Cruise Ship Carbon Emissions: The Complete 2025 Environmental Impact Guide

The cruise industry’s environmental impact has reached unprecedented levels in 2025. To put this in perspective, Royal Caribbean’s Icon of the Seas—the world’s largest cruise ship—emits as much carbon dioxide annually as a small town of 50,000 residents. As the industry projects carrying 33.7 million passengers this year, understanding cruise ship carbon emissions has never been more critical for environmentally conscious travelers.

This comprehensive guide examines the latest 2025 data on cruise ship emissions, compares major cruise lines’ environmental performance, and provides practical guidance for making informed travel decisions in an era of climate awareness.

Understanding Cruise Ship Carbon Emissions: The Basics

Cruise ship emissions encompass multiple greenhouse gases and pollutants that impact both climate change and local air quality. Understanding these emissions requires examining several key components:

Types of Cruise Ship Emissions

• Carbon Dioxide (CO2): The primary greenhouse gas from fuel combustion, accounting for approximately 85% of cruise ship climate impact
• Methane (CH4): Released through “methane slip” from LNG engines, with 80 times the warming potential of CO2 over 20 years
• Sulfur Oxides (SOx): Cause acid rain and respiratory problems, particularly harmful in port cities
• Nitrogen Oxides (NOx): Contribute to smog formation and ocean acidification
• Black Carbon: Accelerates ice melting when deposited in Arctic regions

How Emissions Are Measured

The maritime industry uses several metrics to quantify cruise ship emissions:

• Grams CO2 per passenger-kilometer (gCO2/pax-km): The standard metric for comparing transportation modes
• Kilograms CO2 per nautical mile: Used for ship-to-ship comparisons
• Total annual emissions: Measured in tonnes for fleet-wide assessments
• Emissions per passenger per day: Useful for vacation planning comparisons

Fuel Types and Carbon Intensity

Modern cruise ships primarily use three fuel types, each with different emission profiles:

• Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO): The traditional choice, producing approximately 3.1 tonnes CO2 per tonne of fuel
• Marine Gas Oil (MGO): Cleaner than HFO but more expensive, required in emission control areas
• Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG): Reduces CO2 by 15-20% but increases methane emissions through engine slip

By the Numbers: Cruise Ship Emission Statistics for 2025

The latest data reveals the staggering scale of cruise industry emissions. According to the EU’s Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system and industry analysis, here are the key figures for 2025:

Industry-Wide Annual Emissions

Carnival Corporation, the world’s largest cruise operator, alone emitted 9.5 million tonnes of CO2 in 2023, with projections showing continued growth through 2025. This represents:

• More emissions than the entire city of Glasgow (2.43 million tonnes)
• Equivalent to approximately 2.1 million passenger cars driven for one year
• A 12% increase from pre-pandemic 2019 levels

Per-Passenger Daily Emissions

The average cruise passenger is responsible for 421.43kg of CO2 per day, according to 2025 industry analysis. This breaks down to:

• Accommodation and hotel services: 45%
• Propulsion and navigation: 35%
• Entertainment and dining facilities: 15%
• Port operations and excursions: 5%

Comparison with Other Transport Modes

Cruise emissions are significantly higher than alternative vacation options:

• Cruising: 250-350 gCO2/pax-km for efficient ships, up to 500+ gCO2/pax-km for luxury vessels
• Flying + Hotel: 80-130 gCO2/pax-km for flights plus 15 gCO2/pax-km daily for hotels
• Land-based vacations: 8 times lower emissions than equivalent cruise experiences
• Rail travel: 14-40 gCO2/pax-km depending on energy source

Regional Impact Data

Different cruise routes show varying emission intensities:

• Caribbean routes: Average 280 gCO2/pax-km due to shorter distances between ports
• Mediterranean cruises: 320 gCO2/pax-km with frequent port calls
• Alaska expeditions: 450+ gCO2/pax-km due to remote locations and weather challenges
• Transatlantic crossings: 220 gCO2/pax-km benefiting from longer distances

Major Cruise Lines Emissions Ranking

Based on 2024-2025 data from Transport & Environment and industry reporting, here’s how major cruise lines compare on environmental performance:

Worst Performers (Highest Emissions per Passenger-Kilometer)

