# Time running out for the Badger?



## Ispolkom (Dec 6, 2012)

The S.S. Badger, the last coal-fired car ferry in the U.S., dumps its ash into Lake Michigan. Its permit to do this wasn't renewed in the new Coast Guard authorization bill, so either the Badger's owners will have to finally clean up their act, or stop sailing. The latter would be a shame.


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 6, 2012)

Ispolkom said:


> The S.S. Badger, the last coal-fired car ferry in the U.S., dumps its ash into Lake Michigan. Its permit to do this wasn't renewed in the new Coast Guard authorization bill, so either the Badger's owners will have to finally clean up their act, or stop sailing. The latter would be a shame.


Sounds like the upgrade they would need to do in order to comply with the EPA would add about $4 per ticket, in other words a negliglble cost. Seems like a reasonable

solution to me. There's no particular case to be made to allow them to dump so much ash into the lake. You want nostalgia...then pay for it! (And again, an extra $4 per

ticket is pocket change on that route.)


----------



## railiner (Dec 6, 2012)

Wonder why they don't just convert the boilers to burning oil. It would still be a steamboat. IIRC, Union Pacific did that many years ago to its Challenger 3985......


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Dec 7, 2012)

It's a nice ship. I would hate to see it go.


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 7, 2012)

railiner said:


> Wonder why they don't just convert the boilers to burning oil. It would still be a steamboat. IIRC, Union Pacific did that many years ago to its Challenger 3985......


I think the present owners figured the most economical option was using influence, instead of following the rules like everyone else. Plus, it would cost serious money to convert to oil, and a hallmark of Lake Michigan Carferry is a careful appreciation of the bottom line.

I agree with *railiner* that higher fares and no more ash dumping is the way to go, but fear that owner intransigence will mean that nothing is ready next spring. OTOH, they did extend this year's sailing season because of high demand for transporting wind turbine parts, so maybe they'll be more on the ball.


----------



## railiner (Dec 7, 2012)

It shouldn't be that costly to convert her into an oil-burner....certainly a whole lot less than to a diesel powerplant.....


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Dec 7, 2012)

I wonder why they still built tjhois ship in 1953. By then all the railroads were converting to diesel.


----------



## railiner (Dec 7, 2012)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> I wonder why they still built tjhois ship in 1953. By then all the railroads were converting to diesel.


I can't say for sure, but ships were still primarily steam powered in 1953, and I believe by then, coal hauling giant Chesapeake & Ohio Ry., owned the former Pere Marquette ferries.....


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 7, 2012)

railiner said:


> I can't say for sure, but ships were still primarily steam powered in 1953, and I believe by then, coal hauling giant Chesapeake & Ohio Ry., owned the former Pere Marquette ferries.....


Plus, coal was still popular on the Great Lakes, since the ore boats would otherwise return empty after dropping their iron ore. The lamented Edmund Fitzgerald, for instance, was coal-fired when it first sailed in 1958, and the Duluth Missabe and Iron Range Railway ran steam until 1960, I think.



railiner said:


> It shouldn't be that costly to convert her into an oil-burner....certainly a whole lot less than to a diesel powerplant.....


But it's much cheaper to do nothing, and rely on your cronies to get you an exemption.


----------



## railiner (Dec 8, 2012)

Well as far as exemptions go--they can only go so long. The old Delta Queen seemed to have 9 lives, until politics no longer went their way, and they could not get another SOLAS exemption....


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Dec 8, 2012)

railiner said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder why they still built tjhois ship in 1953. By then all the railroads were converting to diesel.
> ...


Well, yes, but this one was just a lakes ferry. Ah, I don't know.


----------



## rrdude (Dec 9, 2012)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> I wonder why they still built tjhois ship in 1953. By then all the railroads were converting to diesel.


Super-cheap, abundant, parent RR hauled a "TON" of it, and no real environmental regulations to consider at that time. Why NOT choose coal? With land-RR's it was more of a maintenance issue, not so much with large car ferries, on dedicated routes, with plenty of cheap, available coal at all ports.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Dec 9, 2012)

rrdude said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder why they still built tjhois ship in 1953. By then all the railroads were converting to diesel.
> ...


OK, makes sense.


----------



## George Harris (Dec 11, 2012)

The ashes don't dissapear. If they don't dump them in the lake, then where do they go? Coal ashes are fairly intert. Otherwise, they would not be ashes. Maybe give them a designated area. 

The Delta Queen has to shut down due to fire safety regulations.


----------



## rrdude (Dec 11, 2012)

All I can suggest to ANY AU-er who lives within a days drive of Ludington, MI, is to "do it" B4 it's gone. (R U listening Kevin, Rtbern, others?) Penny, I'd suggest YOU make a trip too, it's not luxurious, but it is certainly worth the experience.

