Download PDF : 2010_Air_Emissions_Inventory
Port of Shanghai world’s busiest port
Clear the Air says:
When we add Shenzhen port and Hong Kong port we have the busiest ocean shipping lines in the world. All shipping is burning
4+% high sulphur bunker fuel that is spewed into our air, yet we have no Emissions Control Area (ECA) to force these ships to use
low sulphur diesel within our territorial waters.
Port of Shanghai world’s busiest port
26th December 2011 18:02 GMT
Port of Shanghai
China’s Port of Shanghai has remained the world’s busiest container port for a second year, Reuters has reported.
Container throughput at the port hit a record 30 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) this year.
Last year the port handled 29.07 million TEUs, which was boosted by international trade.
According to Reuters, the Port of Shanghai is aiming to be an influential financing and shipping hub by 2020.
Samantha Cacnio, Vancouver News Desk, 26th December 2011 18:02 GMT
Comments? Email editor@bunkerworld.com.
LCQ7: Enhanced efforts to reduce vessel emissions
http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201112/14/P201112140161.htm
Following is a question by the Hon James To and a written reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Mr Edward Yau, in the Legislative Council today (December 14):
Question:
Will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that the Government has earlier indicated that the pilot scheme for promoting the use of cleaner fuels for local ferries has been completed, of the expected time when it will submit the outcome of the pilot scheme to this Council and for public consultation; moreover, given that the Government has indicated that it has completed the consultation on regulating emissions from non-road mobile machinery which is widely used in places such as container terminals, etc. and it plans to commence the work of enacting legislation in 2012, when the related legislative procedures are expected to complete; of the anticipated improvement in air quality of various districts across the territory upon implementation of the aforesaid scheme/plan;
(b) given that the Chief Executive has proposed in his Policy Address of this year that the Government will explore with the Governments of Guangdong, Shenzhen and Macao proposals for requiring ocean-going vessels in Pearl River Delta (“PRD”) waters to switch to low-sulphur diesel, and setting up an Emission Control Area in PRD waters, whether it knows how the existing regulatory controls over vessel fuels and their emission levels of Hong Kong, Macao and the Mainland compare with one another; whether liaison and meetings with the Mainland and Macao on the relevant subject matter have commenced; in addition, of the expected time when such proposal can be implemented;
(c) given that in response to my question in 2007, the Government indicated that “there is yet to be an internationally-recognised standard for shore power supply and facilities on board for the shipping industry”, thus the proposal of providing shore power supply in public cargo working area or other berthing facilities was considered not practicable for the time being, whereas as far as I understand, there are already more than 15 ports around the world which provide shore power, among which the Port of Shanghai has provided shore power service since last year, and relevant planning has been underway in a number of ports in Taiwan, whether the Government has, in the light of the latest development in various places, started afresh any study in this regard, or liaised with mainland, Taiwan or even international organizations of the trade to understand the relevant technological development as well as to discuss with them the formulation of trade standards; if it has, of the progress;
(d) given that provisions have been made in the design of the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal for the use of shore power in future, whether the Government will consider making additional provisions of the same kind at the Kwai Chung Container Terminals, or initiating pilot schemes on the supply of shore power at various cargo working areas;
(e) since the implementation of the Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Air Pollution) Regulation (Cap. 413M) (“the Regulation”) in 2008, whether there has been an increasing trend of merchant ships violating the Regulation; and up till now, of the number of spot checks conducted by the Marine Department each month, and the number of cases in which the owners concerned were convicted for excessive smoke emissions by their vessels, as well as the fines imposed; and
(f) apart from the measures in (a) to (e), whether the Government has other plans to regulate the emission of pollutants by vessels and container terminal facilities; whether the Government will make reference to the “Green Port” policy introduced by the Mainland and neighbouring regions one after the other to reduce emissions and pollution, and initiate related studies and plans?
Reply:
President,
With successive implementation of land-based control measures, we have seen improvement in the local air pollution. For example, from 2005 to 2010, our local air quality monitoring stations recorded a decrease in the concentrations of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and respirable suspended particulate (RSP) by 45% and 18% respectively. Due to the increase in the maritime activities in Hong Kong and the PRD Region, emissions from the marine vessels have gradually become another source of air pollution. We need to step up our effort to reduce emissions from this source in order to further improve our air quality. The reply to the questions raised by the Hon James To is as follows:
(a) At present, the light diesel supplied on the local market to marine vessels contains not more than 0.5% sulphur. If the sulphur content is capped at 0.1%, the territory-wide emissions of SO2 and RSP will be reduced by around 3%. We have thus completed a trial of powering local ferries with ultra low sulphurdiesel and will report on the trial findings and consult the Panel about improving the quality of vessel fuels sold locally at the meeting of the Legislative Council Panel on Environmental Affairs (the Panel) on December 21.Meanwhile, we have started seeking relevant stakeholders’ views on this proposal.