1. Disney Cruise Line: 1,481kg CO2/nautical mile (Disney Dream in European waters)
2. Norwegian Cruise Line: 1,413kg CO2/nautical mile average across 10 European ships
3. Princess Cruises: 1,253kg CO2/nautical mile fleet average
4. Royal Caribbean: 1,248kg CO2/nautical mile (including Icon of the Seas)
5. MSC Cruises: 1,229kg CO2/nautical mile

Better Performers (Relatively Lower Emissions)

1. Hurtigruten: 180-220 gCO2/pax-km (expedition ships with shore power capability)
2. Viking Ocean Cruises: 240-280 gCO2/pax-km (smaller ships, newer technology)
3. Celebrity Cruises: 290-340 gCO2/pax-km (Edge-class ships)
4. Holland America: 310-360 gCO2/pax-km (mid-size fleet efficiency)

Fleet Size vs. Efficiency Analysis

Larger cruise lines don’t necessarily mean less efficient operations:

• Carnival Corporation: 92 ships, 9.5M tonnes total emissions, mixed efficiency across brands
• Royal Caribbean Group: 65+ ships, newer vessels showing 15% better efficiency than older fleet
• Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings: 28 ships, investing in LNG technology but methane slip concerns
• MSC Cruises: 22 ships, rapid expansion with mixed environmental performance

Transparency and Reporting Practices

Cruise line environmental reporting varies significantly:

• Most Transparent: Hurtigruten, Viking, Celebrity (detailed sustainability reports)
• Moderate Reporting: Royal Caribbean, Holland America (annual sustainability updates)
• Limited Transparency: Disney, Norwegian, Princess (basic compliance reporting only)

The Science Behind Cruise Ship Pollution

Understanding how cruise ships generate emissions requires examining the complex systems that power these floating cities.

Heavy Fuel Oil Combustion Process

Most cruise ships still rely on heavy fuel oil (HFO), a petroleum refinery residue that produces significant emissions:

• Combustion chemistry: HFO contains 85-87% carbon by weight, producing 3.1 tonnes CO2 per tonne burned
• Sulfur content: Up to 3.5% sulfur creates SOx emissions, causing acid rain and respiratory problems
• Incomplete combustion: Produces black carbon particles that accelerate ice melting in polar regions
• Energy density: Lower efficiency compared to refined fuels requires more consumption per mile

LNG and Methane Slip Phenomenon

Liquefied Natural Gas, promoted as a “cleaner” alternative, presents its own challenges:

• Methane slip rates: 1-3% of fuel escapes unburned from engines
• Climate impact: Methane is 80 times more potent than CO2 over 20 years
• Total warming effect: LNG ships may have 70-82% of HFO’s climate impact when methane is included
• Engine technology: Low-pressure dual-fuel engines have higher slip rates than high-pressure systems

Scrubber Systems and Environmental Trade-offs

Exhaust gas cleaning systems (scrubbers) reduce air pollution but create water pollution:

• Open-loop scrubbers: Discharge acidic washwater directly into oceans
• Closed-loop systems: Require proper disposal of toxic sludge at port facilities
• Hybrid systems: Switch between open and closed operation based on local regulations
• Environmental impact: Washwater contains heavy metals, PAHs, and acidic compounds

Black Carbon and Particulate Matter Emissions

Cruise ships are significant sources of black carbon, particularly problematic in Arctic waters:

• Formation process: Incomplete combustion of carbon-rich fuels creates fine particles
• Arctic impact: Black carbon deposits on ice reduce reflectivity, accelerating melting
• Health effects: PM2.5 particles penetrate deep into lungs, causing cardiovascular disease
• Mitigation options: Diesel particulate filters can reduce emissions by 95%

Environmental Impact Beyond Carbon

While CO2 emissions grab headlines, cruise ships impact the environment through multiple pathways that extend far beyond greenhouse gases.

