Cruise lines have defended themselves against new accusations over their environmental impact in Europe.
Responses were made to analysis by Which? into emissions per distance in 2023, claiming to highlight companies operating the worst polluting ships.
Disney Cruise Line was found by the consumer group to be the worst culprit, despite having only one ship – Disney Dream – operating in European waters last year.
The 2,500-passenger vessel released average Co2 emissions of almost one and half tonnes (1481kg) per nautical mile, according to the Which? based on analysis of the EU’s 2023 Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) carbon emissions data.
The second worst polluter was named as Norwegian Cruise Line, which had 10 ships in Europe, with each vessel emitting an average of 1.4 tonnes (1413 kg) of Co2 per nautical mile.
The 4,100-capacity Norwegian Epic was identified as “the most polluting cruise ship in Europe” for emitting two tonnes of CO2 for every nautical mile travelled, making it responsible for 95,000 tonnes (94,986,000 kg) of CO2 emissions in 2023 – as much as a town with around 20,000 residents, Which? claimed.
Other cruise lines with high emissions included Princess Cruises with average emissions of 1253 kg per nautical mile, closely followed by Royal Caribbean with 1248 kg.
Lines also mentioned in the analysis were Virgin Voyages, Celebrity Cruises, Cunard, P&O Cruises and Costa Cruises.
The 10 most-polluting vessels in 2023 were all mega ships, with three of these belonging to NCL, according to the report.
Separate analysis carried out on behalf of Which? by carbon reduction consultancy Ecollective found the carbon footprint of a passenger on a European cruise can be larger than that of someone flying on a short-haul holiday.
This analysis found that a no-fly Mediterranean cruise emits five times more carbon dioxide equivalent (Co2e) per person than going to Barcelona by aircraft and staying in a hotel (2,100kg CO2e compared to 425kg CO2e).
The carbon footprint of a two-week Caribbean cruise, including return flights to Barbados, is more than double that of a two-week holiday in Barbados full board (6,196kg CO2e compared to 2,487kg CO2e), Which? claimed.
“Greenwashing can also make it harder for consumers to calculate the true environmental impact of a cruise holiday,” the consumer advocate said.
“There are multiple factors to take into account, and holidaymakers are likely to be confused by some cruise lines’ claims regarding exhaust gas cleaning systems, known as ‘scrubbers’, the use of liquid natural gas (LNG) and shore power
Hurtigruten, which has two ships that are partially battery powered, and Viking, building four ships that will be partially propelled by hydrogen fuel cells, were highlighted for “investing in genuine solutions”.
Which? Travel deputy editor Naomi Leach said: “Holidaymakers are becoming increasingly concerned about the impact of their travel both on the environment and on local communities. The emissions generated by some of Europe’s largest cruise ships are simply staggering.
“It’s clear more needs to be done to clean up the cruise industry and to tackle greenwashing to ensure consumers are getting clear and honest information about the impact of cruising.”
A Disney Cruise Line spokesperson said: “While we fully support transparency and accountability in emissions reporting, it is important to note that the methodology used in this analysis does not accurately reflect the full context of our operations, especially for a cruise line with only one ship operating in the region for a relatively short period of time.
“Disney Cruise Line complies with all air and water quality standards. While sailing in Europe, the Disney Dream used a combination of hydrotreated vegetable oil along with ultra-low-sulphur marine gas oil, which reduces greenhouse gas emissions beyond IMO requirements.
“DCL is committed to continuing to reduce its emissions in line with The Walt Disney Company’s environmental goals.”
NCL told Which? that while the EU’s MRV data can provide valuable insights, it is only one piece of the full picture.
It does not account for time spent in port, where emissions are naturally lower and where vessels spend a large amount of time or the number of passengers being transported on the ship, which the company said should be considered to reflect the ship’s efficiency per person.
NCL is also committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by 2030, using a 2019 baseline.
A spokesperson for MSC Cruises, identified as the fifth worst polluter, accused Which? of “irresponsible and biased reporting” that relies on “flawed methodology” which is doing more harm than good and is “misleading consumers”.
They added: ““The method used for this ranking is not an accurate reflection of the environmental performance of cruise ships and is misleading for consumers and does nothing to help them make informed decisions about the climate impact of their holiday.
“Those ships that spend the majority of their time travelling shorter distances and spending more time in port consume less fuel and therefore emit less emissions.
“In 2023, the number of shore power connections in Europe increased and we will see this continue to increase year on year, eliminating local emissions in ports where shore power is available.
“In 2023 we had two LNG ships operating in Europe and this sees a reduction of greenhouse emissions by up to 20% compared to conventional maritime fuels.
“We strongly dispute the claim that our ships have ‘high methane emissions’.
“Information regarding methane slip in the public domain and in this report is not scientifically accurate and often based on older generation LNG dual fuel engines and do not take into account the improvements that are being made in improved engine technologies and the resulting reduction in potential methane slip.
“We stand by our position on the important role that LNG plays in the global energy transition and we acknowledge the urgency of the situation.
“Today, LNG provides not only an immediate improvement but will ensure our transition to bio-and synthetic renewable LNG fuels as they become available.
“In 2023, we sourced certified bio-LNG for the maiden voyage of MSC Euribia, allowing for a net zero emissions voyage. Replicating this success depends significantly on government strategies and fuel suppliers enabling the availability of renewable fuels suitable for the shipping industry.”
A spokesperson for Princess Cruises, P&O Cruises, Cunard and Costa parent Carnival Corporation, said: “Reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is Carnival Corporation’s number one sustainability priority and we are very proud of our progress so far in pursuing net zero emissions by 2050.
“Thanks to our aggressive climate actions, our fleet produces 10%-plus less total GHG emissions today than our peak historical year (2011), despite increasing capacity by 30% during that time.”
The company added: “GHG emissions based on distance sailed is not a good measure of the environmental performance of most cruise ships, which often sail shorter distances and spend significant time in port. A ship with high emissions-per-distance-sailed may actually produce less total emissions than a ship with low emissions-per-distance-sailed travelling further distances and using more fuel.
“Knowing the Which? organisation aims to inform consumer choice, we caution you against judging a ship’s environmental performance based on ‘emissions per mile.’
“Instead we recommend considering indicators that drive total emissions reductions, such as emissions per lower berth capacity. In fact, we’re on track to have cut our GHG emissions per lower berth capacity (called carbon intensity) by 40% by 2026 verses 2008 levels, which is ahead of the IMO’s (International Maritime Organisation) 2030 carbon intensity reduction timeline.”