Perhaps the panels will be around the the base of the mast as well? The color looks the same.

Ernie

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carlos Fernandez:
[...] It is nice to see cruise ships following this "green" trend. [...]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

These panels seem to be more for show than anything else.

---

I don't buy that.

1. They are awfully expensive just to have for show and serve no purpose.

2. Most passengers won't even know they exist as they are out of view except for those above the Bridge.

3. If they were just for show I would expect Celebrity to capitalize on them. Celebrity has made absolutely no mention of them in any of their promotional materials about the ship.

4. They are not even shown in the ship renderings Celebrity has produced. The cut-away is the first I have seen of them, and Celebrity hasn't even released that cut-away.

Basically, if they were going to be for show only, I would expect Celebrity to be making a big deal about them.

Yes, they may not work out in the long run (like The Lawn) but the fact RCI/Celebrity is willing to try new things goes a long way in my book. They were the first to try gas turbines on a cruise ship. They ended up being too expensive but at least they tried. Some other cruise lines followed, but I think Celebrity was the only line that used them as a main source of energy production and not back up or for extra power (except for the Radiance Class ships).

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:

I don't buy that.
[...]

---

These panels will certainly provide some power and indeed every drop of oil saved counts. But let's put this into context:

The Solistice class ships have an installed power of 91 MW. (from faktaomfartyg.se) I do not know the area of these panels but it certainly is MUCH smaller than the length multiplied with the width of the ship which would be an area larger than the "footprint" of the ship: 314,80 m x 36,80 m = 11584.64 m^2. (numbers again from faktaomfartyg.se)

The Solar constant is app. 1.3 kW / m^2 - in the average the solar radiation onto earth is assumed to be app. 340 W / m^2.

-> The power of the solar radiation onto this surface in the average is app. 3.9 MW.

The efficiency of solar panels ranges from 5 % to app. 20 % ->

-> the electrical power we could get from this area entirely cover with solar panels is in the range of 0.195 MW to 0.78 MW - which would be app. 0.2% to 0.8 % of the 91 MW installed power - an area larger than the "footprint" of the whole ship.

I leave it to you to estimate how large the area of these panels compared to this area actually is......

Beside that, there is still the issue whether these panels will bring in the energy back that has been spent to make them. The good news is that the 'energy payback time' of photovoltaic elements has been reduced recently - so it just might make sense if the right technology has been used. (the energy payback time for photvoltaic elements has been on the order of 15 years or so but is much lower now)

-> These panels are a very, very tiny contribution to the overall power consumption of the ship. It's a nice gag but not more than that.

[ 09-28-2008: Message edited by: Ernst ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:
Someone took a video of a 3D cutaway display of SOLSTICE. It appears those solar panels will be above the Bridge, on the mast base, the funnel bases, and even the adult Solarium. Very interesting. I sure wish I could get my hands on one of those cut-away drawings!

Ernie

Cut-away link

---

Yes Ernie, you are right, it would be interesting to get one of these diagrams. Apparently this company produced all renderings for Solstice and some for Genesis. In this site you can see some renderings not seen before and one of a bar on Oasis called "Club 7 Bar", interesting. http://www.vayerstudios.com/ Enter and go to the gallery. They also have a nice 360 degree view of the Lido Cafe.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carlos Fernandez:

[...]

Yes, the panels might be exposed to a harsh environment but aren't they all (well maybe not the ocean). If they ventured into this the designers must have studied this thoroughly to make sure these panels work at sea and are not damaged by salt water and high winds at times. They also take some space and what better way to use all this unused space. I'm sure there are other ships out there like mega-yachts using this technology already.

