30 per cent rise in Ferry costs

[kelly58]

Due to the new EU rules from 1st January ferry company's will have to use low sulphur diesel which is more expensive which will increase crossing charges by 30pc according to a report in today's daily mail. 

[Tracker]

Fuel costs are only one aspect of running a ferry and it is hard to believe that alone will increase prices by 30%?

 

Who believes in the conspiracy theory of smoke, mirrors and mis-information being implemented yet again by the media, by politicians and/or by the cartel of ferry operators?

 

 

[Steve928]

I don't know about the accuracy of 30% but a significant increase is likely and this has been discussed in journals far more eminent than the DM.

 

Also expect a large hike in ULSD pump prices as these measures (it affects not just ferries) lead to increased demand outstripping supply plus the loss of the market for the low grade bunker oil (sludge), currently a waste product of the refining process.

[hallii]

I forget the exact price difference but, for me, the tunnel appears much more attractive this year.

 

I think the ferry companies are waiting to see "who blinks first" should be some good offers along soon.

 

H

[Guest Peter James]

kelly58 - 2014-12-02 8:21 AM

 

Due to the new EU rules from 1st January ferry company's will have to use low sulphur diesel which is more expensive which will increase crossing charges by 30pc according to a report in today's daily mail. 

 

The Daily Mail don't like the EU much do they *-) .....

[Guest Joe90]

makes you laugh, diesel engined fumes are the new polluting public enemy number 1, despite everyone being led to believe driving diesel was the green alternative to petrol engines ...................perhaps like tobacco the garage diesel pumps will be behind a screen to discourage young motorists taking up the diesel car habit.

[Dave C]

Peter James - 2014-12-02 9:39 AM

 

kelly58 - 2014-12-02 8:21 AM

 

Due to the new EU rules from 1st January ferry company's will have to use low sulphur diesel which is more expensive which will increase crossing charges by 30pc according to a report in today's daily mail. 

 

The Daily Mail don't like the EU much do they *-) .....

 

 

 

BRILLIANT!!

[rolandrat]

Spin Spin Spin Spin Spin. me thinks

[kelly58]

Families taking a ferry across the Channel in the New Year face a 30 per cent hike in ticket prices as the EU brings in tough new green rules.

Britain’s biggest ferry operator, P&O Cruises, said a return ticket for a family of four from Dover to Calais will jump from £160 to £210.

The UK Chamber of Shipping says the move could be the death knell for the ferry industry, adding: ‘Routes teetering on the edge of economic viability will be pushed off the edge.’

Scroll down for video 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/12/01/2286EA6B00000578-2856639-image-9_1417473413978.jpg

• SHARE PICTURE

Copy link to paste in your message

+4

Britain’s biggest ferry operator, P&O Cruises, said a return ticket for a family of four from Dover to Calais will jump from £160 to £210 as a result of new EU green laws

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/12/01/23A67AC000000578-2856639-image-1_1417477813011.jpg

• SHARE PICTURE

Copy link to paste in your message

+4

Experts say it will cost the industry £300million a year – much of which will be absorbed into ticket prices. File picture

The new EU rules – which force shipping firms to buy expensive low- emission fuel – will push traffic on to the roads, drive up the cost of diesel for cars and result in the loss of 2,000 jobs, it was predicted last night.

And a European committee has warned that the fuel switch could lead to engine breakdowns and fires, leaving boats floating dangerously without power in busy shipping lanes.

Brussels has ordered that all ships in the English Channel, North Sea and Baltic Sea act to reduce sulphur emissions from January 1.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/12/01/054858950000044D-2856639-image-12_1417473446880.jpg

• SHARE PICTURE

Copy link to paste in your message

+4

A European committee has warned that the fuel switch could lead to engine breakdowns and fires, leaving boats floating dangerously without power in busy shipping lanes. File picture

Firms will have to switch to expensive low-sulphur fuel or install filtering equipment at the cost of millions of pounds. Experts say it will cost the industry £300million a year – much of which will be absorbed into ticket prices.

Independent consultants Amec say ferry companies will have to cut routes and slash jobs. Freight traffic to Europe will be forced on to the roads and through the Channel Tunnel – resulting in more pollution.

And increased demand for low-sulphur shipping fuel could lead to higher prices on forecourts. The price at the diesel pump could rise by 2.8p a litre, Amec said, because there is not enough capacity in refineries to cope with the demand for both vehicle and shipping fuel.

A route from Harwich to Esbjerg in Denmark was scrapped in September because of the expected rise in fuel costs.

Most operators are expected to switch from heavy fuel to lighter marine gas-oil – which is 60 per cent more expensive.

A spokesman for P&O Ferries, which runs 15 ships in the Channel and North Sea, told the Daily Mail: ‘Consumers will be picking up the bill for this because shipping companies cannot bear this cost alone.

'Marine gas-oil is considerably more expensive than the fuel we use today, so we can predict price increases for both freight and tourist customers.