Ocean Acidification and Marine Ecosystem Damage

Cruise ship emissions directly contribute to ocean chemistry changes:

• CO2 absorption: Oceans absorb 25% of atmospheric CO2, forming carbonic acid
• pH reduction: Ocean pH has dropped 0.1 units since pre-industrial times
• Marine life impact: Shell-forming organisms struggle in acidic conditions
• Coral reef damage: Acidification combined with warming threatens reef ecosystems
• Food chain disruption: Phytoplankton changes affect entire marine food webs

Air Quality in Port Cities

Cruise ship emissions significantly impact air quality in popular destinations:

• Barcelona: Cruise ships contribute 32% of port area NOx emissions
• Venice: Ship emissions exceed WHO air quality guidelines on cruise days
• Southampton: Cruise terminal shows PM2.5 levels 40% above city average
• Miami: Port emissions equivalent to 350,000 additional cars during cruise season

Waste Streams and Water Pollution

Beyond air emissions, cruise ships generate massive waste streams:

• Sewage: 3,000-passenger ship produces 150,000 gallons of sewage per week
• Greywater: 1 million gallons per week from sinks, showers, and laundry
• Ballast water: Transfers invasive species between ecosystems
• Solid waste: 50 tonnes per week requiring proper disposal or incineration
• Hazardous materials: Batteries, chemicals, and medical waste require special handling

Impact on Arctic and Sensitive Marine Areas

Climate change opens new cruise routes in previously inaccessible areas:

• Arctic routes: Black carbon emissions accelerate ice melting
• Wildlife disturbance: Noise pollution affects marine mammal communication
• Pristine ecosystems: Introduction of invasive species through ballast water
• Cultural impact: Overwhelming small Arctic communities with tourist influxes

Cruise vs. Alternative Travel: Real Carbon Comparisons

Making informed travel decisions requires understanding the true carbon footprint of cruising compared to alternative vacation options.

Detailed Lifecycle Analysis: Cruise vs. Fly + Hotel

Let’s examine a 7-day Caribbean vacation for two people:

Cruise Option:

• Transportation to port: 200kg CO2 (domestic flight)
• Cruise emissions: 2,950kg CO2 (7 days × 421kg per person per day)
• Total: 3,150kg CO2

Fly + Hotel Alternative:

• Round-trip flights: 1,200kg CO2 (economy class to Caribbean)
• Hotel accommodation: 420kg CO2 (7 nights × 30kg per room per night)
• Local transportation: 140kg CO2 (rental car and activities)
• Dining and activities: 210kg CO2
• Total: 1,970kg CO2

Result: The cruise option produces 60% more emissions than flying and staying in hotels.

Regional Vacation Alternatives and Their Footprints

Different destinations offer varying emission profiles:

Mediterranean (7 days, 2 people):

• Cruise: 3,400kg CO2
• Flight + Hotel: 1,800kg CO2
• Train + Hotel: 450kg CO2
• Road trip: 620kg CO2

Alaska/Norway (7 days, 2 people):

• Cruise: 4,200kg CO2
• Flight + Hotel: 2,400kg CO2
• Overland tour: 1,100kg CO2

Carbon Calculator Tool for Personal Estimates

To calculate your cruise carbon footprint, use this formula:

Daily Cruise Emissions = Base Rate + Ship Size Factor + Route Factor

• Base Rate: 350kg CO2 per person per day
• Ship Size Factor: +15% for mega-ships (4,000+ passengers), -10% for small ships (<1,000 passengers)
• Route Factor: +25% for Alaska/Arctic, +10% for repositioning cruises, -5% for short Caribbean routes
• Cabin Factor: +30% for suites, +15% for balcony cabins, baseline for interior cabins

Example: 7-day Alaska cruise, mega-ship, balcony cabin = 350 × 1.15 × 1.25 × 1.15 × 7 = 3,990kg CO2 per person

Industry Decarbonization Efforts and Timeline

The cruise industry faces mounting pressure to reduce emissions, leading to various initiatives and technological developments.

Current Sustainability Initiatives by Major Lines

Royal Caribbean Group:

• Net-zero commitment: 2050 target with interim 2030 goals
• Shore power installation: 50% of fleet equipped by 2025
• Alternative fuels: Testing biofuels and hydrogen fuel cells
• Energy efficiency: 35% improvement per passenger since 2005

Carnival Corporation:

• Emission reduction: 40% per passenger-equivalent by 2026 vs. 2008
• LNG fleet expansion: 11 ships operating on LNG by 2025
• Scrubber technology: 85% of fleet equipped with exhaust cleaning systems
• Waste reduction: 50% reduction in food waste by 2030

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings:

• Intensity targets: 10% reduction by 2026, 25% by 2030
• Shore power adoption: Installing connections across major ports
• Hull optimization: Advanced coatings and design improvements
• Operational efficiency: Route optimization and speed management

