Recreational Boating & the Green Movement

[Nomad Willy]

View attachment 114149I just read a post or article where statistics indicated electric cars are driven far less miles than gasoline cars. Charging stations, charging times and other limitations of electric vehicles leaves little doubt why this is so.

But the reason I’m posting this is that it may have large implications to what may or will happen to the electric trawler that may come to pass.
We may own other boats that are electric but we’ll probably experience a significant period of time when trawlers will evolve into a new breed of boat with much more efficient hulls and a trend toward much lighter overall weight.
And of course more efficient propulsion systems. With much much smaller engines running higher rpm and deeper reduction drives and perhaps bigger propellers w fewer and larger dia higher aspect ratio blades.

I think they won’t look like traditional sailboats w/o sails but more like present trawlers that are much narrower/longer and perhaps w a lower profile to avoid the drag w running into the wind. As we do much of the time. A bit like feathering the oarblade on return. And w hulls looking more like modern sailboats w a low freeboard, flat sheer lines, vertical stems and slightly curved but relatively flat bottoms aft.

 

[OldDan1943]

The smaller weather window thing is a big one. The last trip we took had a first leg of 49nm. For us, that's 7.5 hours at slow cruise (~6.5 kts). We delayed our departure a day due to weather. However, seas were still a bit rougher than we wanted the next morning. So we kept waiting. By early afternoon, things had calmed enough that we were happy to go. Got off the dock around 3:30 PM. Running at slow cruise, we would have arrived well after dark (11 PM) and the lock we needed to go through to reach the spot we intended to stay would have been closed for the night. So instead, I just pushed the fuel consumption levers forward and covered the 49nm run in just under 3 hours. Arrived before dark, locked through, tied up, and had a nice dinner on the balcony of a local restaurant while watching the sunset. In that case, the extra 50 gallons of fuel burned was well worth it.

And now we know why "faster than 8knts" can be a good thing. DINNER!!

 

[CaptTom]

Congratulations,
I see you were able to cherry pick to prove your position.

No, I read the whole article, including the captions under the one graph you posted. The page you linked, and all the other data that's linked from that page, contradict your contentions, as long as one doesn't just cherry-pick one chart and post it as some sort of final word on the subject.

Doing that suggests a deliberate effort to remain uninformed.

Fact remains it is not the only opinion out there.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinions, be they grounded in reality or not. But spouting opinions, or repeating opinions others have spouted, doesn't change reality. And uninformed opinions should have no place in policy making, no matter how many times they're amplified by social media engagement algorithms.

Well, that certainly makes it easier, if none of us have to actually do anything about this climate change thing but to complain about it. I can sure do that just as well as Kerry or Leonardo, even if I don't have a private jet.

I'd say arguing against reality just to support one's personal opinion is doing something. On the other hand, so is making an effort to be informed about nuanced, and dare I say it, inconvenient scientific facts.

Yes, that's harder than just repeating sound bites, posting charts completely out of context and dismissing every credible scientist who's looked at the issue.

But as I said, each of us can do something without going back to living in a cave, or converting our trawlers to sail. We can advocate, we can vote, and we can support companies which are finding that reducing our CO2 footprint is profitable. We can find simple ways to reduce, reuse and recycle.

When we have an opportunity to do what's right, what's best for society AND what's best for the environment, I call that a win-win-win.

 

[localboy]

...be they grounded in reality or not. But spouting opinions, or repeating opinions others have spouted, doesn't change reality. And uninformed opinions should have no place in policy making, no matter how many times they're amplified by social media engagement algorithms.

Ah...reality. Whose reality?

“Reality”, like “the truth” no longer means a thing. It has been used as propaganda. A ploy to control the masses. Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes “the truth”. The truth, as reported by certain entities in this country, is no longer trustworthy. I can say I’m 7’ tall. That does not make it true.

One dare not question “the truth” or one would be branded a (insert epithet here) by those same entities. Labeled, harassed, cancelled...silenced. I could provide multiple examples but none would be allowed to remain in this site.

 

[Greatlaker221]

Look up earth temps with the little ice age included. Then look up comparisons between sunspot activity and earth temps. It’s a match. Overlay temps since the Industrial Age. Not a match. Could it be that the sun has a greater effect on temps than greenhouse gasses?

Once you digest that, we do need to keep C02 in balance, but to blame every weather, earth, political, emotional, event on climate change is not logical Captain.

