Knowledge

The international Maritime Organization (IMO) Weather Criterion has proven to be the governing stability criteria regarding minimum metacentric height for e.g., small ferries and large passenger ships. The formulation of the Weather Criterion is based on some empirical relations derived many years ago for vessels not necessarily representative for current new buildings with large superstructures. Thus, it seems reasonable to investigate the possibility of capsizing in beam sea under the joint action of waves and wind using direct time domain simulations. This has already been done in several studies. Here, it is combined with the first order reliability method (FORM) to define possible combined critical wave and wind scenarios leading to capsize and corresponding probability of capsize. The FORM results for a fictitious vessel are compared with Monte Carlo simulations, and good agreement is found at a much lesser computational effort. Finally, the results for an existing small ferry will be discussed in the light of the current weather criterion.

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.

Green House Gas (GHG) emissions are not the only emissions of concern to the international transport community. SOx emissions are non-GHG emissions that are caused by the presence of sulphur in the fuel. As the maximum percentage of sulphur in automotive and aviation fuels is strictly regulated in most countries around the world, much of the attention in recent years has focused on maritime transport. The attention mainly stems from the fact that in marine fuels the percentage of sulphur can be very high: it can be as high as 4.5 % in Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO), which is the fuel typically used in all deep-sea trades. Even though the amounts of SOx produced by ships are substantially lower than CO2, SOx emissions are highly undesirable as they cause acid rain and undesirable health effects in humans and animals. To mitigate these adverse environmental effects, the international shipping community has taken substantial policy measures. With the introduction of new limits for the content of sulphur in marine fuels in Northern European and North American sea areas, short-sea companies operating in these areas will face substantial additional cost. As of 1/1/2015, international regulations stipulate, among other things, a 0.1 % limit in the sulphur content of marine fuels, or equivalent measures limiting the percent of SOx emissions to the same amount. As low-sulphur fuel is substantially more expensive than HFO, there is little or no room within these companies current margins to absorb such additional cost, and thus significant price increases must be expected. Unlike its deep-sea counterpart, in short-sea shipping such a freight rate increase may induce shippers to use land-based alternatives (mainly road). A reverse shift of cargo would go against the EU policy to shift traffic from land to sea to reduce congestion, and might ultimately (under certain circumstances) increase the overall level of CO2 emissions along the entire supply chain. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the potential effect of sulphur regulations on the share of cargo transported by the waterborne mode vis-à-vis land-based alternative

Green House Gas (GHG) emissions are not the only emissions of concern to the international transport community. SOx emissions are non-GHG emissions that are caused by the presence of sulphur in the fuel. As the maximum percentage of sulphur in automotive and aviation fuels is strictly regulated in most countries around the world, much of the attention in recent years has focused on maritime transport. The attention mainly stems from the fact that in marine fuels the percentage of sulphur can be very high: it can be as high as 4.5 % in Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO), which is the fuel typically used in all deep-sea trades. Even though the amounts of SOx produced by ships are substantially lower than CO2, SOx emissions are highly undesirable as they cause acid rain and undesirable health effects in humans and animals. To mitigate these adverse environmental effects, the international shipping community has taken substantial policy measures. With the introduction of new limits for the content of sulphur in marine fuels in Northern European and North American sea areas, short-sea companies operating in these areas will face substantial additional cost. As of 1/1/2015, international regulations stipulate, among other things, a 0.1%limit in the sulphur content of marine fuels, or equivalent measures limiting the percent of SOx emissions to the same amount. As low-sulphur fuel is substantially more expensive than HFO, there is little or no room within these companies current margins to absorb such additional cost, and thus significant price increases must be expected. Unlike its deep-sea counterpart, in short-sea shipping such a freight rate increase may induce shippers to use landbased alternatives (mainly road). A reverse shift of cargo would go against the EU policy to shift traffic from land to sea to reduce congestion, and might ultimately (under certain circumstances) increase the overall level of CO2 emissions along the entire supply chain. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the potential effect of sulphur regulations on the share of cargo transported by the waterborne mode vis-à-vis land-based alternatives.

This paper aims to conduct an updated literature survey on the Market-Based Measures (MBMs) currently being proposed by various member states and organizations at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) or by the scientific and grey literature as a cost-effective solution to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships. Τhe paper collects, summarizes, and categorizes the different proposals to provide a clear understanding of the existing discussions on the field and also identifies the areas of prior investigation in order to prevent duplication and to avoid the future discussion at the IMO to start from scratch. Relevant European Union (EU) action on MBMs is also described. Furthermore, the study identifies inconsistencies, gaps in research, conflicting studies, or unanswered questions that form challenges for the implementation of any environmental policy at a global level for shipping. Finally, by providing foundational knowledge on the topic of MBMs for shipping and by exploring inadequately investigated areas, the study addresses concrete research questions that can be investigated and resolved by the scientific and shipping community

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.

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.

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.

Wind propulsion systems (WPS) for commercial ships can be a key ingredient to achieving the IMO green targets. Most WPS installations will operate in conjunction with propellers and marine engines in a hybrid mode, which will affect their performance. The present paper presents the development of a generic, fast, and easy tool to predict the propeller and engine performance variation, along with the cost, as a function of the wind power installed in two operation conditions: fixed ship speed and constant shaft speed. Specific focus is directed toward showing generic trends and trade-offs that inform economic decision-making. To this end, a key feature of the presented work is the ability to assess the cost–benefit of both controllable pitch propellers and fixed pitch propellers (CPPs and FPPs). This provides advice on when, in terms of WPS installation size, it is worthwhile to install which kind of propeller. CPPs are found to be more suitable for newly built wind-powered ships (>70% wind power), while a conventional FPP is satisfactory for wind-assisted ships (<70% wind power) and retrofitted installations. The results for a 91,373 GT bulk carrier showed that a WPS unloads the propeller and the engine, which leads to an increase in the propulsive efficiency and a detrimental rise of the engine specific fuel oil consumption. However, propeller gains are found to be greater than engine losses, which result in extra savings. Thus, not only does a WPS save fuel and corresponding pollutant emissions, but it also increases the entire propulsive efficiency.