a 0.10 percent sulfur ECA zone. In March, new Norwegian environmental requirements for emissions in several protected fjords - the Nærøyfjord, Aurlandsfjord, Geirangerfjord, Sunnylvsfjord and Tafjord - entered into force. The fine for Global Cruise Lines is the first issued in connection with the new, stricter rules. On April 16, the NMA received reports about smoke emissions from the cruise shipMagellan, which was berthed in Flåm. NMA surveyors boarded the ship when she arrived at Geiranger the next day, and they measured the sulfur content of the ship’s fuel to be 0.17 percent, or 0.07 percentage points above the regional limit. Tracking of the vessel's AIS signal showed that the vessel made ports of call at Eidfjord and Flåm in the days preceding the port of call at Geiranger. Both of these ports are located within the North Sea ECA, where the maximum allowable fuel sulfur content is 0.10 percent. NMA said that the extent of the violation is significant because the ship sailed a long distance within the emission control area using a fuel with an excessive sulfur content. As an aggravating factor, Norway's new rules concerning the world heritage fjords were violated."

September 2018:

"The Alaska DEC issued the following 2 Notices of Violation for 2018:
Westerdam - Unauthorized discharge of 22,500 gallons of untreated graywater in Glacier Bay (September 11)
Seven Seas Mariner - Chlorine Daily Maximum (September 5 )"

 

- I refer you back to profit.  As a libertarian, free-market capitalist in this area, I have no issue with profit but handouts are bullshit and this industry is at the bottom of the list of deserving "contributors."

 

I wonder how much Norway would bill the CRD for the effluent we've discharged into the Salish Sea since the 1850s, and continue to do so to this very day?

[VIResident]

It sounds like they already have.

 

But shore power for these vessels is a relatively new thing, it's not like it has been a lingering to-do since the 80s. And only half of the vessels that dock at Ogden Point can actually use it.

 

At the crux of my argument is while the City of Victoria wants to curtail the industry immediately and only allow it to continue growing when shore power is brought online for three vessels (no easy feat, not cheap, and it will take years to bring online even one connection) the cruise industry will have no choice but to pivot to where it can grow.

I call bullshit Mike.  This isn't just shorepower its the whole picture from where the crap from the emissions scrubbers goes to the garbage that lands in our landfill, and everything between.  Shore power is one bit of it.