---

The "energy payback" of photovoltaic elements is a problem not limited to ships. As said, there are promising developments that cut this time to more reasonable values. I guess it is nevertheless fair to assume that the lifetime aboard a ship might be shorter than in the typical application ashore which makes this problem worse. (due to the harsh environment, the lifetime of the ship etc.) Nevertheless, if more recent technology has been used it could indeed still make sense. (not necessarily if the "energy payback time" is on the order of 15 to 20 years)

Photovoltaic elements are in use aboard smaller vessels for quite some time now. (you can buy that for your boat) What causes my 'mixed feelings' is that these panels aboard the Solistice class might give the impression that they make her significantly more environmentally friendly whereas it actually is a rather tiny contribution. (which of course still counts but it is really, really tiny)
To give you an idea, have a look at these large Solar power plants - remember the 91 MW of Solitice (of course, she is not always running at 91 MW):

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

These panels will certainly provide some power and indeed every drop of oil saved counts. But let's put this into context:

---

Ernst,
I wasn't debating on how much power these panels would generate or even how useful they would be, just that I don't think they are on the ship merely for show. RCI/Celebrity may have installed them to test efficiency or even gage how they might be better utilized when technology advances. This is a company that is open to experimentation, judged by things like the gas turbines, the Ocean Lab on EXPLORER OF THE SEAS, and even some of the passenger innovations they implement. Not all are successful but they are willing to take the risk.

Those panels are not cheap, and as I mentioned before most passengers will never see or hear about them, so I think they are onboard for more than just show. That was my point.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carlos Fernandez:

Yes Ernie, you are right, it would be interesting to get one of these diagrams. Apparently this company produced all renderings for Solstice and some for Genesis. In this site you can see some renderings not seen before and one of a bar on Oasis called "Club 7 Bar", interesting. http://www.vayerstudios.com/ Enter and go to the gallery. They also have a nice 360 degree view of the Lido Cafe.

---

That Club 7 Bar looks way cool on OASIS. I'm trying to figure out where that will be on the ship???

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:

Ernst,
I wasn't debating on how much power these panels would generate or even how useful they would be, just that I don't think they are on the ship merely for show. [...]
Those panels are not cheap, and as I mentioned before most passengers will never see or hear about them, so I think they are onboard for more than just show. That was my point.

Ernie

---

Meyer Werft and Celebrity, all of RCCL for that matter, have always been forward thinking in terms of ship design and technology and that is what you are seeing here.

There was an interview in Seatrade not long ago where Harri Kulovara talked about the the panels and this new technology. While they certainly don't and won't provide a great amount of power, they certainly pull their proverbial weight in terms of providing power for elevators and such, as Ernie said.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fairsky:

In fact, thier bad PR over the violations may have been a key factor in the Radiance and M-class ships being only gas turbine with no conventional engines. No other line has chosen this arrangement because it makes no sense. If it was purly for innovation and cost-saving I have no doubt CCL would have done so by now. They haven't. RCI did it because it had an image problem to fix. (Of course now they're being retrofitted with diesel engines as well.)

---

Is this what you really think? First the violations that faced RCI happened long before the Radiance and M-Class ships were built. If that engine type was installed because of an "image problem", then it came way too late. It also would not have been too successful either as most passengers could care less what type of engines the ship has. They are much more concerned with how tasty the food is, where the bar is, and what the evening's entertainment will be.

What RCI did to address the issue at the time was to enhance the Save the Waves program and expand it, and implement an Environmental Officer on every ship which is now standard practice with most cruise lines. Of course some people lost their jobs.

I might also mention that several other cruise lines were hit with environmental violations (including Carnival Corp. brands) but RCI received the most publicity. All this happened almost 10 years ago so it's water under the bridge so to speak. In 1999 RCI agreed to pay $18M in violations fines and was put on five years probation. At the time it was the largest environmental fine paid for by a cruise line. Subsequently, in 2002 Carnival also reached a plea agreement to pay $18M in fines/fees and was also put on five years probation for the following:

quote:

---

Ecstasy, Fantasy, Imagination, Paradise, Sensation, Tropicale

Carnival Corporation pled guilty to numerous occasions from 1996 through 2001 that it discharged oily waste into the sea from their bilges by improperly using pollution prevention equipment. In addition, the company falsified the Oil Record Books in order to conceal its practices. The plea agreement only focusses on Carnival Cruise Line (and dismisses any future charges against other Carnival Corp. subsidiaries), however it only applies to the Southern District of Florida. Other federal jurisdictions may pursue independent investigation and prosecution.

---

Bottom line, RCI was not the only cruise line violating environmental laws and trying to clean up their act.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tim in 'Lauderdale:
FWIW, these panels are not for PR or marketing purposes. If they were, you would have seen them promoted already.