Shore Power Adoption and Infrastructure

Shore power (cold ironing) allows ships to plug into electrical grids while in port:

• Current adoption: 15% of cruise ports offer shore power connections
• Leading ports: Los Angeles, Seattle, Hamburg, Stockholm
• Investment required: $5-10 million per port berth
• Emission reduction: 95% reduction in port emissions where renewable electricity is used
• Challenges: Grid capacity, standardization, and retrofit costs

Alternative Fuel Developments

The industry is exploring multiple fuel pathways for decarbonization:

Green Methanol:

• Advantages: 95% CO2 reduction when produced from renewable sources
• Challenges: Limited production capacity, storage requirements
• Timeline: First methanol-powered cruise ship expected 2030
• Cost premium: 2-3x current fuel costs initially

Green Hydrogen:

• Potential: Zero direct emissions when produced with renewable electricity
• Technical challenges: Storage density, safety systems, fuel cell size
• Applications: Fuel cells for hotel loads, hydrogen combustion for propulsion
• Commercial timeline: 2035-2040 for large-scale deployment

Green Ammonia:

• Benefits: Higher energy density than hydrogen, existing transport infrastructure
• Concerns: Toxicity, NOx emissions, technical complexity
• Development status: Research phase, first trials expected 2028
• Regulatory framework: IMO developing safety guidelines

IMO Regulations and Compliance Timelines

International Maritime Organization regulations drive industry change:

• 2030 targets: 20% reduction in emissions per transport work, 70% reduction in marine fuel carbon intensity
• 2050 goal: Net-zero emissions from international shipping
• Carbon pricing: Global maritime fuel levy of $100-380 per tonne CO2 by 2028
• Regional measures: EU including shipping in emissions trading system from 2024
• Fuel standards: Tightening sulfur limits and potential carbon intensity standards

The Economics of Green Cruising

Transitioning to sustainable cruise operations involves significant economic considerations that will ultimately affect ticket prices and industry structure.

Cost Implications of Emission Reduction Technologies

Shore Power Infrastructure:

• Ship retrofits: $2-5 million per vessel
• Port infrastructure: $5-10 million per berth
• Operational savings: 20-30% lower energy costs in port
• Payback period: 8-12 years depending on port call frequency

Alternative Fuel Systems:

• LNG conversion: $30-50 million retrofit cost
• Methanol-ready engines: 15-25% premium over conventional systems
• Hydrogen fuel cells: $100-200 million for full hotel power replacement
• Fuel cost premiums: 2-4x current fuel costs for green alternatives

Energy Efficiency Measures:

• Hull optimization: $1-3 million, 5-10% fuel savings
• Waste heat recovery: $5-10 million, 8-15% efficiency gain
• LED lighting conversion: $500,000-1 million, 40% lighting energy reduction
• HVAC upgrades: $2-5 million, 15-25% hotel energy savings

Consumer Willingness to Pay for Sustainability

Market research reveals varying consumer attitudes toward sustainable cruising:

• Premium acceptance: 68% of travelers willing to pay 5-10% more for sustainable cruises
• Generational differences: Millennials and Gen Z show 40% higher willingness to pay green premiums
• Regional variations: European consumers more price-sensitive to sustainability than North Americans
• Transparency importance: 78% want detailed environmental impact disclosure
• Certification value: Third-party environmental certifications influence 45% of booking decisions

Regulatory Pressure and Carbon Pricing

Government policies increasingly impact cruise economics:

• EU ETS inclusion: Estimated $50-100 per tonne CO2 cost from 2024
• Port environmental fees: $1-5 per passenger surcharges in green ports
• Fuel regulations: IMO 2020 sulfur cap increased fuel costs 20-30%
• Carbon border adjustments: Potential future costs for international cruises
• Tourism taxes: Environmental levies in popular destinations like Venice, Barcelona

What Travelers Can Do: Practical Guidance

Environmentally conscious travelers have several options to reduce their cruise-related carbon footprint while still enjoying ocean vacations.

