The 0.1% limit in sulphur content within Sulphur Emission Control Areas as of 1st January 2015 requires that ship operators either use pricier ultra-low sulphur fuel oil, or alternatively install abatement technologies through substantial capital investments. A part of the resulting higher operating costs are passed on to shippers resulting in increased freight rates. These may lead to modal shifts towards rail or road options competing with Ro-Ro operators. Due to the unexpectedly low fuel prices in the period 2014–2016, Ro-Ro operators were relatively unharmed by the new limits, but nascent research has shown that if fuel prices increase some Ro-Ro services may not survive. This paper examines a set of policy options that can mitigate or reverse the negative effects of the low-sulphur regulation. The measures include internalizing external costs of transport, repaying fuel surcharges to shippers, subsidizing technological investments of ship operators, or increasing the landbased costs of transport via levies. To compare their efficacy, total costs are calculated for each measure. The results show that the proposed measures can successfully reduce the negative effects of the regulation but this would entail significant costs. A combination of subsidies towards shippers and ship operators is shown to be effective at reversing potential modal shifts and can be crucial in case of high fuel prices in the near future. The findings of this work can assist operators to develop new strategies and improve the resilience of their network, and regulators designing environmental policies that may have negative implications on certain sectors.
The abatement of greenhouse gas emissions represents a major global challenge and an important topic for transportation research. Several studies have argued that energy efficiency measures for virtual arrival and associated reduced anchorage time can significantly reduce emissions from ships by allowing for speed reduction on passage. However, virtual arrival is uncommon in shipping. In this paper, we examine the causes for waiting time for ships at anchor and the limited uptake of virtual arrival. We show the difficulties associated with the implementation of virtual arrival and explain why shipping is unlikely to achieve the related abatement potential as assumed by previous studies. Combining onboard observations with seafarers and interviews with both sea-staff and shore-based operational personnel we show how charterers’ commercial priorities outweigh the fuel saving benefits associated with virtual arrival. Moreover, we demonstrate how virtual arrival systems have unintended, negative consequences for seafarers in the form of fatigue. Our findings have implications for the IMO’s greenhouse gas abatement goals.
Aiming at reducing CO2 emissions from shipping at the EU level, a system for monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) of CO2 emissions of ships was introduced in 2015 with the so-called ‘MRV Regulation’. Its stated objective was to produce accurate information on the CO2 emissions of large ships using EU ports and to incentivize energy efficiency improvements by making this information publicly available. On 1 July 2019, the European Commission published the relevant data for 10,880 ships that called at EU ports within 2018. This milestone marked the completion of the first annual cycle of the regulation’s implementation, enabling an early assessment of its effectiveness. To investigate the value of the published data, information was collected on all voyages performed within 2018 by a fleet of 1041 dry bulk carriers operated by a leading Danish shipping company. The MRV indicators were then recalculated on a global basis. The results indicate that the geographic coverage restrictions of the MRV Regulation introduce a significant bias, thus prohibiting their intended use. Nevertheless, the MRV Regulation has played a role in prompting the IMO to adopt its Data Collection System that monitors ship carbon emissions albeit on a global basis.
“Speed optimization and speed reduction” are included in the set of candidate short-term measures under discussion at the International Maritime Organization (IMO), in the quest to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships. However, there is much confusion on what either speed optimization or speed reduction may mean, and some stakeholders have proposed mandatory speed limits as a measure to achieve GHG emissions reduction. The purpose of this paper is to shed some light into this debate, and specifically examine whether reducing speed by imposing a speed limit is better than doing the same by imposing a bunker levy. To that effect, the two options are compared. The main result of the paper is that the speed limit option exhibits a number of deficiencies as an instrument to reduce GHG emissions, at least vis-à-vis the bunker levy option.
