The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has adopted a strategy to reduce emissions from international shipping that sets very ambitious targets. The first set of actions, so-called short-term measures, are expected to be implemented by 2023 and result in a reduction of emission intensity by at least 40% by 2030 compared with 2008 levels. Compliance may be achieved through a reduction in sailing speeds, but certain countries have raised concerns on the ramifications of longer transit times on their exports, particularly for perishable products. In this paper, we present a methodology to assess the impacts of various short-term measures on perishable products. We use an extension of a nested modal split model to examine shifts towards other modes of transport. We demonstrate our methodology with a transpacific case study carrying perishable products from South America to China. We compare the short-term measures currently under discussion, in one of the first academic studies to explore these issues. These include a speed limit approach, a power limit, and a goal-based measure. Our results show that a power limit or a goal-based measure would offer some advantages to liner shipping operators using more efficient vessels, unlike a speed limit. Using 2008 as the benchmark year has resulted in small speed reductions required by the liner shipping sector to reach its targets. For perishable cargoes, small speed reductions can be tolerated by the shippers without significant modal shift. Choosing the right short-term strategy is of utmost importance to promote clean shipping practices in the following years.
Global warming and, correspondingly, reducing CO2 emissions is one of the most challenging tasks the world faces today. The maritime industry contributed to 2.89% of the global anthropogenic CO2 emissions. To decrease this share, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) defined, among others, the goal to reduce the carbon intensity of international shipping by 40% until 2030. In this context, the short-term measures recently adopted, in the form of a technical standard (Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index, EEXI) and a rating scheme based on an operational indicator (Carbon Intensity Indicator, CII), mark a crucial step to achieving the mentioned goal. In addition, the EU Commission has recently introduced the FuelEU Maritime Initiative limiting the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity of a ship’s energy use incorporating a reduction occurring in a five-year rhythm between 2025 and 2050. The paper investigates the practical options availed to existing containerships of different sizes and technological vintages for meeting the specific EEXI, CII, and GHG intensity reduction requirements imposed by the regulations. The investigation will be based on the actual technical and operational profiles of six sample ships and will consider a set of possible compliance options including, but not limited to, engine power limitation, waste heat recovery system, variable frequency drives, and virtual arrival. The data used originates from noon reports of existing containerships provided by a European industry leader. The ship-specific CO2 emission reduction potentials required for the impact assessment result from either literature or actual data-based calculations. Financial data is used for investigating the economic impact of the reduction requirements. Conclusions drawn include an operational advantage that pre-EEDI ships enjoy when applying engine power limitation (EPL) for EEXI compliance, the occurrence of payback periods exceeding ship lifetimes, and an estimate of the effect that onshore power supply can have on complying with the FuelEU Maritime Initiative.
Maritime transport is the backbone of international trade. The amount of total international maritime trade in million tonnes loaded was 8408 in 2012 and had increased to 11.076 by 2019, for an average annual increase of 3.12%. In early 2020, the world fleet contained 98.140 ships of 100 gross tonnes and above with 2.06 million dead weight tonnage of capacity. The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from shipping activities are not negligible. According to the fourth GHG study commissioned by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), in 2018, global shipping emitted a total of 1056 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2), accounting for around 2.89% of global anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Due to the international nature of shipping, efforts to control CO2 emissions from ships are absent from the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. In an attempt to phase out carbon emissions from shipping entirely, the IMO formulated a strategy to cut the total annual GHG emissions from shipping by at least 50% from their 2008 levels by 2050; however, no mandatory rules have been promulgated since the release of this strategy.
Given the insufficient progress made by the IMO, the European Union (EU) decided to take a leading role in promoting the reduction of CO2 emissions from maritime transport. In 2015, the EU issued regulations on the monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) of CO2 emissions from ships with a gross tonnage above 5000 arriving at, within, or departing from ports under the jurisdiction of an EU member state, to come into force at the beginning of 2018. It should be noted that, under the MRV regime, even if only one port on a voyage is within the European Economic Area (EEA) and the other is not (e.g., a voyage from Rotterdam directly to Singapore), the ship must still report the total CO2 emissions of the whole voyage, rather than just the emissions of the part of the voyage within EU waters.
The MRV regime has been in operation for over two years, and the CO2 emissions data for the 2018 and 2019 reporting periods have already been published. Based on the data collected, on 16 September 2020, the European Parliament took the bold step of voting for the inclusion of maritime transport in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). This is a market-based system that uses economic tools such as a levy on bunker fuels and an emission trading system to provide monetary incentives for polluters to reduce emissions. The European Commission is conducting an impact assessment of the ETS, the results of which are expected in 2021. At this time, it is unclear how the inclusion of shipping into the EU ETS will work. There are two possibilities. The first is that only intra-EU voyages will be included; that is, only voyages from one EEA port to another EEA port will have to pay CO2 emission costs. The second is that both intra-EU voyages and voyages between an EEA port and a non-EEA port will have to pay CO2 emission costs, with the cost of a voyage between an EEA port and a non-EEA port being based on the CO2 emissions over the whole voyage, rather than the part of the voyage within EU waters. As the second possibility also covers the first possibility, we examine the implications of both possibilities but focus more on the second.