Choosing Lower-Emission Cruise Options

Ship Selection Criteria:

• Ship age: Vessels built after 2015 typically 20-30% more efficient
• Size considerations: Mid-size ships (1,500-2,500 passengers) often more efficient per passenger
• Fuel type: LNG ships produce 15-20% less CO2 than HFO vessels
• Shore power capability: Ships that can plug in at ports reduce emissions significantly
• Route efficiency: Shorter distances between ports reduce total emissions

Cruise Line Environmental Performance:

• Best choices: Hurtigruten, Viking Ocean, Celebrity (newer Edge-class ships)
• Improving performers: Royal Caribbean (newer ships), Holland America
• Avoid if possible: Older ships from Disney, Norwegian, Princess fleets
• Check certifications: Look for ISO 14001, Green Marine, or MARPOL compliance

Cabin and Itinerary Choices:

• Interior cabins: 30% lower emissions than suites due to space efficiency
• Shorter cruises: 3-5 day cruises often more efficient than 7+ day voyages
• Regional itineraries: Caribbean and Mediterranean routes typically more efficient than Alaska/Arctic
• Repositioning cruises: One-way voyages avoid deadheading but may have higher per-day emissions

Carbon Offset Programs and Their Effectiveness

Many cruise lines offer carbon offset programs, but effectiveness varies significantly:

Cruise Line Offset Programs:

• Royal Caribbean: Optional offsets at $3-8 per day, mixed project quality
• Norwegian: Automatic offsets for Haven suite guests, reforestation focus
• Celebrity: Partnership with verified carbon standard projects
• MSC: Marine protection and reforestation initiatives

Third-Party Offset Providers:

• Gold Standard certified: Atmosfair, MyClimate offer high-quality offsets
• Verified Carbon Standard: South Pole, Climate Impact Partners
• Cost range: $15-40 per tonne CO2, or $50-150 per cruise
• Project types: Renewable energy, forest protection, direct air capture

Offset Effectiveness Guidelines:

• Additionality: Ensure projects wouldn’t happen without offset funding
• Permanence: Prefer technological solutions over forestry for long-term impact
• Verification: Choose third-party certified programs over cruise line offerings
• Timing: Immediate emission reductions better than future promises

Alternative Vacation Planning Strategies

Consider these lower-emission alternatives that still provide ocean experiences:

Coastal and River Cruising:

• River cruises: 60-80% lower emissions than ocean cruises
• Coastal ferries: Norway’s Hurtigruten coastal route uses hybrid power
• Expedition cruising: Smaller ships with lower per-passenger impact
• Sailing vessels: Wind-powered options like Star Clippers reduce fuel use

Land-Based Ocean Vacations:

• Island hopping: Fly once, use ferries or small aircraft between islands
• Coastal road trips: Drive scenic coastal routes with ocean-view accommodations
• Beach resorts: All-inclusive resorts with multiple activities on-site
• Sailing lessons: Learn to sail at coastal destinations

Sustainable Ocean Experiences:

• Marine conservation tours: Support research while traveling
• Eco-lodges: Coastal accommodations with environmental certifications
• Overland expeditions: Reach polar regions by land rather than ship
• Local experiences: Support coastal communities through responsible tourism

Future Outlook: 2030-2050 Emission Scenarios

The cruise industry stands at a crossroads, with technology development, regulation, and consumer demand shaping its environmental trajectory over the next 25 years.

Industry Net-Zero Commitments and Feasibility

Major cruise lines have announced ambitious climate targets, but achieving them requires unprecedented technological and operational changes:

Current Industry Commitments:

• Royal Caribbean: Net-zero by 2050, 65% intensity reduction by 2030
• Carnival Corporation: 40% intensity reduction by 2026, net-zero “aspiration” by 2050
• Norwegian: 25% intensity reduction by 2030, net-zero by 2050
• MSC: Net-zero by 2050, interim targets under development

Feasibility Assessment:

• Technology readiness: Current alternatives can achieve 50-70% emission reductions by 2030
• Fuel availability: Green methanol and ammonia production must scale 100x by 2050
• Investment requirements: $150-200 billion industry-wide for full decarbonization
• Operational changes: Slower speeds, smaller ships, fewer sea days likely necessary

Technology Roadmap for Zero-Emission Cruising

2025-2030: Transition Technologies

• Advanced LNG systems: High-pressure engines reducing methane slip to <0.5%
• Biofuel blending: 20-30% sustainable fuel blends in existing engines
• Hybrid propulsion: Battery systems for port operations and peak shaving
• Shore power expansion: 80% of major ports equipped by 2030
• Energy efficiency: 30-40% improvement through hull design and systems optimization

