Posted by Cornish Jack on 06/10/2017 14:31:17:
Surprised that noone has, so far, mentioned the statistics compiled for the "More or Less" programme on the Beeb – "The 16 largest marine bulk carriers produce MORE pollution than ALL the world's motor vehicles put together" !!
OK, so it's statistics manipulation in essence (as are all the other hysterical reactions) but, the fact remains, ships use "bunker fuel" which is the filthiest , most air polluting of all the distillates and what is heard of it?? "Nah, don't bovver wiv ships, mate – they're out at sea an out of sight, ain't they". Still, if the great unwashed are wittering on about the evils of diesel pollution they won't have time to notice the REAL problems we're facing!!
rgds
Bill
I heard something different and will have to listen to it again! I think the programme investigated a Guardian article that made that claim and debunked it.
If I understood properly, the particular pollutant was Sulphur, and the figures were taken from a 'what will happen if we don't do anything about it study' done in the US. They interviewed the chap responsible who said that the report had resulted in an International Agreement to clean up Bunker Fuel, and as a result, the predicted sulphur pollution never happened. Various other points about the comparison being dubious were made, for example petrol and diesel don't contain a lot of Sulphur in the first place.
But Bill is absolutely right that shipping is a major source of pollution. On the bright side, if bulk carriers were banned it would fix our car pollution problem as well; no oil tankers = no diesel, petrol or lubricants = no cars. Job done! Slightly worrying, it would also mean no agricultural machinery or fertilizers. I might have to eat the cat!
Dave
Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 06/10/2017 15:46:44