It's like a "points run". You go X the lake, and back, in one day. And the whole way, you are riding, and enjoying, *history*, B4 it's gone.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 11, 2012)

George Harris said:


> If they don't dump them in the lake, then where do they go?


Somewhere where they can't contaminate drinking water and the food supply?


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Dec 11, 2012)

install a hopper of somesort that the ashes go into then when its full pump it out onshore into a truck.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Dec 11, 2012)

I'll try to see if I can get a sailing on it. I really hope that they can ust let it burn oil.


----------



## gswager (Dec 12, 2012)

amtrakwolverine said:


> install a hopper of somesort that the ashes go into then when its full pump it out onshore into a truck.


It's not the same ash as firewood ash. It's more like "sharp gravels".


----------



## CHamilton (Mar 4, 2013)

> Steamship Anchors A Community, But Its Days May Be Numbered
> On the shores of Lake Michigan, the tiny town of Ludington, Mich., is home port to the last coal-fired ferry in the U.S. The S.S. Badger has been making trips across the lake to Manitowoc, Wisc., during the good weather months since 1953. And as it runs, the 411-foot ferry discharges coal ash slurry directly into the lake.
> 
> An Environmental Protection Agency permit allows the Badger to dump four tons of ash into the lake daily. But now, the agency has put the permit under review — and that means the Badger could stop sailing.
> ...


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Mar 5, 2013)

How about we dump the EPA into Lake Michigan. Now that would be the perfect solution!


----------



## Nathanael (Mar 5, 2013)

Lazy, irresponsible ship owners.

They've known for decades that dumping toxic coal ash (the stuff is full of mercury) into the lake is not a good idea. We'll see whether they retrofit the ship once they're required to comply with the same regulations as everyone else. The online commenters to the NPR article actually recognize this, and note that the owners admitted that they needed to convert the ship a decade ago, and the engineering for the retrofit was completed in 1970. They're just being lazy because polluting makes them money. The competing car ferry, an hour south, is upset that the operators of the Badger are being allowed to get away with unfair competition. James Young provides the best links.

Fay, who comments in the NPR article, is ignorant. There was, in fact, a nasty fish die-off due to toxic dumping; it had been continuing for so long by the time the commenters were born that they didn't even realize it had happened back in the 19th century.


----------



## Trogdor (Mar 5, 2013)

OlympianHiawatha said:


> How about we dump the EPA into Lake Michigan. Now that would be the perfect solution!


Why, because they care about clean water that millions of people in the Midwest depend on for drinking rather than some nostalgic relic of an ancient transportation design that hasn't been updated in decades?


----------



## NW cannonball (Mar 8, 2013)

It's been only a few decades since I rode the Ludington Ferry.

If that ferry boat is the only remaining heavy-metal polluter on Lake Michigan - well -- they shouldn't -be - but they are and always have been the least - but they weren't Ford or the former owners of the whole Gary end of the lake

When I was a child - whenever the parents took me around the end of Lake Mich -- my eyes would start to water. And there was all those bright colored smokes around the end of the lake (Lake Michigan) -- we were always going to visit grandma near Buffalo.

Yeah - a small subsidy or let the Ludington ferry go. No problemo.

But that "evil mercury coal" is just a weentsy politico nonsense compared to the worse crap the "end of the Lake" of the "Gary" stinking smokes were - that (please consider this - people who think you property will survive corporate pollution dumpers == hee hee= you will lose and no- one will buy your company-supported home-place ever- your heirs will have to pay to dump it.

Maybe now that all original innocent buyers of real-estate in last-century-Gary have lost all their investment. Maybe the brownfields investors will find something there.

The Ludington Ferry is so little a polluter that I, me, and all sane people do not give a lousy microsecond of their time, compared to --

How to dispose of Detroit and most of the rest of polluted Michigan. And large parts of the Chicago side. The Indiana-side disposal is something nobody who had some kind of clean dirt to live on -- if you have clean dirt to live on - or if there is some sterile mountain where you may live on small mushrooms and flesh of birds, thaat is worth lot's more than northern Indiana acres.

Let all Indianers learn that they bought the wrong land. If you want to move to the crazy coasts or the insane arctic -- ok.

For me, all Indianers are suspect at first glance, like Michiganders are, except for a few UP'ers.

But none of these are as scary and threatening and creepy as the Maryland-Virginia-DC-total-creepio-vile-evil-total-nuclear-polluters-total-anyhow-polluters-buyers-of-media-lies-who-pretend-to-be-some-kind-of-politial-supporters-of-some-creeps.

My policy- as a self-preserving- sane person - is -- kill all residents in VA, M, DC, whho have income over 200000.

It is not "rich, or contributing" people that the lousy plebs want to destroy .

Only the non-contributing - super-polluting- vile - total abusive hangers-on and rip-off artists -- when the 50-mile space around the Chesapeake has no - zero - government emloyees in that whole space -- that would be good .