As for the introduction of statutory control on the emissions of non-road mobile sources (including mobile machinery used at container terminals, airport, construction sites, etc.), we have consulted the trades on our proposal. We plan to report to the Panel on the outcome of the consultation and consult it on the final proposal in the first quarter of 2012. Subject to the Panel’s support, we shall commence the necessary legislative procedures for implementing the control proposal which is expected to complete within the 2012-13 legislative session.
Emissions from non-road mobile machinery currently account for about 7% (6,800tonnes) and 11% (600 tonnes) of the local emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and RSP respectively. If all non-road mobile machinery in local use are replaced with ones meeting the proposed emission standards, local emissions of NOx and RSP can be reduced by 4.7% (4,500 tonnes) and 9% (500 tonnes) respectively. It will also help mitigate the environmental nuisance generated at container terminals and construction sites near the urban centres.
(b) Hong Kong, Macao and the Mainland control marine emissions within their waters through implementing the requirements of the Annex VI to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships promulgated by the International Maritime Organisation. These include restriction of fuelsulphur contents, control of emission of NOx and ozone-depleting substances, and regulation of shipboard incineration.
We have started discussion with the relevant authorities of Guangdong, Shenzhen and Macao on the regional cooperation initiatives on reducing marine emissions within the PRD waters set out in the 2011 Policy Address. We will jointly explore the feasibility of these initiatives and the way to take them forward.Meanwhile, we are also consulting the local stakeholders, including the oil companies, ship owners and the shipping industry about the proposed control initiatives, which would help us consider and work out the implementation timetable as soon as possible.
(c) and (d) The design of the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal has already made provisions for the use of onshore power supply (OPS) in future. We will keep closely monitoring the progress in the development of internationally harmonized technical standards for OPS and the trend of other overseas ports in using OPS, with a view to installing relevant facilities in the cruise terminal as soon as possible.
As for container terminals, since container vessels have a shorter berthing time, switching to low-sulphur diesel is more cost-effective than using OPS. We will continue to listen to the views of the industry and closely monitor the trend of overseas container terminals in using OPS to decide whether there is a need to require container terminals to install relevant facilities.
(e) The Marine Department has not found any increasing trend of non-compliance cases of vessels since implementation of the Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Air Pollution) Regulation in 2008. Dark smoke emission from ocean-going vessels is regulated under the Shipping and Port Control Ordinance, whereas that from local vessels is regulated under the Merchant Shipping (Local Vessels) Ordinance. As at November 2011, the Marine Department has carried out around 3 600 surprise inspections (on average 330 inspections per month) on vessels in Hong Kong waters in relation to air pollution. Since 2008, the Marine Department has prosecuted five vessels for excessive emission of dark smoke causing nuisance. All of these vessels were convicted and the level of fine for each case ranged from HK$500 to HK$2,500.
(f) The Chief Executive proposed the use of clean fuels for marine vessels in this year’s Policy Address. The proposed measures include:
(i) explore with the governments of Guangdong, Shenzhen and Macao the feasibility of requiring ocean-going vessels to switch to low-sulphur fuel while berthing at ports of Hong Kong and the PRD;
(ii) explore with the governments of Guangdong, Shenzhen and Macao setting up an Emission Control Area in PRD waters over the longer term; and
(iii) study in collaboration with the relevant trades the feasibility of improving the quality of vessel fuels sold locally to reduce emissions from vessels.
We are actively following up the above proposed measures in order to reduce vessel emissions.
On the other hand, many major ship liners in Hong Kong signed up to the Fair Winds Charter (the Charter) in January this year, committing to switching to lowsulphur fuel as far as possible when berthing in Hong Kong waters within 2011 and 2012. The Charter has not only reduced the emissions generated from the marine vessels around the port area, but also demonstrated the feasibility of fuel switch in Hong Kong waters, which would help us explore extending fuel switch to the whole PRD waters.
