Summer Sale Extended! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

Shame on Carnival for putting profits ahead of the planet's well-being

As travelers who enjoy a cruise as one kind of lovely vacation, my family is certain now never to cruise with Carnival Cruise Lines — not because the line will move to Tampa, Fla., in 2014, but because of its leadership's sadly narrow perspective on how to preserve their profits at the cost of endangering our seas and coastal areas ("Carnival has plans to ship out of port," June 28).

Knowing that Carnival continues to haggle with the EPA over implementing standards to reduce air pollution, it would be unconscionable for an informed traveler to even consider voyaging with Carnival Cruise Lines.

Given enforcement of the EPA's policy that ships burn cleaner fuel within 200 nautical miles of the coast, Carnival estimates that passengers will pay as much as $140 more per cruise.

Missing the golden opportunity to become a brave and visionary steward of environmental preservation, Carnival shortsightedly and greedily seeks to maintain its executives' full pockets and its stockholders' full coffers. From the Chesapeake Bay to the Gulf of Mexico, Carnival continues to grandstand and quibble with the EPA instead supporting the agency's effort to control pollution.

It would be great if Carnival were to boldly and proudly state that it cares so deeply about the health of our oceans and the future of our planet that it would work to bring its fuel policies and mechanisms in line with EPA standards.

As part of its attempt to re-educate and refocus the cruising public's perspective, Carnival should be specific and honest by stating that the measures it takes to reduce pollution will cost their cruising travelers as much as $140 per person. Carnival should ask its customers to share the vision of a cleaner earth.

Despite the fact that in the short run it will cost more to support the EPA's efforts, ultimately global environmental stewardship led by Carnival Cruise Lines would be immensely less costly. Our oceans, the habitats within them and the ecosystems with which a healthy planet is blessed would be better preserved and protected from sea to shining sea.

Martha Armenti, Baltimore

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Fuel prices are the least of Carnival's worries

    Fuel prices are the least of Carnival's worries

    The days when people bragged about taking a cruise to the Caribbean are long gone. The afterglow from a week at sea with all-you-can-eat amenities topped off with a tan is gone as well. And the EPA has nothing to do with it ("Carnival has plans to ship out of port," June 28).

  • Why Gov. O'Malley lobbied the EPA

    Why Gov. O'Malley lobbied the EPA

    In Timothy Wheeler's article ("O'Malley lobbies EPA on fuel rule," June 16), readers are left with the wrong impression about why Gov. Martin O'Malley called the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on behalf of the Port of Baltimore. Governor O'Malley was asking the EPA to review a draft proposal...