Why don’t I show the data, you would not believe me. If you find it for yourself it may make you think a bit before you dismiss it.

 

[tom hudson]

Recreational boating & the Green Movement

Background: I'm pushing 70, trained as an engineer, including in early environmental science. Like many engineers, I'm somewhat obsessed by increasing efficiency of all we do in life, and not just for the benefit of the environment, but also for a richer life. I don't think those two ideas are exclusionary to one another.

Back in the 60s and 70s there was the early movement toward mechanically powered, efficient cruising vessels. Look at Beebe's Passagemaker, and some of his other designs. Look at other commercial designs, such as the Gulfstar 43. The lines of their hulls were efficient and sea-kindly, a term long out of fashion.

In more recent times others such as Buehler have made a point of efficiency in hull design and propulsion (and in his case, of simplicity as well).

Here in the 21st century we have modern high strength-to-weight engineering materials, more efficient (yes, dinosaur-consuming) engines, and other interesting ideas such as the Sharrow propellor. I have no doubt that in the next 10-20 years we will reach lower cost, higher efficiency battery chemistries, more cost efficient solar collectors, better electric motors, and other engineering advances that together will make recreational cruising in an electric vessel more cost-effective than the best diesel-powered vessel of today. Some, perhaps many, of those advances will be hailed as environmentally friendly.

But while the day of the practical electric cruising vessel has not yet arrived, incremental change is here today, and ongoing. Let's keep in touch with what's feasible, what's possible, and be unafraid to criticize what may be a technological dead end, and maybe even adopt a few new ideas ourselves. Progress is never a straight, up-and-to-the-right sloping line. But let's keep pushing it both up and to the right.

 

[tom hudson]

As a sidebar, another pumped storage hydroelectric project is TVA's Raccoon Mountain Project, built in 1978: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raccoon_Mountain_Pumped-Storage_Plant

 

[tom hudson]

An earlier post on this thread left the impression that China had if not a lock, then perhaps dominance over the mining and processing of lithium for storage batteries. That is certainly not true today. There is a U.S. company, Albemarle, with a strong market share of lithium, whose mines are primarily in Utah, Chile and (by minority interest) Australia.

Heads up and full disclosure, I own stock in this company:
https://www.albemarle.com/businesses/lithium/resources--recycling/lithium-resources

I do believe that China has a stronger position in rare earths, though I'd be proud to be disproved on that point.

 

[BandB]

Wifey B: Wow, a thread out of control and accusations thrown left and right and discussions so far beyond lay understanding and the scope of this forum. A simple question and everyone wants to debate the meaning of life.

So, for my 0 cents worth, I'm going to offer this.

Everyone here damages the environment. You do, I do, we do.

As a society, we've caused increasing damage to our environment creating a real problem as we head to the future. We're not going to fix it all today or tomorrow and it won't happen by all of us suddenly being perfect, but we just need to make progress and in some case progress is to stop screwing up so bad.

Each of us needs to personally address our role in looking after our environment and the world we live in. Are we doing better than we were or worse? Look at our personal total picture. We burn a lot of fuel on the water. Bad for environment. However, we are 100% LED bulbs in over 500 locations, we are converting our business autos to hybrid. We compact and recycle at home. We compact on the boat but rarely have recycling available when cruising. We recycle all we can from our businesses from fabric scrap to cardboard to plastic. Yes, we drink lots of bottled water but we make sure all the bottles go to a plastic recycler so confident they are recycled. We continue to look at opportunities and hoping next year we're better than this year and the year after even better. We encourage environmental awareness to our employees, at our school, at our orphanage. Our schools will be undergoing a huge solar project hopefully this summer if the pandemic allows with students doing a good part of the work. It was students who initiated the idea and they were right. As to our home, we haven't figured out a way to make it happen or to make it financially justifiable. It likely was before we figured out ways to reduce usage. Part of the problem is the way the state is set up with FPL.

We save the world one little bit at a time.

One other thing is that money talks. We persuade good behavior, encourage improvement with money. Why do we do well with tires and batteries? There's a price. You want to do it with cans and bottles, put a price on them. You want to encourage solar, put dollar incentives on them or disincentives on other energy forms. We've made progress on industry polluting our streams and rivers by making it expensive to do so.

No one here has all the answers, but it's one day at a time, two steps forward, one back and repeat. The first step is recognizing there's a problem. Second, is simply committing to improvement.