----------



## fairviewroad (Mar 18, 2013)

NW cannonball said:


> It's been only a few decades since I rode the Ludington Ferry.
> If that ferry boat is the only remaining heavy-metal polluter on Lake Michigan - well -- they shouldn't -be - but they are and always have been the least - but they weren't Ford or the former owners of the whole Gary end of the lake
> 
> When I was a child - whenever the parents took me around the end of Lake Mich -- my eyes would start to water. And there was all those bright colored smokes around the end of the lake (Lake Michigan) -- we were always going to visit grandma near Buffalo.
> ...


Rarely is my reaction to an entire post this: WTH?


----------



## Amtrak Cajun (Mar 19, 2013)

That post made little sense.


----------



## rrdude (Mar 20, 2013)

In the greater scheme of things, and I rarely disgree with Trog, the Badger's pittance of pollution is just that, a pittance. Much bigger fish to fry, but WAIT!

Who do we find BEHIND, (and I mean REALLY behind, as in "behind the scenes") a lot of this PR about the "dirty Badger"?

Why, none other than their only cross-lake rival, the modern, twin-hull, Lake Express, just an hour or so south of the Badger's home port.

Draw your own conclusions.........


----------



## Trogdor (Mar 21, 2013)

One conclusion is that Lake Express has to follow the rules, but for some reason Badger does not?


----------



## Ryan (Mar 21, 2013)

Amtrak Cajun said:


> That post made little sense.


That post made far less than little sense.


----------



## rrdude (Mar 21, 2013)

Trogdor said:


> One conclusion is that Lake Express has to follow the rules, but for some reason Badger does not?


Nah, not really. In many, many, cases the concept of "grandfathering" a policy / rule / law / decision is a common and accepted practice. (In fact I think the Badger currently falls in this category).

When starting a *new* operation, such as the Lake Express, one would *expect* that the operation would have to abide by all of the *current* environmental and safety laws / regulations / rules.

However, an almost continuously-run, 50+ year old operation like the Badger, it is not an unreasonable request to permanently "grandfather" the coal-ash dump regulations. I think it would be different if there were hundreds of similarly coal-powered ships still steaming the Great Lakes, but in fact, there is only one, the SS Badger.

The Great Lakes are undoubtedly cleaner, because of a lot of the newer, cleaner propulsion and pollution control systems.

I still support giving the Badge a pass on this Trog...........


----------



## Trogdor (Mar 21, 2013)

I guess we'll agree to disagree on this one. I have no problem with the concept of grandfathering something in, but not a perpetual grandfathering to the point that it will never have to comply with regulations designed to protect our health.

One could debate how long they should be given to comply, but "forever" ain't it.


----------



## KayBee (Mar 22, 2013)

Looks like end of 2014:







MEDIA CONTACT: Anne Rowan, 312-353-9391,[email protected]

Phillippa Cannon, 312-353-6218,[email protected]

*For Immediate Release *No. 13-OPA010

*S.S. Badger Coal Ash Discharge to Lake Michigan to Cease by End of 2014 Sailing Season*

CHICAGO (March 22, 2013) - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced the lodging of a proposed consent decree that requires Lake Michigan Carferry Service, Inc. (LMC) of Ludington, Michigan, to eliminate the discharge of coal ash into Lake Michigan by the end of the 2014 sailing season.

DOJ and EPA will accept and consider comments on the proposed consent decree during a 30-day public comment period, to be announced shortly in the Federal Register. The proposed consent decree is available on the DOJ website at http://www.justice.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html. Additional information about the S.S. Badger is available at http://www.epa.gov/region5/water/npdestek/badger/.


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Sep 14, 2013)

I received some very good news in an email from the folks at the Badger last night:   



> For Immediate Release
> 
> For further information, email Terri Brown, Director of Marketing and Media Relations at [email protected]
> 
> ...


----------



## CHamilton (Jan 24, 2015)

LMC prepares to install ash conveyor on SS Badger in preparation for 2015 sailing season.



> Like a Christmas gift that arrives with “some assembly required,” Senior Chief Engineer Chuck Cart and the crew at Lake Michigan Carferry have on hand the new conveyor system to transport ash from the SS Badger’s boiler to retention units that will be built on the cardeck of the 410-foot Badger, but the system needs to be assembled.
> 
> The good news, according to Cart, who has been chief engineer of the Badger for 19 years, is that the conveyor will be in place in time for the start of sailing May 15 and it will allow the Badger to operate in compliance with the EPA’s mandate to stop discharging coal ash before sailing this year. The mandate is part of the terms of a U.S. Department of Justice-approved consent decree between LMC and the Environmental Protection Agency concerning what is the last coal-fired steamship operating in the U.S.


----------