The 0.1% sulphur limit within Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA) has made compulsory the use of either pricier ultra-low sulphur fuel, or the installation of abatement technologies that require significant capital investments. Due to the unexpectedly low fuel prices, Ro-Ro operators have been able to cope with the new sulphur limits, but recent research has shown that if fuel prices increase some Ro-Ro services may face the risk of closure. This paper proposes three key performance indicators (KPIs) to enable the asssessment of the impact of SECAs on Ro-Ro shipping. The KPIs are used on a set of case studies for services of a leading European Ro-Ro operator, and allow benchmarking of a series of operational and policy measures that aim to reverse the negative impacts of SECAs. The operational measures consider speed reduction, new sailing frequency, fleet reconfiguration, as well as investments in abatement technologies. Policy measures include the options of either subsidizing shippers or ship operators, or alternatively introducing new taxes on landbased options. The KPIs can be useful to ship operators seeking to improve the resilience of their network, as well as to regulatory bodies designing new environmental policies and understanding any negative implications these may have on ship operators.
This report is a background report to the MarE-Fuel project financed by the Maritime Fund and the Lauritzen Fund. Partners of the project has been DTU, Anker Invest, Mærsk Line, Copenhagen Economics, OMT and DFDS. In the report, potential decarbonization roadmaps or pathways for the maritime industry are presented, as well as the methodology of deriving them. Different future fuels and their emissions are highlighted. In addition, biomass availability plays an essential role in climate mitigation efforts towards net-zero by 2050, and thus we examined different biomass availability scenarios alongside greenhouse-gas emissions cap scenarios. The assumptions related to the underlying emissions can be found in the first chapter of the report. Besides the underlying emissions for a decarbonized maritime industry, the ship stock and the underlying transport demand play an essential role for a future decarbonized maritime industry. In the second chapter of the report, we address this issue by explaining how ship stock and shipping demand have been incorporated into the model. Finally, we present the optimization ship stock model developed to generate roadmap scenarios. We show the objective function and the underlying constraints of the model. The results of this work are presented and discussed. We also show some sensitivity analysis, which will shed light on the relevant parameters for the futureof the maritime industry. Our main findings can be found in the end of the report.
Uncertainties on the global availability and affordability of alternative marine fuels are stalling the shipping sector’s decarbonization course. Several candidate measures are being discussed at the International Maritime Organization, including market-based measures (MBMs) and environmental policies such as carbon taxes and emissions trading systems, as means to decarbonize. Their implementation increases the cost of fossil fuel consumption and provides fiscal incentives to shipping stakeholders to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions reductions. MBMs can bridge the price gap between alternative and conventional fuels and generate revenues for funding the up-scaling of alternative fuels’ production, storage and distribution facilities and, thus, enhance their availability. By estimating the fuels’ implementation and operational costs and carbon abatement potential, this study calculates marginal abatement costs and estimates the level of carbon pricing needed to render investments into alternative fuels cost-effective. The results can assist policymakers in establishing robust and effective maritime decarbonization policies.
International shipping has been reported to account for 13% of global NOx emissions and 2.1% of global green house gas emissions. Recent restrictions of NOx emissions from marine vessels have led to the development of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) for large two-stroke diesel engines. Meanwhile, the same engines have been downsized and derated to optimize fuel efficiency. The smaller engines reduce the possible vessel acceleration, and to counteract this, the engine controller must be improved to fully utilize the physical potential of the engine. A fuel index limiter based on air/fuel ratio was recently developed (Turbo, 2016), but as it does not account for EGR, accelerations lead to excessive exhaust smoke formation which could damage the engine when recirculated.
This paper presents two methods for extending a fuel index limiter function to EGR engines. The methods are validated through simulations with a mean-value engine model and on a vessel operating at sea. Validation tests compare combinations of the two index limiter methods, using either traditional PI control for the EGR loop or the recently developed fast adaptive feedforward EGR control (Nielsen et al., 2017a). The experiments show that the extended limiters reduce exhaust smoke formation during acceleration to a minimum, and that the suggested limiter, combined with adaptive feedforward EGR control, is able to maintain full engine acceleration capability. Sea tests with engine speed steps from 35 to 50 RPM, made peak exhaust opacity increase by only 5% points when using the proposed limiter, whereas it increased 70% points without the limiter.