Regarding other measures to reduce emissions from container terminals, it is now a statutory requirement that the sulphur content of diesel used by non-road mobile sources (including mobile machinery and non-road vehicles) at container terminals must not exceed 50ppm (i.e. ultra low sulphur diesel). Emission reduction is also attained by switching most quay cranes to electric power, and converting more than half of the diesel-driven gantry cranes into electric or hybrid cranes. In addition, some non-road vehicles used at container terminals have been replaced by electric or hybrid models to help improve the air quality and environment of the port.
Ends/Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Issued at HKT 12:27
New standards save lives
DOWNLOAD PDF :AN4-2011
Port of LA introduces Carbon Calculator
30th November 2011 19:47 GMT
Helping ports reduce their carbon footprint
The Port of Los Angeles has announced that it has introduced a tool to assess global warming at port facilities.
The port has worked with technical experts and other ports worldwide to develop a Carbon Calculator for ports which estimates greenhouse gas emissions from their operations in an effort for ports to explore reduction strategies.
According to a press release, ports can use the free Carbon Calculator to to compute the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from sources associated with their operations, including port-specific sources such as cargo handling equipment and harbour craft.
The Calculator’s Reduced Emissions Scenarios feature will allow ports to develop strategies on how best to reduce their carbon footprint.
The calculator is a software package that lets ports estimate their existing carbon dioxide emissions from direct, port-owned sources such as fleet vehicles, cranes, harbour craft and cargo handling equipment, and also indirect sources such as electricity purchased for the port-owned buildings and operation.
“The Carbon Calculator is a powerful tool to help each port chart its own course toward reducing greenhouse gases,” said Port Executive Director Geraldine Knatz, who also serves as President of the International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH). “A consistent methodology among ports will help us assess our global impact.”
The Carbon Calculator is a project of the World Ports Climate Initiative (WPCI) – an IAPH collaboration which was launched in 2008.
The initiative is dedicated to identifying and promoting effective, sustainable practices and strategies for ports and harbors to improve air quality while remaining vital economic engines.
The Port of Los Angeles is one of 59 WPCI members and has taken the lead in developing the calculator.
Samantha Cacnio, Vancouver News Desk, 30th November 2011 19:47 GMT
Comments? Email editor@bunkerworld.com.
How come Hong Kong does not publish this kind of data ?
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/environment/studies_reports.asp
Ship pollution still high despite pact
| Sulphur dioxide pollution has dropped slightly since the signing of the Fair Winds Charter, but the industry is still the city’s No 2 emitter, seminar told | ||
| Keith Wallis Nov 13, 2011 |
||
|
The Fair Winds Charter, a voluntary fuel-switching scheme introduced by shipping lines nearly a year ago, had improved local air quality, but the shipping sector was still the second-biggest emitter of sulphur dioxide in Hong Kong, environmental officials told a seminar yesterday. Despite the impact of ship pollution on public health, campaigners and government officials at the Civil Exchange event said it could take months if not years before tighter local and international legal controls on ship emissions were in place. Joanne Ooi, chief executive of the Clean Air Network, said people were not aware that exhaust from ships was “affecting a huge swathe of the public in some of the poorest districts” of the city. She was commenting after Simon Ng Ka-wing, visiting scholar at the Institute for the Environment at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, said there were several hot spots for marine sulphur-dioxide emissions. Ng, who is leading a team working on a government study on ship emissions, said Kwai Chung and main shipping routes, including the East Lamma Channel, to Shenzhen’s Yantian and Shekou ports had high sulphur-dioxide concentrations. He said 79 per cent of the sulphur-dioxide emissions from ships in Hong Kong came from oceangoing vessels, while 21 per cent came from fast ferries serving Macau and Pearl River Delta cities and river-trade ships. Tony Lee Yu-tao, senior environmental protection officer with the Environmental Protection Department, said a “preliminary assessment reveals a slight improvement” in air quality since 18 shipping lines switched to using low-sulphur diesel in while berthed in Hong Kong. This improvement was achieved even though the number of oceangoing ships arriving at the Kwai Chung container terminal had increased, Lee said. There are about 300 ships, including oceangoing and river-trade vessels, ferries and government vessels, at any one time in Hong Kong. The carriers, which include the Tung family-controlled Orient Overseas Container Line (OOCL), Cosco Container Lines, an offshoot of the mainland’s largest shipping company, and Danish giant Maersk, agreed to use low-sulphur diesel for two years from last January when they signed the Fair Winds Charter. Teddy Fung, managing director of OOCL’s Hong Kong branch, said switching to low-sulphur diesel had increased the firm’s fuel bill by US$1.4 million. Other container lines that signed the charter and switched fuels faced a similar increase, giving a cost advantage to firms that did not sign the charter. Environment Secretary Edward Yau Tang-wah said the maritime sector was second only to the power sector in the amount of sulphur dioxide that was pumped into the city’s atmosphere. Yau confirmed talks had started with mainland authorities to establish a control area for ship emissions in the Pearl River Delta, which was one of the key objectives by the shipping lines when they signed the charter. But Lee said the creation of an emissions-control area was a long-term goal that would require Beijing’s approval and submission to the International Maritime Bureau. Instead, Mike Kilburn, Civic Exchange’s head of environmental strategy, suggested a low-emission zone could be set up more quickly. |
||
Action urged on ships’ carbon emissions
3 November 2011 Last updated at 01:51 GMT
BBC News
By Richard Black Environment correspondent, BBC News
Without curbs, emissions from ships will form a larger fraction of the global total in future
Greenhouse gas emissions from shipping should be included in the UK’s climate change budgets, the Committee on Climate Change has recommended.
