The “Initial IMO Strategy” was adopted in the 72nd session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 72) of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in April 2018. It has set, among other things, ambitious targets to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships, and purports to express a strong political will to phase them out as soon as possible. The most ambitious of these targets is to reduce GHG emissions by 2050 at least 50% vis-à-vis 2008 levels, and there is also an intermediate target to reduce CO2 emissions per transport work by 2030 at least 40%, again vis-à-vis 2008 levels. More than three years since the adoption of the Initial IMO Strategy, this chapter takes stock at the status of shipping decarbonisation and attempts to assess prospects for the future. Obstacles towards achieving the IMO targets are identified and discussed.
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.
In this paper, the main aim is to examine the performance of turbulence models to shed light on the effect of turbulence modeling in capturing different in-cylinder phenomena under large two-stroke marine engine-like conditions. The Unsteady Reynolds Averaged Navier–Stokes (URANS) and Large Eddy Simulation (LES) turbulence models are utilized. The LES and URANS results are compared with experimental data, in which LES and URANS models show similar accuracy in capturing the pressure and heat release with a moderately better accuracy in the LES case. The predicted gas temperature at the liner wall is approximately 45% higher for URANS than LES during the expansion stroke, which may lead to different sulfuric acid formation and heat transfer prediction. The LES model predicts a 34% higher average swirl than that in the URANS case which leads to an earlier and a stronger interaction between the flame and the spray, decreasing the oxidation of the emissions. Due to the higher predicted in-cylinder temperature in the LES case, the NO emission amount at exhaust valve opening time (EVO) is 7% higher in the LES case. At EVO, the emission in the LES case is predicted to be 3-fold higher than that in the URANS case due to less oxidation of in the post oxidation stage in the LES case. The second cycle LES simulation shows that the solutions after the scavenging process are in-sensitive to the initial conditions.
International initiatives have successfully brought down the emissions, and hence also the related negative impacts on environment and human health, from shipping in Emission Control Areas (ECAs). However, the question remains as to whether increased shipping in the future will counteract these emission reductions. The overall goal of this study is to provide an up-to-date view on future ship emissions and provide a holistic view on atmospheric pollutants and their contribution to air quality in the Nordic (and Arctic) area. The first step has been to set up new and detailed scenarios for the potential developments in global shipping emissions, including different regulations and new routes in the Arctic. The scenarios include a Baseline scenario and two additional SOx Emission Control Areas (SE-CAs) and heavy fuel oil (HFO) ban scenarios. All three scenarios are calculated in two variants involving Business-AsUsual (BAU) and High-Growth (HiG) traffic scenarios. Additionally a Polar route scenario is included with new ship traffic routes in the future Arctic with less sea ice. This has been combined with existing Current Legislation scenarios for the land-based emissions (ECLIPSE V5a) and used as input for two Nordic chemistry transport models (DEHM and MATCH). Thereby, the current (2015) and future (2030, 2050) air pollution levels and the contribution from shipping have been simulated for the Nordic and Arctic areas. Population exposure and the number of premature deaths attributable to air pollution in the Nordic area have thereafter been assessed by using the health assessment model EVA (Economic Valuation of Air pollution). It is estimated that within the Nordic region approximately 9900 persons died prematurely due to air pollution in 2015 (corresponding to approximately 37 premature deaths for every 100 000 inhabitants). When including the projected development in both shipping and land-based emissions, this number is estimated to decrease to approximately 7900 in 2050. Shipping alone is associated with about 850 premature deaths during presentday conditions (as a mean over the two models), decreasing to approximately 600 cases in the 2050 BAU scenario. Introducing a HFO ban has the potential to lower the number of cases associated with emissions from shipping to approximately 550 in 2050, while the SECA scenario has a smaller impact. The "worst-case" scenario of no additional regulation of shipping emissions combined with a high growth in the shipping traffic will, on the other hand, lead to a small increase in the relative impact of shipping, and the number of premature deaths related to shipping is in that scenario projected to be around 900 in 2050. This scenario also leads to increased deposition of nitrogen and black carbon in the Arctic, with potential impacts on environment and climate.
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.
In this video, Professor Harilaos Psaraftis (DTU Technical University of Denmark) will outline the main decarbonization challenges.
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted the so-called Initial IMO Strategy in 2018, stipulating that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from international shipping need to be reduced by at least 50% by 2050, and CO2 emissions per transport work are to be reduced by at least 40% by the year 2030, both compared to the 2008 levels.
At the same time, there is an elephant in the room: It is the intent of the European Commission and the European Parliament to include shipping into the EU ETS. How the elephant will be handled is not clear. In this talk we will outline the main decarbonization challenges through a focus on a RoPax case study.