Meyer Werft and Celebrity, all of RCCL for that matter, have always been forward thinking in terms of ship design and technology and that is what you are seeing here.

There was an interview in Seatrade not long ago where Harri Kulovara talked about the the panels and this new technology. While they certainly don't and won't provide a great amount of power, they certainly pull their proverbial weight in terms of providing power for elevators and such, as Ernie said.

Tim

---

This thread has been started with "It is nice to see cruise ships following this "green" trend." - giving how tiny the contribution of these panels will be I am a bit concerned when reading such a statement - yes it might be a contribution but it will not only be a tiny contribution but a really, really, really tiny one - so one can hardly say that it makes such a ship 'green' or even that the ship is following the 'green trend'. (BTW - the power consumption of elevators is actually not as big as one might thing - for those found on ships it is usually in the low kW range - whether all elevators of Solistice can indeed be powered from these panels is another story)

Giving that there are many other ways how one can safe energy aboard a ship (on a MUCH larger scale) I would stay with my statement that these panels are 'for show' or a gag at best. (whether this is made public to the passengers or not is another story)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

Giving that there are many other ways how one can safe energy aboard a ship (on a MUCH larger scale) I would stay with my statement that these panels are 'for show' or a gag at best. (whether this is made public to the passengers or not is another story)

---

I still say these panels have more purpose than a "gag" or "for show". If most passengers and the public don't even realize they are there, then why bother if it is just for show? What is the benefit? Very little is done on a cruise ship unless there is some type of return. As I've said before, RCI/Celebrity must be getting some return out of this investment. Whether it be a testing ground for future technology or simply a way to save power, I feel these panels have to serve some purpose.

Out of curiosity, what are the other ways to save energy on a cruise ship on a large scale, and if they exist why aren't they being implemented on every cruise ship? Surely there must be some reason why not???

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

This thread has been started with "It is nice to see cruise ships following this "green" trend." - giving how tiny the contribution of these panels will be I am a bit concerned when reading such a statement - yes it might be a contribution but it will not only be a tiny contribution but a really, really, really tiny one - so one can hardly say that it makes such a ship 'green' or even that the ship is following the 'green trend'. (BTW - the power consumption of elevators is actually not as big as one might thing - for those found on ships it is usually in the low kW range - whether all elevators of Solistice can indeed be powered from these panels is another story)

Giving that there are many other ways how one can safe energy aboard a ship (on a MUCH larger scale) I would stay with my statement that these panels are 'for show' or a gag at best. (whether this is made public to the passengers or not is another story)

P.S.: Photovoltaic elements are hardly a new technology.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:

I still say these panels have more purpose than a "gag" or "for show".

---

That's a semantic problem - for me it comes out for the same in this context whether they are a 'gag' or 'for show'. You know, I am not a native English speaker. Beside that, 'they' are BTW mentioning the solar panels.

quote:

---

Originally posted by eroller:
[....]

Out of curiosity, what are the other ways to save energy on a cruise ship on a large scale, and if they exist why aren't they being implemented on every cruise ship? Surely there must be some reason why not???

Ernie

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carlos Fernandez:

But still a contribution.

---

Yes. (or better: probably) But the contribution of these panels is not nearly enough to say that Solistice is following the "green trend". There are other reason why one could say that but hardly because of these panels.

[ 09-29-2008: Message edited by: Ernst ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

Yes. (or better: probably) But the contribution of these panels is not nearly enough to say that Solistice is following the "green trend". There are other reason why one could say that but hardly because of these panels.

[ 09-29-2008: Message edited by: Ernst ]

---

Well, but it is a start. Today will be photovoltaic panels which don't contribute much, tomorrow will be something else much better and someday, hopefully, cruise ships will run completely on renewable resources. For show or not I think it is a good little start.

quote:

---

Yes Ernie, you are right, it would be interesting to get one of these diagrams. Apparently this company produced all renderings for Solstice and some for Genesis. In this site you can see some renderings not seen before and one of a bar on Oasis called "Club 7 Bar", interesting. http://www.vayerstudios.com/ Enter and go to the gallery. They also have a nice 360 degree view of the Lido Cafe.

---