We've done things in the past but when the problem was very visible as cities were covered with smog. Oh the fight over Catalytic Converters, but our cities would have been a disaster were it not for them. I believe we'll improve in the future as long as we don't live in denial.

When we return from this cruise next week, we'll start reviewing our business plan. Normally, we do this in the fall so running late this year. One thing we tossed in was part for each location and each group to say what they'd do better for the environment in 2021 and 2022. Every year we learn. One thing from this year. Everyone doesn't have to go to the office each day. Save the drive and time and effort if not needed. We still have offices for everyone but we anticipate the maximum we'll see in the future in the office on a given day will be 60%. Out of habit, group managers would come in for an hour and organize and return calls and then go check on stores in their group. Unnecessary. Oh and one step further. Travel will be way down as we've learned to travel by web and see people and things on cam. We don't need to drive to Jacksonville to look through a store there, just walk us around with a cam.

We can all do better and we'll all still have those outlier areas. I'm proud to be working for the environment and doing my share, but I'm not giving up my large diesel boat engines. Is that hypocritical? Perhaps some of you judge is so. But I'd put my overall environmental impact over the last few years as very positive and improving each year. I balance my life. I'm not all good or all evil, but somewhere in between.

 

[Alaskaflyer]

It's human nature to prefer common over individual sacrifice even for causes one believes in. One can throw out literally dozens of American examples that would cover everyone in this thread in one way or another. Sure, hypocrisy is a sin, as are many other aspects of basic human behavior. Glass houses and all that.

 

[bligh]

Really this conversation is silly. Just the act of building a recreational boat fiberglass, aluminum, steel boat whether its powered by wind, solar, or electric , has a massive negative effect on the environment . Just to list a few of the resources used to produce a boat;


Petroleum to heat and make metal parts and hulls

Petroleum to make fiberglass


Petroleum for all plastic parts including..... Batteries!


Chemical factories to make paint, epoxy, resin, glue

Factories to make all plastic, wiring, rails , steel parts


Energy consumed to transport all materials to boat yard.


Waste packaging for all materials delivered to boat yard.


Waste materials left over from production of vessel ; fiberglass cut outs, cushion leftovers, material leftovers, sail leftovers, leftover paint, glue, paint tape, sandpaper, duct tape, plastic sheeting, etc.


Waste PPE use during production; Zuit suits, googles, ear plugs , safety glasses, rubber gloves, used respirators, tape etc.


Energy used to produce engine for vessel.; heat to cast and machine engine parts, batteries, solar panels..


I'm sure I could go on. But there is NOTING environmentally friendly about building a boat. I tend to think the average boat ,during a 20 year operation period, has less impact on the environment than the original construction of the vessel itself. So if your concerned about the environment, your best bet is not to participate. But really, you all dont really care that much about the environment, you just want to virtue signal to everyone that you are a good conscientious citizen trying to make the world greener (when your not) with your battery powered boat.

 

[Art]

Really this conversation is silly. Just the act of building a recreational boat fiberglass, aluminum, steel boat whether its powered by wind, solar, or electric , has a massive negative effect on the environment . Just to list a few of the resources used to produce a boat;


Petroleum to heat and make metal parts and hulls

Petroleum to make fiberglass


Petroleum for all plastic parts including..... Batteries!


Chemical factories to make paint, epoxy, resin, glue

Factories to make all plastic, wiring, rails , steel parts


Energy consumed to transport all materials to boat yard.


Waste packaging for all materials delivered to boat yard.


Waste materials left over from production of vessel ; fiberglass cut outs, cushion leftovers, material leftovers, sail leftovers, leftover paint, glue, paint tape, sandpaper, duct tape, plastic sheeting, etc.


Waste PPE use during production; Zuit suits, googles, ear plugs , safety glasses, rubber gloves, used respirators, tape etc.


Energy used to produce engine for vessel.; heat to cast and machine engine parts, batteries, solar panels..


I'm sure I could go on. But there is NOTING environmentally friendly about building a boat. I tend to think the average boat ,during a 20 year operation period, has less impact on the environment than the original construction of the vessel itself. So if your concerned about the environment, your best bet is not to participate. But really, you all dont really care that much about the environment, you just want to virtue signal to everyone that you are a good conscientious citizen trying to make the world greener (when your not) with your battery powered boat.

Oh... so now you want to get into the details!!?? Only kidding; good post!!

