Should Large Power Boats be Banned?

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by MrWesson

A large container ship pollutes as much as 50 Million cars. 1 ship = 50,000,000 cars..

That is going to change though. The cargo ships will change to low sulfur fuel eventually. They already have to when entering the English Channel or the North Sea.

[Paul Kelly]

There's a phrase in the Charity sector which I came across and I rather like, called 'Full cost recovery' In that sector it means charging properly for the 'below the line' as well as the 'above the line' delivery, so a charity doesn't end up subsidising a service.

In this context it's about trying to cost environmental damage and charge according to that. To be fair that should be applied to anything recreational from an outboard to a Super Yacht. It's proportionate. Whether that should be a tax on fuel or another means is open to question.

The real problem is that we are spending just a few of hundred years burning up natural resources that it has taken 100s of millions of years to make. And when it's gone, it's gone.

So no, don't ban the Power Boats. Charge them for 'full cost recovery'!! Logical and probably impossible to implement.

[zeehag]

ban banning. better yet ban the banning banner and banners to the effect of banning.

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Given a more realistic fuel price, I'm sure people would make meaningful choices - such as a harder think about how big a powerboat they really need, and maybe not also owning a fleet of hemis and muscle cars for just getting around.

The Dashews came to the conclusion that even with the high fuel prices in Europe or Canada Windhorse was still cheaper to own and run than Beowulf was...

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Woodland Hills

Are we banning big boats with small engines? What about small boats with really big engines are they verboten too.

Let's compromise and ban all boats propelled by petroleum products: like gasoline or diesel, plastic sails and ropes, etc. or maybe just ban all boats MADE from petroleum products like epoxy , polyester or fiberglass.........

Sounds like a plan.. allow 25yrs for reforestation of appropriate forests with suitable timber in countries around the world then timber and metal vessels only.
And all the car workers can retrain as boat builders and carpenters..
Solve the plastics pollution and CO2 problems at the same time..

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by Paul Kelly

The real problem is that we are spending just a few of hundred years burning up natural resources that it has taken 100s of millions of years to make. And when it's gone, it's gone.

We'll just build nuclear powered FPB's then :-)

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by 2big2small

where people who are lots stupider and louder than I.

If you're inviting a competition, you shouldn't set the bar so high...

[denverd0n]

Originally Posted by boatman61

End subsidised fuel.. not just for large power boats but all forms of engines that require fossil energy to function... That's you America.. time you paid up like everyone else.. $1.75/litre..

Fuel is not subsidized in America, except to the extent that the full cost of pollution remediation is not built into it. But that's true for almost all countries.

The problem, of course, is determining how, and to what extent, the cost of pollution clean-up should be added. If 2big2small is right, and the cost is infinite, then EVERYBODY is subsidizing it to an unacceptably low extent. If the cost is something less than infinite, then it's a matter of determining how much that is and how to deal with it.

Additional problem is that -- and I really don't want to start this argument, but it is relevant -- "global warming" has become more of a political issue than a scientific one in the last 10 years. Just try to get a grant to look into what percentage of climate change is caused by human activity versus natural causes and I guarantee you that you'll be shouted down, accused of being a heretic, and called a Luddite. But if you want a grant to look into what we should do to stop human-caused climate change, all kinds of support and money will come raining down on you.

It is frankly just stupid to imagine that there is one and only one cause for climate change. Even if we accept that human activity is the primary cause, we still need to understand what else is going on before we can effectively deal with it. But in today's political climate that is simply not a possibility. Science has been sacrificed to the Gods of a political agenda.

Meanwhile, my wife and I have been diligently practicing "reduce, reuse, recycle" for 40+ years now. All the while observing that the people who shout the loudest about what the government should be doing to "fix" our environment, strikingly often do virtually nothing themselves to try to make any difference.

[AJ_n_Audrey]

An interesting development is the Torqeedo 40HP electric inboard engine. Currently it costs at least double what a diesel engine would cost, but I keep hoping Tesla will take an interest in marine applications and give Torqeedo some competition, thus driving down prices. Not sure how much solar you would need to re-charge, but I would certainly be interested if the price weren't so high. Having just re-built the water pump">raw water pump, the injector pump, and the injectors on my Westerbeke 40, the simplicity of an electric motor sounds good just now.

[ArmyDaveNY]

If we ban large power boats then due to their supposed environmental impact, then we should ban any boat that isn't impeccably maintained, since it is a potential source of pollution. While we're at it we should ban solar panels and batteries since the process of production is very "unclean." We should also ban any human who doesn't live a hunter/gather lifestyle since their activities disturb nature. While we're at it, we should ban elephants, hippos, and all animals since they also disturb the environment and create dust and silt while moving around.

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by Tricolor

Please not more government involvement, we already have to much legislation.

Originally Posted by K_V_B

The default answer to "should we ban X" is No...

Originally Posted by TJ D

No, absolutely not. Individual freedom to make choices should not be infringed upon in a free society. Even bad choices.

Originally Posted by John_Trusty

I'm with you guys - don't ban anything. I'd like to add an economic incentive, which is how our society generally motivates activities.

I would agree with all of these, if they could lift the existing bans that infringe on my rights.

I was kicked out of the cape cod canal, even though I had a favorable 4 knot current, and 15 knot wind that was blowing straight down the canal. I was forced to anchor 6 hours, and tack 20 times to retreat, then sail 100 extra miles, because my boat didn't have an engine.

It is illegal for me to travel on some roads in america as I choose to use only bicycle, and these are banned in many places. Walking is also not allowed.

When I arrived in the harbor here, they gave me a full sheet of paper with small print of 25 rules with a long paragraph for each rule. Then they are telling me to stop doing things that are not even on the rules, that hurt no one or nothing.

I can give many many more examples if you like for things I am banned from, and the rules are largely written in a way that is favorable to large powerboats, but not working for me.

So lift all the bans in the name of freedom, I can support that.

Until then....

Originally Posted by boatman61

End subsidised fuel.. not just for large power boats but all forms of engines that require fossil energy to function..
That's you America.. time you paid up like everyone else.. $1.75/litre..

1.75 I don't agree to. I suggest $5 per liter rising by $1 per year.

Originally Posted by Woodland Hills

Are we banning big boats with small engines? What about small boats with really big engines are they verboten too.

All boats with any engine.

Let's compromise and ban all boats propelled by petroleum products: like gasoline or diesel, plastic sails and ropes, etc. or maybe just ban all boats MADE from petroleum products like epoxy , polyester or fiberglass.........

This I can agree to. I will replace my sails and rope with natural fibers and use a wooden boat if I get to live in that world in return.

[mud bug]

I think that people who feel they know better than others and must control what others do should be banned! FREEDOM from others imposing their thoughts or values on you is what America was founded upon!!!

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

If we ban large power boats then due to their supposed environmental impact, then we should ban any boat that isn't impeccably maintained, since it is a potential source of pollution. While we're at it we should ban solar panels and batteries since the process of production is very "unclean." We should also ban any human who doesn't live a hunter/gather lifestyle since their activities disturb nature. While we're at it, we should ban elephants, hippos, and all animals since they also disturb the environment and create dust and silt while moving around.

Sure, but just to add some perspective -- 40 posts and thousands of views, and not one voice for just banning, as far as I understand what has been written so far.

There was a voice, however, for banning me for asking the question

[LLizzard]

A walk around any marina will tell you most boats, regardless of size, rarely leave the dock. Therefore their largest carbon footprint is the electricity being generated to supply their shore power.

[akprb]

I don’t accept the premise for starters.

The natural conclusion is banning humans in the extreme.

It’s an old story of the Statist....