‘All shipping companies will be affected – but our biggest rival, the Channel Tunnel, will not be affected. Peak-time sailings might cost 30 per cent more than people paid last year.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2856639/Green-rules-slap-50-family-ferry-fare-France-EU-fuel-diktat-force-prices-weeks.html#ixzz3Kk18i2kO
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Guest Had Enough]

rolandrat - 2014-12-02 11:38 AM

 

Spin Spin Spin Spin Spin. me thinks

 

Thank you for that excellent analysis of the situation. I'm sure that we're all very relieved that it's all lies and just spin. I can now stop worrying about booking next year's ferries as soon as possible, just in case this new ruling raises prices considerably. Phew! What a relief!

 

 

[Robinhood]

....the ruling isn't new. It has been flagged for some time, and is reputedly what put the last nail in the coffin of the Harwich-Esbjerg crossing, which had its final voyage at the end of September.

 

AIUI, there are two options for shipping companies, either the use of low-sulphur fuel, or the equipment of the ships with "scrubbing" technology. (or Catalyser and EGR B-) ). No doubt each company will be examining the economics of these options.

 

I would be surprised if next year's pricing doesn't already have the effects largely factored in (and, indeed, various people have been questioning a perceived rise in pricing already).

 

Given my perception that the channel is often covered in a brown haze, maybe this is a measure that we should support (albeit at a cost).

 

 

[Guest Had Enough]

Robinhood - 2014-12-02 12:45 PM

 

Given my perception that the channel is often covered in a brown haze, maybe this is a measure that we should support (albeit at a cost).

 

 

Couldn't agree more. Despite the nonsense talked by some about politicians, without them we'd still have filthy rivers, daily smog and millions dying from respiratory diseases. The Clean Air Act and other legislation has transformed our country and anyone doubting this should visit industrial cities in Russia and China to see what the UK would be like without environmental legislation.

 

I'm very happy to have exhaust gas recirculation valves, catalytic converters and EU laws forcing manufacturers to make their vehicles and ships even cleaner.

 

I'm a capitalist (albeit in a very small way) but I'm also bright enough to know that, without legislation, many industrialists would be happy to discard their waste products in the cheapest way possible and to hell with the environment.

 

The same applies to drivers, there are some who are happy to remove catalytic converters in order to save a few bob or to continue driving around in ancient pollution-emitting vehicles. They should be taken off the road. What's more important, ours and our children's health or tight people saving money?

 

 

 

 

[Muswell]

On current trends by 2020, in Europe, shipping will contribute more emissions than all land-based sources together. Marine fuel is extremely high in sulphur; there has been a programme of reduction running for some years now and of course the industry has been fighting hard to avoid doing anything and then saying there is not enough time. The 30% is a possible fare increase on some routes put out by an industry lobby. Plus ca change

[Muswell]

Had Enough - 2014-12-02 1:00 PM

 

 

The same applies to drivers, there are some who are happy to remove catalytic converters in order to save a few bob or to continue driving around in ancient pollution-emitting vehicles. They should be taken off the road.

 

 

 

 

I disagree, a vehicle in which a part of the engine's emission control system, such as DPF, EGR or catalytic converter, has been intentionally removed should be crushed. That would make people think twice.

[Corky 8]

Just think of all the clean fresh air we will be able to breath, with all this Sulphur reduction, and remember the Pollution China, India and all those other Developing Country's  produce does not float around the world, Oh and the Moon is really made of Cheese.

[Tracker]

Muswell - 2014-12-02 1:16 PM

 

Had Enough - 2014-12-02 1:00 PM

 

 

The same applies to drivers, there are some who are happy to remove catalytic converters in order to save a few bob or to continue driving around in ancient pollution-emitting vehicles. They should be taken off the road.

 

 

 

 

I disagree, a vehicle in which a part of the engine's emission control system, such as DPF, EGR or catalytic converter, has been intentionally removed should be crushed. That would make people think twice.

 

I disagree.

Manufacturers that are unable to make reliable emission control add ons should be made to foot the bill when they go wrong as a penalty for introducing unproven technology and using their customers for testing and development.

And then there might be some justification in penalising drivers any further than they already are penalised by the lack of honesty from the vehicle manufacturers and punitive taxation from the politicians..

[Guest Had Enough]

Corky 8 - 2014-12-02 2:29 PM

 

Just think of all the clean fresh air we will be able to breath, with all this Sulphur reduction, and remember the Pollution China, India and all those other Developing Country's  produce does not float around the world, Oh and the Moon is really made of Cheese.

 

China and Russia (and other countries) have some of the most polluted cities in the world and have had for decades, but guess what? During that time our air and rivers have become much cleaner, so it seems pretty obvious to me that their filth doesn't float around the world.

 

I can assure you that if it wasn't for legislation you wouldn't be able to breath clean air, as anyone who lived through he smog of the '50's and earlier will tell you. As a child I remember having to wear a smog mask as the air was filthy, and thousands of people died every year from bronchial diseases.

 

Smart Alec remarks about the moon being made of green cheese don't negate facts that are obvious to anyone who actually knows about the changes that have been made in the last few decades, changes that mean we're all much healthier than our forebears.

 

How anyone can scoff at legislation to improve the cleanliness of our air is beyond me.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest Had Enough]

Tracker - 2014-12-02 2:31 PM

 

I disagree.

