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.
The content of Resolution MSC.473(ES.2) can be summarized in five main points and one invitation to IMO Member States.
The first point pertains to the implementation of the Framework of Protocols. The second point pertains to the designation of seafarers as 'key workers' in order to facilitate safe and unhindered movement for embarking or disembarking a vessel. The third point pertains to the consideration of temporary migration measures to ease mobility of seafarers, eg waivers or relaxations of visa or documentary requirements. The fourth point is on the use of prevention measures such as testing crews before embarkation; this requires active conduct by port states, namely providing access to personal protective equipment and testing facilities. The fifth point is on providing seafarers with immediate access to medical care and facilities, as well as with evacuation when the assistance required cannot be provided on board or at port; this aims to prevent humanitarian situations such as casualties on board vessels due to lack of access to intensive care units.
Furthermore, the Resolution invites Member States to designate a National Focal Point on Crew Change and Repatriation of Seafarers ('National Focal Point').
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.
In an effort to reduce the environmental impacts of maritime transportation, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) designated special Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECAs) where ships are required to use low-sulphur fuel. In January 2015, the sulphur limit within SECAs was lowered to 0.1%, which can only be achieved if vessels are using pricier ultra-low sulphur fuel, or invest in abatement technologies. The increased operating costs borne by Ro-Ro operators in SECAs due to the stricter limits can result in the shutting down of some routes and a redistribution of cargo flows with land-based alternatives. The exact repercussions of the new sulphur limits are difficult to identify in the wake of significant recent reductions of the fuel prices for both low-sulphur and heavy fuel oil. This paper presents a modal split model that estimates modal shifts vis-a-vis competing maritime and land-based modes available to shippers. This allows examining the implications of the recent low prices to modal choice, and the influence a potential increase in fuel prices may have. The model is applied to seven routes affected by the regulation based on data from a leading European Ro-Ro operator. Sensitivity analyses on market share data, cargo values, freight rates, and haulers rates are conducted. Emissions inventories are constructed to assess the environmental efficacy of the SECA regulation. The novelty of the proposed model lies in the examination of the ex-post implications of shutting down a service and the redistribution of transport. Recommendations to mitigate and reverse the negative side-effects of such environmental legislation are proposed.
As Arctic sea ice recedes due to global warming, ship traffic is increasing, posing global climate risks, particularly from black carbon emissions. Emitted by ships burning heavy fuel oil, black carbon accelerates ice melt and contributes to climate change. Despite this urgency regulatory progress on the topic has been slow. The International Maritime Organization has debated Arctic black carbon emissions for over a decade with little advancement. Notably, regulatory efforts on the topic so far have been driven mainly by non-state actors rather than states. However, their regulatory influence is hindered by a critical barrier: a lack of transparency. This article analyses the crucial role of transparency in international law-making, specifically for non-state actors, using Arctic black carbon regulation as a case study. Drawing on semi-structured interviews, the article identifies transparency challenges and suggests recommendations to overcome them, thereby strengthening the role of non-state actors within the regulation.
The capacity to act as a port state in international law is best described by the specific powers exercised over foreign ships, namely inspection, detention, expulsion or request of any type of information prior to the entry into the port. Many of these powers are explicitly attributed to the state in multilateral instruments, whereby the flag state consents to having its ships subject to the jurisdiction of the port state. Notwithstanding the consensus around the complementary nature of port state jurisdiction with respect to certain obligations of the flag state, the port state is not limited to fulfilling a secondary role. This is especially visible in the prevention, reduction and control of ship-source pollution, where some port states have not hesitated in acting regardless of an expressed consent by the flag state to the rule or standard being applied with the support of port powers. Not only do port states use more stringent enforcement powers to ensure that international treaties are effective, but they also prescribe novel rules and standards upon any foreign ship that approaches the port, often as a means of breaking an international negotiation deadlock. This study discusses the international legal basis for such unilateral jurisdiction by analyzing the principles of state jurisdiction under the dichotomy parochial/cosmopolitan. By interpreting the stated and implicit purposes of port state actions under that dichotomy, this study proposes that states are finding a legal ground to act based on certain legal functions they fulfill in the international legal order. This argument puts into perspective the assumed self-sufficiency of territoriality and shows how unilateralism may also serve to seek to set universally applicable norms.