2030-2040: Alternative Fuel Adoption

• Green methanol: First commercial methanol-powered cruise ships operational
• Hydrogen fuel cells: Hotel power systems transitioned to fuel cells
• Wind assistance: Rotor sails and rigid sails providing 10-20% propulsion
• Carbon capture: Onboard CO2 capture systems for remaining fossil fuel use
• Synthetic fuels: E-fuels produced from renewable electricity and captured CO2

2040-2050: Zero-Emission Operations

• Green ammonia: Primary fuel for long-distance cruising
• Hydrogen propulsion: Direct hydrogen combustion or fuel cell systems
• Nuclear power: Small modular reactors for largest cruise ships
• Advanced batteries: Solid-state batteries enabling all-electric short cruises
• Air capture integration: Ships contributing to atmospheric CO2 removal

Regulatory Landscape Evolution

Government policies will increasingly drive cruise industry transformation:

International Regulations:

• IMO targets: 20% emission reduction by 2030, 70% by 2040, net-zero by 2050
• Carbon pricing: Global maritime fuel levy of $100-300 per tonne CO2 by 2030
• Fuel standards: Mandatory renewable fuel quotas increasing to 10% by 2030
• Efficiency requirements: Mandatory speed limits and operational measures

Regional Policies:

• European Union: Full inclusion in ETS, potential cruise passenger levies
• United States: California leading with zero-emission port requirements
• Caribbean: Regional cooperation on sustainable cruise tourism standards
• Arctic Council: Potential restrictions on HFO use and black carbon emissions

Economic Instruments:

• Carbon taxes: $50-200 per tonne CO2 in major cruise markets by 2030
• Green shipping corridors: Preferential treatment for zero-emission vessels
• Subsidy phase-out: Removal of fossil fuel subsidies affecting marine fuels
• Green bonds: Preferential financing for sustainable cruise ship investments

Conclusion: Navigating the Future of Sustainable Cruising

The cruise industry’s environmental impact represents one of tourism’s greatest sustainability challenges. With current emissions equivalent to millions of cars and projections showing continued growth, the sector faces an urgent need for transformation.

Key findings from our analysis reveal that cruise passengers generate 8 times more emissions than equivalent land-based vacations, with significant variation between cruise lines and ship types. While industry leaders like Hurtigruten and Viking demonstrate that lower-emission cruising is possible, major operators like Disney, Norwegian, and Princess continue to operate some of the most polluting vessels in the fleet.

For environmentally conscious travelers, the path forward involves careful selection of cruise lines, ships, and itineraries that minimize environmental impact. Choosing newer, more efficient vessels, supporting cruise lines with genuine sustainability commitments, and considering alternative ocean vacation options can significantly reduce travel-related emissions. Those interested in reducing your carbon footprint at home can also explore clean energy solutions that complement sustainable travel choices.

The industry’s transition to zero-emission operations by 2050 is technically feasible but requires unprecedented investment in alternative fuels, new technologies, and operational changes. Success depends on coordinated action between cruise lines, governments, fuel suppliers, and port authorities. The shift toward renewable energy solutions in other sectors demonstrates that large-scale decarbonization is possible with the right commitment and investment.

As the climate crisis intensifies, the cruise industry must prove that floating cities can coexist with planetary boundaries. The choices made today—by companies and consumers alike—will determine whether cruise ships become symbols of sustainable innovation or monuments to unsustainable excess. Just as homeowners can achieve net zero energy usage through solar and battery storage systems, the maritime industry must embrace similar clean energy transitions.

The future of cruising lies not in avoiding the environmental challenge, but in embracing the opportunity to pioneer truly sustainable ocean travel. For travelers, understanding these impacts and making informed choices represents the first step toward a more sustainable relationship with our oceans. Supporting businesses committed to carbon footprint reduction across all sectors—from travel to home energy—creates the market demand necessary to drive meaningful environmental progress.

The future of cruising lies not in avoiding the environmental challenge, but in embracing the opportunity to pioneer truly sustainable ocean travel. For travelers, understanding these impacts and making informed choices represents the first step toward a more sustainable relationship with our oceans.