Under the Climate Change Act, the UK is committed to cutting all its climate-changing emissions by 80% – based on 1990 levels – by 2050.
But international aviation and shipping emissions are not currently included.
If the government agrees, it will mean tighter targets for other sectors such as motoring and electricity generation.
“Shipping could account for up to 10% of emissions allowed under the 2050 target, and that says this is a material issue,” said Committee on Climate Change (CCC) chief executive David Kennedy.
The CCC’s report says there are many ways for shipping to curb its carbon footprint – by improving fuel efficiency, deploying kites or sails, or allocating vessels more efficiently.
Some companies are already developing such techniques.
Tight budgets
The first four carbon budgets, stretching to 2027, have already been agreed
The CCC has recommended – and the government has adopted – a series of carbon budgets setting down the maximum scale of greenhouse gas emissions that the UK can emit over successive five-year periods.
They are designed as staging posts on the way to the 2050 target.
If the government does agree to include shipping and maybe aviation in the budgets, then constraints on other sectors must become tighter.
“If you include shipping in the 2050 target – especially if you throw in aviation as well – that implies full decarbonisation of electricity, heat and surface vehicles,” said Mr Kennedy.
“And if the ambition is full decarbonisation [of those sectors], then we need to make good progress in the next two decades, otherwise we can’t achieve the 2050 target.”
The committee will put its formal recommendation on shipping and aviation to the government next year, and the government says that it will respond “in due course”. Under law, it must decide by the end of 2012.
Ins and outs
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
Any solution must… avoid potentially damaging an industry that is vital to the future prosperity of the United Kingdom”
End Quote David Balston UK Chamber of Shipping
The committee’s analysts spent three months attempting to calculate UK shipping emissions “from the bottom up”, scouring records of 150,000 shipping movements into and out of UK ports by vessels including cargo ships, tugs, fishing vessels, ferries and cruise liners.
It believes the UK should be responsible for half of all the emissions associated with ships entering or leaving national ports – the other half being borne by whichever countries lie at the other end of the journeys.
Having crunched the numbers, the committee concludes that the UK’s share is 12-16 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (MtCO2) per year.
Globally, shipping emissions are growing by 3-4% per year, and could account for a quarter of all the world’s greenhouse gas output by 2050.
The International Maritime Organisation agreed earlier this year on a programme to progressively increase vessels’ fuel efficiency.
The CCC is basically saying the UK should lead an international effort to go further and faster down this track.
The UK Chamber of Shipping, which worked with the CCC on its analysis, welcomed the conclusion, but warned of potential impacts on competitiveness.
“Eco-ships”, such as Japanese line NYK’s 2030 concept, could cut emissions by 70%
“This work is hugely important,” said David Balston, the organisation’s director for safety and environment.
“We do stress, however, that any solution must be global rather than regional to avoid distorting world trade and potentially damaging an industry that is vital to the future prosperity of the United Kingdom.”
Mr Kennedy also suggested the priority was to end up with a global system of carrots and sticks for decarbonising shipping, and urged UK ministers to press for such a deal at and after the UN climate talks that begin in South Africa at the end of the month.
