“The rich gazed at their superyachts, and decided they were not enough. The new breed of megayachts, which are at least 70 metres (230ft) in length, may be the most expensive moveable assets ever created.”
“First and foremost, owning a megayacht is the most polluting activity a single person can possibly engage in. Abramovich’s yachts emit more than 22,000 tonnes of carbon every year, which is more than some small countries. Even flying long-haul every day of the year, or air-conditioning a sprawling palace, would not get close to those emissions levels.
The bulk of these emissions happen whether or not a yacht actually travels anywhere. Simply owning one – or indeed building one – is an act of enormous climate vandalism.”
This is why I fucking hate the do your part bullshit.
Corporations and wealthy don’t have the same pressure or responsibility, but it’s us as consumers who have to put all the extra work and thought into changing our routines and habits (not to mention how much more it could cost)
Fuck these fucks. Greed killed the earth.
Bluntly banning Megayachts seems excessively interventionalist when you could instead ban the fossil fuel engines they use and ban the emissions. Make them pass a smog test that’s no more lenient than a car. Why not effectively force them to be wind and solar powered and thus force them to blow their money on advancing green energy? If that kills the megayacht business anyway, well then fair enough.
I actually think that’s an awesome idea. Force them to be “green” mega yachts. They can’t bitch about batteries being expensive, they’re literally the richest people on the fucking planet. We shouldn’t have to suffer even more just so they can be obscenely wealthy and cheap at the same time…
No one should own a mega yacht, even if its solar or wind powered. And its like 100% a given, that super rich would just pay double the price (compared to current mega yachts) to get them because they can
Removed by mod
This is just a “feel bad” story rather than an actionable policy suggestion since, as the author acknowledges, regulating these yachts is going to be rather difficult because they can just sail somewhere else. Plenty of countries will welcome them in return for the economic activity associated with being a haven for the super-rich.
I’ve wondered about that. Ireland, Delaware, and Bermuda are all notorious tax havens, but are any of them actually any better off than they would be otherwise? I get the feeling that the benefits are going to a very select handful of people, and not, uh, trickling down.
let them sail somewhere else then
without rich people
If the yachts already exist anyway and so the carbon footprint will be the same, it seems better for them to exist here where they put a lot of money into the local economy rather than somewhere else. I suppose that has to be weighted against the potential to discourage future yacht construction…
Let em put their money into the local economies of somalia when first world ports no longer welcome them.
They can’t sail somewhere else if you sink them.
Now do cruise ships.
And then jets.
Start with cruise ships if you please.
I’m cool with that.
Some of these megayachts are the size of a cruise ship, but only for one dude and his family. Hence all the pollution just for a handfull of people, who do not even use it most of the year.
Better to turn them into artificial reefs if you see them
Just a little public service <3
what do you do with owner
I heard they like submarines
Capsize the rich
What a whiny article. Sure I agree with the spirit, but let’s consider cruise ships and container vessels first if climate change is really the goal.
It’s not about pollution per capita, it is the actual sum total that we should start with.
Container ships provide an important service for many many people, and are actually one of our most efficient forms of goods transport. These personal yachts on the other hand are pure vanity projects
There is no reason that cargo ships should be able to burn arbitrarily dirty fuel in international waters basically constantly.
There are plenty of comfort actions that are carbon costly, but that doesnt excuse the big polluters. It’s like saying people like their showers too hot so we should take colder showers before Maersk has to upgrade their systems.
But if anything should go first, it’s the mega yachts. I mean it’s absolutely ridiculous and isn’t helping anyone.
I’m just saying take the big bites first. I’m not mega rich, but I know mega rich people are litigious AF. It is a matter of bang for the buck to me.
Go ahead and try to ban mega yachts first and see how the oligarchy shits a brick. You can stop more fuel burn faster other ways.
Companies are litigious as well, that’s who owns container ships.
Little surprise, then, that megayachts have been associated with crimes including money laundering, prostitution and illegal drug use.
This comment works against the author’s credibility. You don’t need to spotlight controversial laws against the personal freedoms of consenting adults to make megayacht owners look bad. It’s like saying “the rapist also smokes marijuana!” And isn’t prostitution and drug consumption fair game in international waters?
Second, the fact that yacht owners can choose which country’s flag to sail under – and can fly a flag of convenience if they choose – means it would be extremely difficult to enforce such a tax.
That’s interesting. Though I didn’t know they had to pick a flag. Surely they could buy a tiny island and create their own country with their own laws. There’s a book on how to do that.
Cum hoc ergo propter hoc, but
prostitution
consenting adults
seems like the world should ban filthy wealth lifestyle. How should we proceed, any idea anyone ?
Gee I’m suddenly feeling very hungry
We should start by killing everybody who has a permanent internet connection.
Done. Now what?
I’m surprised I don’t hear more stories about them being targeted by pirates.
Watch them manage to ban canoes and write exemptions for the mega yachts. We know that’s exactly what will happen.
The Guardian, a shill for oil?
Why ‘ban yachts’ when a carbon tax would achtually reduce fossil fuel consumption and emissions? I’ll tell you why: because banning yachts doesn’t put a restriction on fossil fuel consumption.
It bans yachts.
I agree, don’t ban the yacht, eat the owners of yachts.
Removed by mod
And when they’re moving, they’re highly inefficient as well. With a displacement ship hull designed to part the water their top speed is limited by their own length. A ship cannot overtake its own bow wake and with a length of let’s say 70 meters you end up at a top speed of about 20 knots. Which isn’t slow, but also not that much faster than cargo or passenger transport (maybe going 10 to 15 knots).
While a cargo ship is mostly longer and could theoretically sail faster, it is designed to be economical. It gets an engine that is most efficient at a certain speed, for example 12 knots at ahead standard, the propeller is cut for efficiency etc.
A yacht is designed to be comfortable and fast. It gets powerful engines that combust however much they need to combust. The propeller may be designed to produce less noise or vibration instead of being most fuel efficient.