 

[Benthic2]

One aspect of boating that should not be discounted is that for many people the extinction of whales, dying coral reefs, and plastic in the ocean is an abstract concept that is easy to dismiss as unimportant. I think as a boating group of people, we probably have more of an appreciation of those things after having seen whales up close, snorkeled over a reef full of fish and generally appreciating what the ocean has to offer. So take a land lubber out on your boat and help them see all that the ocean has to offer. The world will be a better place if more people appreciate the marine environment.

 

[Xsbank]

This:

 

[Group9]

Well, let's take a poll on this "truth".

Do the people who think carbon based climate change is a real crisis, think it would be better, or worse, if every person on the planet owned a gas or diesel fueled trawler or powerboat, (and a large house, and a couple of cars like most of us do)?

I just can't take people seriously, who don't practice what they preach. No matter how many graphs or studies they put up, or how many clever names they think up for the people who disagree with them.

 

[ksanders]

Well, let's take a poll on this "truth".

Do the people who think carbon based climate change is a real crisis, think it would be better, or worse, if every person on the planet owned a gas or diesel fueled trawler or powerboat, (and a large house, and a couple of cars like most of us do)?

I just can't take people seriously, who don't practice what they preach. No matter how many graphs or studies they put up, or how many clever names they think up for the people who disagree with them.

Thats my opinion

If you believe that we are in a crisis situation then act accordingly. Lead by example. Dump your hydrocarbon fueled life, and implore others to follow your example and do the same.

My wife Believes in Organic food. I respect that 100% because she flat out WILL NOT eat non organic food, not one bite. She has beliefs and has acted on them. I may not agree but I respect anyone who believes something and acts accordingly.

 

[OldDan1943]

My wife Believes in Organic food. I respect that 100% because she flat out WILL NOT eat non organic food, not one bite. She has beliefs and has acted on them. I may not agree but I respect anyone who believes something and acts accordingly.

Guess you dont go out to dinner much.
Does she eat meat and or fish?

 

[Group9]

No, I read the whole article, including the captions under the one graph you posted. The page you linked, and all the other data that's linked from that page, contradict your contentions, as long as one doesn't just cherry-pick one chart and post it as some sort of final word on the subject.

Doing that suggests a deliberate effort to remain uninformed.



You are certainly entitled to your own opinions, be they grounded in reality or not. But spouting opinions, or repeating opinions others have spouted, doesn't change reality. And uninformed opinions should have no place in policy making, no matter how many times they're amplified by social media engagement algorithms.



I'd say arguing against reality just to support one's personal opinion is doing something. On the other hand, so is making an effort to be informed about nuanced, and dare I say it, inconvenient scientific facts.

Yes, that's harder than just repeating sound bites, posting charts completely out of context and dismissing every credible scientist who's looked at the issue.

But as I said, each of us can do something without going back to living in a cave, or converting our trawlers to sail. We can advocate, we can vote, and we can support companies which are finding that reducing our CO2 footprint is profitable. We can find simple ways to reduce, reuse and recycle.

When we have an opportunity to do what's right, what's best for society AND what's best for the environment, I call that a win-win-win.

But, you don't actually change anything major in your life, right? You just pontificate and that takes care of everything.

I still think that comes of about as false and insincere as it is possible to be. Obviously, you think you are the shining beacon of logic that you profess to agree with, but nevertheless, see no real reason to act on. See the difference?

Would the world be better off, or worse off, if every single person on it, all seven billion of them, did exactly what you do? We both know the answer.

 

[SteveK]

Well, let's take a poll on this "truth".

Do the people who think carbon based climate change is a real crisis, think it would be better, or worse, if every person on the planet owned a gas or diesel fueled trawler or powerboat, (and a large house, and a couple of cars like most of us do)?

I just can't take people seriously, who don't practice what they preach. No matter how many graphs or studies they put up, or how many clever names they think up for the people who disagree with them.

More of the same of a perceived problem would mean a larger perceived problem. Not sure how you want to have question answered.

TF members are a small percentage of all boat owners. For every trawler I suspect there are 50 trailer type boats running around burning fossil fuels.

 

[SteveK]

Thats my opinion

If you believe that we are in a crisis situation then act accordingly. Lead by example. Dump your hydrocarbon fueled life, and implore others to follow your example and do the same.

My wife Believes in Organic food. I respect that 100% because she flat out WILL NOT eat non organic food, not one bite. She has beliefs and has acted on them. I may not agree but I respect anyone who believes something and acts accordingly.

I guess the argument that beef is organic because all they eat is grass which is organic does not fly. Is organic the same as vegetarian? Or Vegan? so many ways to mess with us carnivores.

