Lessons from cruise’s past to shape its future

The cruise industry is on a journey: aiming for ever higher levels of safety and sustainability, while contending with significant public scrutiny and technical challenges. But, as Bud Darr, Executive Vice President, Maritime Policy and Government Affairs of MSC Group and Andreas Ullrich, Global Market Leader Passenger Ships & Ferries at Bureau Veritas, discussed at Seatrade Cruise Global 2024, the sector’s legacy of problem solving will be pivotal in the years ahead.

Safety is a journey, not a destination

Bud Darr (MSC): Our company, and the industry at large, continues to move towards a safer and safer fleet. Achieving safety is – ultimately – a journey, not a destination: we’re always improving and adapting to new trends. These days, we shipowners are especially focused on the human factor, alongside ensuring that equipment is fit for purpose. That means training crews to reach the right skill level for the new technologies being integrated on board. I feel it needs to be an ongoing commitment for shipowners, and I’m happy to say it’s what we’re doing every day at MSC.

Andreas Ullrich (BV): Of course. Even if we can’t achieve “absolute safety,” it’s still what we should aim for. I think the record shows the industry is taking this seriously – we’ve definitely seen this increased focus on training and safety culture to reduce risk as new technologies emerge. In particular, now we’re seeing where safety and sustainability overlap in the discussion of new fuels.

Bud: Very much so. There’s a whole new generation of fuels, each with their own hazards, that are new to our seafarers, shoreside experts and operational managers. Take ammonia, for instance: it shows great potential as a hydrogen carrier, but its toxicity has to be managed. Hydrogen also has its own specific risks. Reaching net-zero will necessarily imply more training, safety measures and risk assessments. One day we may even be looking at using advanced nuclear power – it may sound far-fetched but its technical merits warrant examination. 

Collaboration is always the best fuel

Andreas: You raise a very important point: decarbonization requires studying every option, no matter where it stands today. On the classification side, we’re expected to contribute to the solutions, so we strive to be leaders on this journey. We’re most successful when collaborating with shipyard suppliers, owners and competitors.

Bud: Exactly. To quote an industry partner, collaboration is always the best fuel. It’s simple, but it’s true! Classification societies make good partners because they help us frame possible futures from a design and operational standpoint. We can then bring those ideas to life with our shipbuilders and our original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) in a safe and environmentally sound way.

An industry of problem-solvers

Bud: We’re an industry of problem solvers at heart, so we need to be proactive and propose new solutions. As an example: 15 to 20 years ago, the increase in cruise ships sizes led to concerns about managing passenger flows and evacuations during emergencies. We had to rethink our usual approach to mustering passengers and crew – basically, everybody put on a lifejacket and went to their assigned lifeboats, which were limited to 150 passengers. Unpacking that issue of passenger limit led to several different benefits. Crucially, we found that making lifeboats bigger to fit more passengers actually made them safer and more durable overall. 

Andreas: That’s a fantastic example. It shows how serious the industry and regulators are about safety, but it also illustrates the benefits of a shift in regulatory mindset. The 150-per-lifeboat figure made sense when it was introduced under the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)… in 1929! But that was a prescriptive measure answering to a need at that time as the result of an incident, and no longer relevant to large modern ships with more passengers on board. And in any case, an equivalent level of safety has to be upheld, whatever the capacity of the lifeboat. 

May the best solutions win

Andreas: I think we’ll see this shift from “prescriptive” to “goal-based” continue in the safety and sustainability regulatory space. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is increasingly defining a requisite goal to achieve while remaining open to different methods. 

Bud: Indeed. I do believe it would be counterproductive if regulators were to impose a choice of fuel for decarbonization. That would be like picking the winner before the race has even begun! With goal-based regulation, you can set a target, like net-zero around 2050, and say “may the best solutions win.” 

It allows shipowners to choose the best of a range of solutions for their needs, which could also matter for customers and the public. I know from experience that our guests react positively to hearing how we ensure shipboard sustainability. As customers become more and more attuned to their own environmental footprint, I think they too will be partners in this journey.