International shipping is at a crossroads as regards decarbonization. The Paris climate change agreement in 2015 (COP21) was hailed by many as a most significant achievement. Others were less enthusiastic, and more recently American President Trump decided to take the U.S. out of the agreement. Four years earlier, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) had adopted the most sweeping piece of regulation pertaining to maritime greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction, in the name of the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI). In addition, one year after COP21, the IMO adopted a mandatory data collection system for fuel consumption of ships and agreed on an initial strategy and roadmap on the reduction of GHG emissions from ships. This paper takes a critical look at the above and other recent developments and focuses on the challenges faced by the industry if a path to significant CO2 reductions is to be successful. Difficulties and opportunities are identified, and the paper conjectures that the main obstacles are neither technical nor economic, but political.
The purpose of this chapter is to present some basics as regards the energy efficiency of ships, including related regulatory activity at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and elsewhere. To that effect, the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) is first presented, followed by a discussion of Market Based Measures (MBMs) and the recent Initial IMO Strategy to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships. The discussion includes commentary on possible pitfalls in the policy approach being followed.
For more than a century, conventional marine vessels spatter the atmosphere with CO2 emissions and detrimental particles when operated by diesel motors/generators. Fuel cells have recently emerged as one of the most promising emission-free technologies for the electrification of ship propulsion systems. In fuel cell-based ship electrification, the entire marine power system is viewed as a direct current (DC) microgrid (MG) with constant power loads (CPLs). A challenge of such settings is how to stabilize the voltages and currents of the ship’s grid. In this paper, we propose a new modified backstepping controller to stabilize the MG voltage and currents. Finally, to study the performance and efficiency of our proposal, we run an experiment simulation using dSPACE real-time emulator.
In recent years the issue of sulfur emissions from maritime transport has seen newfound attention. This chapter presents an overview of the main issues of sulfur emissions and the legislative framework that seeks to reduce the sulfur footprint of the maritime sector. It also analyzes potential modal shifts toward less efficient land-based modes which may happen as a result of sulfur regulations and investigates the related potential economic damage to ship operators. To that effect, this chapter presents findings from a recently finished project at DTU and the developed methodological framework that can be used to estimate such modal shifts, as well as to measure the efficacy of policy and ship operators’ measures to reverse such shifts.
The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the concept of Market Based Measures (MBMs) to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions from ships, and review several distinct MBM proposals that were under consideration by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The chapter then moves on to discuss the concept of Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) of CO2 emissions and the distinct mechanisms set up the European Union (EU) and the IMO for MRV. The reason the MBM and MRV subjects are treated in the same chapter is twofold: (a) the MRV discussion essentially started when the MBM discussion was suspended in 2013, and (b) MRV is a critical step for any eventual MBM implementation in the future.
Cold ironing is the process of providing shorepower to cover the energy demands of ships calling at ports. This technological solution can eliminate the emissions of auxiliary engines at berth, resulting in a global reduction of emissions if the grid powering the ships is an environmentally friendly energy source. This paper conducts a literature review of recent academic work in the field and presents the status of this technology worldwide and the current barriers for its further implementation. The use of cold ironing is mandatory in Californian ports for ship operators and as a result terminal and ship operators were required to invest in this technology. In Europe, all ports will be required to have cold ironing provision by the end of 2025. Other regulations that target local emissions such as Emission Control Areas can have a significant impact on whether cold ironing is used in the future as a potential compliance solution. This paper constructs a quantitative framework for the examination of the technology considering all stakeholders. The role of regulation is shown to be critical for the further adoption of this technology. Illustrative case studies are presented that consider the perspective of ship operators of various ship types, and terminal operators that opt to invest in shorepower facilities. The results of the case studies show that for medium and high fuel price scenarios there is economic motivation for ship operators to use cold ironing. For the port, the cost per abated ton of pollutants is much lower than current estimates of the external costs of pollutants. Therefore, shorepower may be a viable emissions reduction option for the maritime sector, provided that regulatory bodies assist the further adoption of the technology from ship operators and ports. The methodology can be useful to port and ship operators in examining the benefits of using cold ironing as an emissions reduction action.