alant
Well-Known Member
New environmental laws on superyachts owned by the rich and famous http://dailym.ai/1jHEGhd
Will you satisfy new emission rules?
- Thread starter alant
- Start date
Whitelighter
Well-Known Member
Nope, but not do I give a f***
jrudge
Well-Known Member
Not sure that is the best of answers. As mob owners we all use considerably more diesel in a season than our car will use probably ever. This summer I guess I used 25,000 lts of diesel. My GasGusling range rover takes I think 60l and I fill it every few weeks. So 400 odd takes of diesel - that is about 16 years worth.
There has to be some responsibility taken for reducing the damage this lot does.
I am anything but a Green, but care is needed here! The limit comes in at 79 feet ... that is not much bigger than most boats on here ...
There has to be some responsibility taken for reducing the damage this lot does.
I am anything but a Green, but care is needed here! The limit comes in at 79 feet ... that is not much bigger than most boats on here ...
spannerman
Well-Known Member
I don't think many here have to worry as the spec says boats over 79ft and over 500tons, a Princess 95 weighs around 100 tons so its got to be considerably bigger than that to hit the 500t limit, the only thing I can think of that will be just over 80ft and 500t would be a serious tug boat. They need to make their minds up is it 79ft or 500 tons as you won't find many that match that requirement.
alant
Well-Known Member
You don't believe in mission creep affecting smaller boats then.
Latestarter1
Well-Known Member
Sometimes I become real exasperated, have been talking about RCD2 which was agreed months ago as simply EPA Tier 3 all done and dusted. Totally sensible of EU for a change current RCD emissions being a different level to Tier 2 was a compete nonsense.
Make the most of RCD 2 after that we will be will be coping with after-treatment, SCR is logical choice.
Russians have effectively killed off Emissions Control Zones leaving IMO Tier 3 in a shambles.
rafiki_
Well-Known Member
What is the current coastal fuel situation? Our Marina has started supplying red with FAME, and is claiming 18%. LS, what is the real situation?
Last edited:
Latestarter1
Well-Known Member
18% FAME sounds high to me, perhaps a worst case kop out....
The ECZ zero sulphur fuel availability was kicked off January 2015 however I have lost interest somewhat in IMO Tier 3 as it is has been torpedoed by Ruskies and the Daily Mail article does not reflect true high hp situation (not just superyachts) in Europe as well as leading us to believe IMO Tier 3 is retrospective.
Either way marked road fuel may be turning up as MGO (Marine Gas Oil) to satisfy ECZ however no clue how it can satisfy SOLAS < 60C flash point requirement as it would take commercial vessels out of class.........
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
This is the thin end of the wedge as far as I'm concerned. Most marine leisure engines are derived from industrial engines and in the European and US construction industry, these engines have to meet Tier 4 standards which means diesel particulate filters, adblue systems and more cooling capacity because the engines run hotter. IMHO it won't be too long before local and national authorities in Europe and the US cotton on to the fact that marine leisure engines currently being sold don't conform to emissions standards being applied in other industries. Finding space for the additional emissions handling and cooling equipment is a big enough problem in a construction machinery so I have no idea how it can be incorporated in small leisure craft
And even if boat builders manage to find space for this stuff, there are potential safety hazards. In construction machinery, if the diesel particulate filter malfunctions, the engine is shut down. Imagine being in the middle of the E Channel in a F6 and the engine management systems senses a DPF malfunction and shuts down an otherwise perfectly good engine?
petem
Well-Known Member
I'm sure that tree huggers will see this as killing two birds with one stone. Sink the boat and the crew!
volvopaul
Well-Known Member
Perhaps VAG group have already designed an engine that passes tier 4 regs .
Momac
Well-Known Member
I suspect that's somewhat above average.
pan
Well-Known Member
Assuming a 60-70ft non displacement, using 10lt/nm, thats 2,500nm, at cruising 25kt, then 100hrs, about average for a boat that actually leaves the marina from time to time!