ECOPRODIGI (2017-2020) is an Interreg Baltic Sea Region flagship project, which links research organisations, enterprises, associations and business support organisations. Altogether, 21 partners jointly investigate the most critical eco-inefficiencies in maritime processes in the Baltic Sea Region as well as develop and pilot digital solutions for improving the eco-efficiency by focusing on three specific cases: 1) digital performance monitoring of vessels, 2) cargo stowage optimisation at ports and 3) process optimisation at shipyards. Furthermore, looking towards the future, the project partners, on one hand, create a digitalisation roadmap and training modules for future decision makers in the maritime industry but also reach out to policymakers to engage them in discussion regarding how they can support the digital change. This report provides an overview of the project and main findings achieved to date, describes the main eco-inefficiencies identified and presents the potential of digital technologies and new concepts for improving them. Also, as the current digital transformation relates to the way how changes are managed in organisations, this report presents the main challenges and requirements identified in the process of moving towards more digitalised business operations. Finally, the last section looks at the maritime sector from a broader perspective and provides some ideas about the most likely future developments. The main findings of the project so far indicate that major improvements in eco-efficiency can be carried out in the maritime industry. They can be summarised as follows: 1) In the first case, ‘digital performance monitoring’, the project partners estimate, for instance, that fuel consumption and emissions can potentially be reduced by 2-20% based on data and analysis from distinct ship segments, routes and their baseline situations. The reductions are possible to achieve by taking such actions as capitalising on the latest digital technologies, utilising and analysing real-time operational data and vessel performance, anticipating operating conditions and maintenance of the ship and its components, changing working methods and improving practices as well as placing a focus on the training of personnel. 2) In the second case, ‘cargo stowage optimisation’ the project partners identified a set of eco-efficiency bottlenecks in the cargo stowage processes at ports that can be subject to improvement. The use of advanced digital technologies can contribute to more efficient utilisation of vessels and terminal operations. The port stays can be reduced, and, thereby, vessels can sail more slowly and reduce fuel consumption and emissions. Moreover, when stability calculations improve due to further digitalisation of cargo unit data, the ship can be loaded more optimally and the amount of ballast water can potentially be decreased without compromising safety, which again reduces fuel consumption on the sea leg. It is estimated that fuel consumption and emissions can potentially be reduced by 2-10% per route and ship and that additional benefits can be gained on the landside due to future digital decision support tools applied for the end-to-end stowage process. In addition, improved cargo unit pick up time estimates can be provided to customers waiting for the cargo to be handled at port, whereby the service improves. 3) In the third case, ‘process optimisation at shipyards’, improved situational awareness and process management, including the use of new technologies, such as 3D and solutions for managing the complex supply chain, have potential for improving the shipyard processes aimed at increased eco-efficiency. For example, in block building phase 3D technology reduces lead-time and potentially saves hundreds of man-hours in rework due to the fact that more efficient processes and proactive actions are enabled.
Strict limits on the maximum sulphur content in fuel used by ships have recently been imposed in some Emission Control Areas (ECAs). In order to comply with these regulations many ship operators will switch to more expensive low-sulphur fuel when sailing inside ECAs. Since they are concerned about minimizing their costs, it is likely that speed and routing decisions will change because of this. In this paper, we develop an optimization model to be applied by ship operators for determining sailing paths and speeds that minimize operating costs for a ship along a given sequence of ports. We perform a computational study on a number of realistic shipping routes in order to evaluate possible impacts on sailing paths and speeds, and hence fuel consumption and costs, from the ECA regulations. Moreover, the aim is to examine the implications for the society with regards to environmental effects. Comparisons of cases show that a likely effect of the regulations is that ship operators will often choose to sail longer distances to avoid sailing time within ECAs. Another effect is that they will sail at lower speeds within and higher speeds outside the ECAs in order to use less of the more expensive fuel. On some shipping routes, this might give a considerable increase in the total amount of fuel consumed and the CO2 emissions.
Policy emphasis in ship design must be shifted away from global and idealized towards regional based and realistic vessel operating conditions. The present approach to reducing shipping emissions through technical standards tends to neglect how damages and abatement opportunities vary according to location and operational conditions. Since environmental policy originates in damages relating to ecosystems and jurisdictions, a three-layered approach to vessel emissions is intuitive and practical. Here, we suggest associating damages and policies with ports, coastal areas possibly defined as Emission Control Areas (ECA) as in the North Sea and the Baltic, and open seas globally. This approach offers important practical opportunities: in ports, clean fuels or even electrification is possible; in ECAs, cleaner fuels and penalties for damaging fuels are important, but so is vessel handling, such as speeds and utilization. Globally we argue that it may be desirable to allow burning very dirty fuels at high seas, due to the cost advantages, the climate cooling benefits, and the limited ecosystem impacts. We quantify the benefits and cost savings from reforming current IMO and other approaches towards environmental management with a three-layered approach, and argue it is feasible and worth considering.