Should investigate the israel 3D printed steak just developed.

 

[Art]

Well, let's take a poll on this "truth".

Do the people who think carbon based climate change is a real crisis, think it would be better, or worse, if every person on the planet owned a gas or diesel fueled trawler or powerboat, (and a large house, and a couple of cars like most of us do)?

I just can't take people seriously, who don't practice what they preach. No matter how many graphs or studies they put up, or how many clever names they think up for the people who disagree with them.

Crux of the situation...

Definition:

"Save Earth's Ecosystem"... while enabling established life styles to proceed in proximity as current; with simultaneous improvements for underprivileged persons and expanding relevant economic conditions and capabilities.

Established prosperous directions of the past centuries, quickly changing circumstances of current days and improvement for future conditions will not be upheld by simply stopping the use of all that has come into the existence for civilization.

It is however... required that we greatly improve [make better] many human interactions with Earth's Nature, This can be accomplished without abstractly negating the use of inventions throughout levels of human existence. We can have our cake and eat it too. We must not throw our baby [i.e. much of human improvements for the recent three centuries] out with the bath water.

Let's not "Go Overboard" one way or the other! Rather. let us consciously and cohesively meet and solve each problematic circumstance for living within the bounds of Earth's nature.

We can do it... We Can... "Save Earth's Ecosystem"!! We Can... enable a good living "global climate future" for our decedents.

 

[FWT]

Well, let's take a poll on this "truth".

Do the people who think carbon based climate change is a real crisis, think it would be better, or worse, if every person on the planet owned a gas or diesel fueled trawler or powerboat, (and a large house, and a couple of cars like most of us do)?

I just can't take people seriously, who don't practice what they preach. No matter how many graphs or studies they put up, or how many clever names they think up for the people who disagree with them.

Crisis? Today, not so much. Some impact? Of course.

The real trouble is that in the United States of Karens, because *I* think something, YOU must comply.

If you don't, you are evil.

"Whenever reason is lost, and judgement fails, disaster fills in."

A little perspective is a valuable thing. Too often missing in so many issues that go way past the Green Movement.

 

[sbman]

Crisis? Today, not so much. Some impact? Of course.

The real trouble is that in the United States of Karens, because *I* think something, YOU must comply.

If you don't, you are evil.

"Whenever reason is lost, and judgement fails, disaster fills in."

A little perspective is a valuable thing. Too often missing in so many issues that go way past the Green Movement.

It seems to me we've reached a point of diminishing returns in the U.S. We have made huge improvements, you only have to look at the color of the air in the L.A. basin to see that. When I was a kid I remember driving into a 'smog bank' when going there from San Diego, and sometimes it would blow down here. The air was black, and thick. The smell of a city in the U.S. is no longer exhaust fumes and soot. However...

Step across the border to any third world country. Many of our cast offs, much of our industry, and pollution is ending up there and are still in use. You only have to go so far as Tijuana to remember what the 60's and 70's smelled like in cities, the smog bank, the soot.

We've offloaded our dirty manufacturing, our ecologically harmful e-waste recycling, any of a number of industries that are not palatable to look at in our own back yard, while we consume the benefits of the same.

To bring it back on point, if we decide that we need battery powered trawlers, it will be at a cost that is distant, remote and unseen (as is current boat production). Meanwhile we'll profess to be 'green', mining elements, assembling batteries, building solar panels and burning fuels to produce all of that will be out of sight and in someone else's backyard.

 

[FWT]

To bring it back on point, if we decide that we need battery powered trawlers, it will be at a cost that is distant, remote and unseen (as is current boat production). Meanwhile we'll profess to be 'green', mining elements, assembling batteries, building solar panels and burning fuels to produce all of that will be out of sight and in someone else's backyard.

Yes

Somewhere (in the US) there is an awful lot of natural gas and coal being burned to create the power loaded into those batteries. Somewhere, there is a lot of strip mining of lithium. Somewhere, there is a lot of refining of a lot of oil into the plastics byproducts those windmills are built from. Somewhere, there is some dirty manufacturing building those solar panels.

Nothing wrong with Green. We just need to be honest about it all.

 

[localboy]

Nothing wrong with Green. We just need to be honest about it all.

So it's not all unicorn farts and rainbow bunnies? Does the current administration know?

 

[OldDan1943]

Until we come up with real renewable power sources, we are merely relocating the pollution.