Manufacturers that are unable to make reliable emission control add ons should be made to foot the bill when they go wrong as a penalty for introducing unproven technology and using their customers for testing and development.

And then there might be some justification in penalising drivers any further than they already are penalised by the lack of honesty from the vehicle manufacturers and punitive taxation from the politicians..

 

I don't recollect ever having an unreliable emission control add-on and during my years as a driver my cars have produced less and less filth and far fewer nasty carcinogens.

 

If the odd cat or similar fails occasionally it's a small price to pay for clean air and only the most selfish person would consider polluting the atmosphere in order to save himself a few bob.

 

[StuartO]

While recognising that we really do need proportionate efforts to clean up the environment, I do get the impression that the initiatives from the EU are sometimes the product of ivory tower thinking rather than good government. EU civil servants being allowed to live in an unreal world and dream up yet another fanciful and expensive scheme.

 

I suppose it's a matter of the quality of their judgement and of that of the EU Parliament which sort-of controls them. The EU's own budget and expenses system appears to be extremely poor and you could argue that the EU is not really a trustworthy system of government - but in the interests of access to the EU market, we have to submit. I don't have faith that the EU will get the cost/benefit analysis of these envoronmental judgements right at all.

[Tracker]

Had Enough - 2014-12-02 2:51 PM

remarks about the moon being made of green cheese don't negate facts that are obvious to anyone who actually knows about the changes that have been made in the last few decades, changes that mean we're all much healthier than our forebears.

 

Come on Frank Lighten up a bit and always look on the bright side of life - it's only a light hearted forum after all!

 

I think you are bang out of order about the moon as everyone knows that it is made of cheese and for you to start a malicious rumour that the cheese is green is very misleading for those easily led.

 

Everyone knows it's blue cheese.

 

If anyone thinks the fuss over marine engine pollution is big just wait till the world catches up with the aviation and airline industry for the pollution they emit which is also on a biblical scale.

 

 

[Guest Had Enough]

StuartO - 2014-12-02 2:58 PM

 

While recognising that we really do need proportionate efforts to clean up the environment, I do get the impression that the initiatives from the EU are sometimes the product of ivory tower thinking rather than good government. EU civil servants being allowed to live in an unreal world and dream up yet another fanciful and expensive scheme.

 

 

So you don't think then that legislators and politicians actually take advice from scientists and that they enact legislation such as this just because they live in mythical ivory towers? Mmmmm, I'll have to think about that one!

[Guest Had Enough]

Tracker - 2014-12-02 2:59 PM

 

 

Come on Frank Lighten up a bit and always look on the bright side of life - it's only a light hearted forum after all!

 

 

Yes, but occasionally up pops a subject that merits serious debate. In such cases must we always revert to childish nonsense or are we grown up enough to actually discuss the topic intelligently?

 

I don't recollect a rule that stipulates that every thread must be light hearted frivolity, although for some people that's obviously their only operating mode. And I don't mean you by the way.

 

[Guest Joe90]

It's OK taking advice from scientists, if the advise is correct.

 

Now more and more science is saying diesel engined vehicles emit far more pollution than was first thought, and it has now been discovered that diesel cars could contribute very much more to global warming than scientists also thought. The tiny particles of soot — or 'black carbon' — in diesel exhaust are now believed to be second only to carbon dioxide in their ability to cause global warming.

 

And again according to scientists the benefits of filters have been overstated. In urban driving they work less well and clog up quickly. And even with the tougher European rules, diesel vehicles will remain far more polluting than petrol.

This is why an increasing number of air-quality experts are calling for a switch back to petrol. :-S

[pepe63xnotuse]

Had Enough - 2014-12-02 2:51 PM

 

Smart Alec remarks about the moon being made of green cheese don't negate facts that are obvious to anyone who actually knows about the changes that have been made in the last few decades, changes that mean we're all much healthier than our forebears.

 

How anyone can scoff at legislation to improve the cleanliness of our air is beyond me.

 

 

..at this rate, they'll be tryin' to stop folk from smoking in their cars whilst kids are on board...!?

..bl**dy meddlin' do-gooders!

 

..as for the moon being made of cheese, well if it was, I hope for sake of some, it's a good old British Cheddar or some such...and not, God forbid, some "Johnnie Foreigner" muck ... ;-)

[Muswell]

StuartO - 2014-12-02 2:58 PM

 

While recognising that we really do need proportionate efforts to clean up the environment, I do get the impression that the initiatives from the EU are sometimes the product of ivory tower thinking rather than good government. EU civil servants being allowed to live in an unreal world and dream up yet another fanciful and expensive scheme.

 

I suppose it's a matter of the quality of their judgement and of that of the EU Parliament which sort-of controls them. The EU's own budget and expenses system appears to be extremely poor and you could argue that the EU is not really a trustworthy system of government - but in the interests of access to the EU market, we have to submit. I don't have faith that the EU will get the cost/benefit analysis of these envoronmental judgements right at all.

 

I think you'll find that these controls are world-wide, not just EU. http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Sulphur-oxides-%28SOx%29-%E2%80%93-Regulation-14.aspx