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
In jrudge's case, I believe he did a Grand Tour of the Med this year which is why he used 25000 litres of fuel http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?440405-Trip-Report-Mallorca-Cote-D-Azur-Corsica-Sardina-Menorca-Mallorca&highlight=
To put that into perspective, I've put about 10000 litres into my 63 footer this season and last which I think is much nearer the average for a Med based boat
MapisM
Well-Known Member
LOL, I won't tell how much fuel I loaded at the beginning of the season, and how much of it I still have in the tanks.... 
Sure, I cruised nowhere near jrudge or MYAG distances, but having nice cruising spots just round the corner is part of the boating strategy... That, and a 2MPG boat! :encouragement:
Sure, I cruised nowhere near jrudge or MYAG distances, but having nice cruising spots just round the corner is part of the boating strategy... That, and a 2MPG boat! :encouragement:
jrudge
Well-Known Member
I accept that this year was a little toppy, but the point of having a boat is it moves ... if not a holiday home is a wiser investment! Regardless, mobs are not economical, they use compared to event the biggest car daft amounts of fuel and I suspect most on this forum will be fair users of there boats. My point really was the we can be indifferent or critical of the regulations, but the real risk there ( probably more for the manufactures I suspect) is that the authorities with a green agenda simple pass legislation saying in an energy constrained / global worming / green agenda / clean energy world this scale of fuel use is no longer acceptable and should be taxed as such ( and certainly not given a tax break).
Us regs to 79 feet .... pretty simple to start reducing the length and not exactly vote losing.
Us regs to 79 feet .... pretty simple to start reducing the length and not exactly vote losing.
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Agree entirely. This is the elephant in the room as far as motorboat manufacturers are concerned. In fact there are 2 elephants, one called NOx and the other called CO2. The current thrust of industrial engine emissions regulations has been to reduce NOx and that in itself is a huge problem for engine manufacturers and manufacturers of the machinery into which the engines are fitted because, as I referred to above, the amount of extra equipment that has to be bolted to each engine. Current industrial engine emissions regulations have not even begun to address the issue of reducing CO2 but effectively that means reducing fuel consumption. Reducing fuel consumption and reducing NOx whilst maintaining power and driveability is very difficult (as VW has just demonstrated).
As you say, all this could be compounded by tax hungry govts with green agendas significantly increasing duties on fuel for leisure vessels. Another factor is the current low price of oil which may be with us for a couple of years but cannot last for ever. In 5 or 10yrs time we could be paying well north of £2 per litre for marine diesel for leisure use if the oil price and duties go up
So where does this leave boat manufacturers, especially planing boat manufacturers? Between a rock and a hard place I would say. They're not generating enough profit to spend on R & D but at the same time, IMHO rising fuel prices and increasing costs due to having to meet ever tighter emissions regs are going to make their products increasingly unsaleable except to the very wealthy. And thats not to mention the fact that, increasingly, boaters are going to consider it socially unacceptable to consume 25000 litres of fuel a year just to blast around the Med (thats not a dig at you, J
)So planing boat manufacturers are either going to have to make their boats significantly more fuel efficient or develop different drive systems altogether. Don't ask me how they're going to do that
petem
Well-Known Member
?Latestarter1
Well-Known Member
This is not a U.S. thing.........IMO is an international intergovernmental agency of the United Nations based in London.
None of these negotiations regarding ECZ's have suddenly been dropped on us discussions have been going on for years and primary focus is commercial shipping. Emissions from large vessels is a big deal for the envionment. The 24 meter rule has an exemption which can be applied for when vessel has engines exceeding 750 kW this was specifically aimed at superyachts.
When we fell out with Russia the size of ECZ's was slashed throwing industry into a pickle.
Suggest we keep calm and carry on as IMO has no effect on us, as I said earlier the simple change to future RCD II emissions bringing them into line with EPA Tier III made total sense.
Magnum's Princess 43 has Cummins QSB 550's which are already EPA Tier III and will slot seamlessly into new RCD II.
I will be far too old to worry about Tier IV however reading papers from Cummins, Scania and Volvo Penta SCR is the way to go.
MapisM
Well-Known Member
Well, on a boat they might as well consider using the black tank content as an additive for the SCR process....
Now, where are the patents experts when you need them?