The session was developed in collaboration with MARLOG.
The activities and emissions from leisure boats in the Baltic Sea have been modeled in a comprehensive approach for the first time, using a new simulation model leisure Boat Emissions and Activities siMulator (BEAM). The model utilizes survey data to characterize the national leisure boat fleets. Leisure boats have been categorized based on their size, use and engine specifications, and for these subcategories emission factors for NOx, PM2.5, CO, non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), and releases of copper (Cu) and zinc (Zn) from antifouling paints have been estimated according to literature values. The modeling approach also considers the temporal and spatial distribution of leisure boat activities, which are applied to each simulated leisure boat separately. According to our results the CO and NMVOC emissions from leisure boats, as well as Cu and Zn released from antifouling paints, are significant when compared against the emissions originating from registered commercial shipping in the Baltic Sea. CO emissions equal 70 % of the registered shipping emissions and NMVOC emissions equal 160 % when compared against the modeled results in the Baltic Sea in 2014. Modeled NOx and PM2.5 from the leisure boats are less significant compared to the registered shipping emissions. The emissions from leisure boats are concentrated in the summer months of June, July and August and are released in the vicinity of inhabited coastal areas. Given the large emission estimates for leisure boats, this commonly overlooked source of emissions should be further investigated in greater detail.
Denne artikel beretter om CO2, NOx og PM2,5 emissioner fra skibe i Københavns Havn for perioden 2015-2019 beregnet i projektet ” ” Kortlægning af udviklingen i luftforurening fra krydstogsskibe og andre skibe i danske havne” udført af DCE - Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi under Aarhus Universitet, for Miljø- og Fødevareministeriet (MFVM). De største kilder i havnen i alle år er krydstogtskibe, fulgt af tankskibes oliepumpning (losning af olieprodukter), passagerskibe, tankskibe, containerskibe og general cargo. Mindre bidrag beregnes for ro-ro cargo og slæbebåde samt uddybningsfartøjer, bulkskibe, forskningsskibe, offshorefartøjer og flydekraner. Pr. skibstype i 2019 beregnes følgende resultater for energiforbrug, CO2, NOx og PM2.5 (procentandele i parentes) for krydstogtskibe (56 %, 57 %, 50 %, 71 %), tankskibes oliepumpning (14 %, 13 %, 18 %, 8 %), passagerskibe (9 %, 9 %, 7 %, 9 %), tankskibe (6 %, 6 %, 8 %, 4 %), containerskibe (5 %, 5 %, 6 %, 3 %), general cargo (5 %, 5 %, 5 %, 2 %), slæbebåde (2 %, 2 %, 1 %, 1 %), ro-ro cargo (1 %, 1 %, 1 %, 0 %) og øvrige skibe (2 %, 2 %, 3 %, 1 %). Øvrige skibe omfatter uddybningsfartøjer, bulkskibe, forskningsskibe, offshorefartøjer og flydekraner.Udviklingen i CO2 emissionerne følger udviklingen i energiforbruget. De totale CO2 emissioner ændrer sig kun lidt i perioden fra 2015 til 2019, men varierer en del fra år til år for de forskellige skibstyper. Fra 2015 til 2019 stiger de samlede CO2 NOx og PM2.5 emissioner med hhv. 7 %, 5 % og 31 %. De totale emissionsstigninger skyldes især 24 % flere anløb med gradvist større krydstogtskibe i perioden, der i højere grad benytter tung olie og scrubberteknologi. Scrubberen, hvis funktion er at rense røggassen for svovl, er mindre effektiv til at begrænse udledningen af PM2.5. For krydstogtskibe beregnes CO2[NOx, PM2.5] e missionsstigninger på 34 %[26 %, 62 %]. For alle andre skibe og olie pumpning falder CO2[NOx, PM2.5] emissionerne med hhv. 13 %[8 %, 8 %]og 17 %[15 %, 16 %].
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.
Maritime shipping is the transmission belt of the global economy. It is also a major contributor to global environmental change through its under-regulated air, water and land impacts. It is puzzling that shipping is a lagging sector as it has a well-established global regulatory body—the International Maritime Organization. Drawing on original empirical evidence and archival data, we introduce a four-factor framework to investigate two main questions: why is shipping lagging in its environmental governance; and what is the potential for the International Maritime Organization to orchestrate emerging private ‘green shipping’ initiatives to achieve better ecological outcomes? Contributing to transnational governance theory, we find that conditions stalling regulatory progress include low environmental issue visibility, poor interest alignment, a broadening scope of environmental issues, and growing regulatory fragmentation and uncertainty. The paper concludes with pragmatic recommendations for the International Maritime Organization to acknowledge the regulatory difficulties and seize the opportunity to orchestrate environmental progress.