Cruises are still very harmful to the climate

Always bigger, always more - that seems to be the motto of the cruise industry, which is experiencing an all-time high after the end of the coronavirus pandemic. Even if some providers talk about climate-neutral travel by ship - the reality is different. If you want to travel ecologically, climate-consciously and sustainably, you should avoid cruise ship travel. This year, the German Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (NABU) once again provides an overview of the impact of different providers in its 2024 cruise ranking.

Even the frontrunners in the 2024 cruise rankings do not offer cruises that do not impact the environment and climate. With promising climate strategies and technical measures to reduce emissions that have already been implemented, the Norwegian brands Hurtigruten and Havila were able to position themselves at the top. They are closely followed by Mein Schiff, Ponant and AIDA. The most forward-looking new addition is the Mein Schiff fleet from TUI Cruises. The ship is to be powered by green methanol - making climate-friendly cruising possible.

However, Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) sued TUI Cruises for massive greenwashing in March of this year, as reported by FVW.

Here is an overview of the measures

Heavy fuel oil and the alternative liquid gas are problematic

However, the positive developments should not obscure the damage caused by cruises: "The climate and environment continue to suffer from the use of dirty, fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide and methane continue to fuel the climate crisis. Sulphur, nitrogen oxides and soot not only harm the environment, but also people's health," says Daniel Rieger, NABU Head of Climate and Environmental Policy, "It's time for the shipping companies to finally change course and move towards climate neutrality and environmental friendliness." According to a study by the Transport & Environment (T&E) association, the 218 cruise ships that sailed European waters in 2022 alone emitted as much sulphur oxide as a billion cars.

Heavy fuel oil contains around 3,500 times more sulphur than would be permitted for cars on European roads 
and is therefore banned on land. 

Liquid gas is only a bridging technology

LNG (liquefied natural gas) can almost completely prevent the emission of particulate matter and sulphur oxides, and nitrogen oxide emissions are also lower, which ensures better air quality in ports and on board. However, LNG is a fossil fuel and emits CO2 and, above all, the methane that escapes during combustion. This is a real climate killer, which has 80 times the greenhouse gas effect of carbon dioxide in the short term.

"Fossil LNG has no great advantage in terms of climate protection," admits Lucienne Damm, Sustainability Manager at Tui Cruises. "In terms of CO2 emissions, it is merely a bridging technology."

Legal regulations

As of this year, the EU-wide Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) also applies to cruises, meaning that shipping companies have to pay for the climate impact caused by their ships. This could be an incentive for companies to improve the energy efficiency of their ships. In addition, the FuelEU Maritime Regulation defines guidelines that oblige shipping companies to use sustainable fuels. The problem at the moment is the lack of availability of these alternatives, be it synthetic liquid gas, bio-diesel or hydrogen.

Use of shore power

The EU's Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Regulation (AFIR) obliges European ports to install sufficient shore-side power connections by 2030 to ensure that they can meet the electricity needs of cruise ships during their stay in European ports. Until now, the monstrous ships have mostly used generators to cover their electricity needs in the ports, resulting in enormous air pollution for the coastal towns and their inhabitants (as well as the passengers on board). Since 2007, however, all new ships have been equipped with an appropriate shore power infrastructure. As a result, the FuelEU Maritime Regulation stipulates that cruise ships must use these power sources.

Malte Siegert, Chairman of NABU Hamburg, adds: "The ports have done their homework. Shore power is available for cruise ships in Hamburg, Kiel and Rostock. Now we are appealing to all shipping companies to make use of this. Otherwise, shore-side electricity must be made compulsory in order to protect people in the cities from exhaust fumes. With green electricity in port, ships can already be climate-neutral during lay times."

Conclusio

NABU shipping expert Sönke Diesener: "Despite all the positive aspects, such as the significant increase in the use of shore power and many technical improvements, things are still moving far too slowly! It is irresponsible for an industry to set itself targets that fall short of Germany's climate targets. Germany has anchored the goal of greenhouse gas neutrality by 2045 in its Climate Protection Act. Nevertheless, eight of the cruise companies surveyed stated that they did not want to be climate-neutral until 2050. This is neither acceptable nor communicable - especially for a leisure activity."