 

[rslifkin]

Until we come up with real renewable power sources, we are merely relocating the pollution.

For the most part, yes. But power generation tends to be more efficient at large scale and also easier to control emissions from. So burning a lot of fuel in 1 place to make a bunch of power is still likely to be an improvement over burning it in thousands of smaller engines (especially when many of those engines are often not operating at peak efficiency due to the varied operating conditions they see).

 

[BandB]

But, you don't actually change anything major in your life, right? You just pontificate and that takes care of everything.

I still think that comes of about as false and insincere as it is possible to be. Obviously, you think you are the shining beacon of logic that you profess to agree with, but nevertheless, see no real reason to act on. See the difference?

Would the world be better off, or worse off, if every single person on it, all seven billion of them, did exactly what you do? We both know the answer.

Actually, as you address that statement to people you don't know the answer. In our case, we've changed a lot. We've made major changes. What we haven't done is changed everything and haven't changed the specifics you're targeting today. However, I do believe if every person had made equivalent changes we'd be better off. Furthermore, we intend to continue to make changes as both knowledge and technology evolve. While abstinence may be great, we also find virtue in moderation.

Automobiles are a great example. While a debate exists about the future unknown and the cars of tomorrow, there is no debate that today's cars produce less pollution than those of years ago. I would say, likewise, there is no doubt industry produces less than it did. My belief is by continuing to work on this though that both will be better 10 years from today than today.

My first exposure to energy conservation was very early in my business career and we had an internal energy czar writing up guidelines. One was for all distribution centers to put motion sensitive activation for lights on all rows in their warehouses as a lot was being wasted on lights in rows where no one was working at that moment. I said "no." Those who followed experienced many times the ballast failures on their fluorescent fixtures as in the past. I call that an idea before it's time. On the other hand we did switch to an elaborate load balancing system on our electricity which primarily balanced the air conditioning and greatly reduced peak loads. Major savings plus helped the utility company. As to distribution center lighting, things have evolved. We are now using all LED lights. When we leased our largest distribution center, we changed every fixture and light for 500,000 sq ft. Major cost but major payback and in this case, the cost savings and the environmental issue in energy savings are aligned.

On solar for commercial buildings, we're still facing a conflict. The payback is far longer than any we normally would invest based on. This is partly due to the energy savings already in place. Still we're starting our first major installations. My wife mentioned the project planned on our schools we operate. The financial payback isn't good but it is practical and educational. The question also came up as to the homes in the area. The power company isn't encouraging it or making it easy or financially good from what I can tell. However, on top of solar for the school, there's a class project to look into solar for homes in the area.

Like most, we're selective. We decide based on the impact to our lives and based on the costs. We'll continue to do so and as those things change, then we'll change.

As to hypocritical per the claims some are making, we are not. We have never claimed everything much change all at once. All we state is that it's a crisis that must be continuously addressed and we all must do better each and every year. We have done better and we will. We will do our share. I'd suggest each consider their own actions and hope none choose to throw rocks from glass houses.

 

[AusCan]

Hmmm

isn't it just a teeny, tiny bit hypocritical for anyone on the one hand feel with their heart of hearts that fossile fuels are causing all the bad things i hear by some on this thread, and at the same time be on a forum that is devoted to a pasttime that is only possible by causing this great harm to our planet and humnanity?

I promise that if I personally believed that I was doing something that was causing others, or our panet direct, irreversible harm I would stop doing that thing immediately.

Seems logical to me.

It seems we have a situation where some tout a belief, and ask others to act, while they themselves are unwilling to do so.

Seriously guys. If you really think Trawlers are killing the planet, Please buy a sail boat. We even have a sister forum devoted to sail based cruising Cruisers forum. Wonderful folks there, lots of knowledge!

Pretty much everything we do has an adverse affect on the planet. Old Mother Nature can handle a certain amount of it, but we are asking too much of her. We all need to cut back on some of our more harmful actions.

Our current throwaway society simply is not sustainable. I don't know how anyone can deny this.

 

[TWedd]

As a child I learned that the Great Lakes were formed by glaciers. I saw the glacial grooves. I believe in global warming, Ive seen the proof with my own eyes!
I'm not sure when the glaciers melted, but I don't think human activity, or fossil fuel use had much to do with the global warming that melted the glaciers.

I support clean air and clean water. I just cant make the leap that our activity over the last 100 years has caused this sudden global warming crisis.

Global warming? Sure. Man made? not so sure.