If international action proved impossible, the European Union would almost certainly introduce measure for traffic in and out of European ports, he said.
Environment group WWF, together with Oxfam, recently issued a report recommending that some kind of global shipping tax be used to raise some of the $100bn per year of climate-related cash that rich countries are committed to providing to the developing world by 2020.
“International shipping has, like aviation, been left out of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions for too long, said Keith Allott, WWF-UK’s head of climate change.
“An international deal to address shipping could be a win-win – addressing a rapidly growing source of emissions and at the same time providing a valuable source of funding for tackling climate change in the developing world.”
BBC © 2011 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15554523?print=true
Shipping news updates
Measures to support cleaner shipping
On 21 September the European Commission adopted a staff working paper entitled Pollutant Emission Reduction From Maritime Transport and The Sustainable Waterborne Transport Toolbox. The document accompanies a legal proposal to revise an EU directive related to the sulphur content of marine fuels that aligns EU law with International Maritime Organization (IMO) requirements.
According to the document, compliance shall be achieved on time while minimising any possible unwanted side effects. Therefore, a number of short-term accompanying measures are being considered to seek solutions for minimising the compliance costs. Among other things it points to existing frameworks such as the TEN-T and the Marco Polo programmes and the European Investment Bank’s policy and instruments in support of sustainable shipping
Moreover, the paper outlines the conditions under which member states may choose to grant investment aids, enabling companies to go beyond existing standards or assisting in the early adaptation ahead of the entry into force of the standards.
The document is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/transport/ships_proposal.htm
Particle filters on inland ships
The Swiss General Navigation Company of Lake Zürich (ZSG) has now equipped all its 15 motor vessels with particulate filters, capable of removing up to 99 per cent of particulate matter (PM) emissions. Since August 2010, particle filters have been mandatory for all new ships and, wherever feasible and economically viable for the existing fleet. ZSG reports that the material costs for the equipment of its ships amounted to around CHF1.3 million, and that installation takes up to 20 working days per ship.
Source: AECC Newsletter, May-June 2011
Cruise line fined for breaching sulphur rules
A cruise ship operator has been fined EUR 30,000 for contravening European Union rules on the sulphur content of marine fuel. The 88,000 gross tonne Disney Magic was inspected this month while at berth in the Italian port of Naples, and it was found the ship was using a bunker fuel with a sulphur content in excess of an EU regulation that requires ships at berth to use fuel with a sulphur content of no more than 0.10 per cent, unless they are scheduled to be in port for less than two hours. Reports said the ship, owned by the US cruise operator Disney Cruise Line, was immediately ordered to stop burning the fuel. Naples is one of the regular ports of call for the 1998-built, Bahamas-flagged Disney Magic.
Source: Sustainable Shipping News, 22 September 2011
Call for a global shipping fuel tax
A report by Oxfam and WWF shows how it is possible to tackle the huge and growing greenhouse gas emissions from ships and raise billions of dollars to help developing countries tackle climate change, without unfairly hitting developing countries. It argues that a deal to apply a carbon price to international shipping should be at the heart of the agreement at the UN climate change conference in Durban, South Africa, later this year. It would also offer a solution to the deadlock on shipping emissions that has lasted more than a decade.
According to the proposal, applying a carbon price of US$25 per tonne to shipping fuel would help cut emissions while generating US$25 billion per year by 2020. The finance would be used both to compensate developing countries for marginally higher import costs that could result from the carbon price, and to provide more than US$10 billion per year to the Green Climate Fund (GCF).
Out of the Bunker – Time for a fair deal on shipping emissions
Source: WWF/Oxfam press release, 8 September 2011
Energy efficiency standards for new ships
In July, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted an Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) regulation for new ships. The EEDI will require new ships to meet a minimum level of energy efficiency: ships built between 2015 and 2019 will need to improve their efficiency by 10 per cent, rising to 20 per cent between 2020 and 2024 and 30 per cent for ships delivered after 2024. The environmental group Clean Shipping Coalition (CSC) welcomes the decision, but warns that it’s only the first step in what needs to be a far more expansive effort to address shipping’s climate impacts. Shipping accounts for around 3.3 per cent of man-made CO2 emissions worldwide and this figure is expected to rise to 6 per cent in 2020.
Source: Clean Shipping Coalition pressrelease, 15 July 2011
North American ECA has entered into force
Emissions of sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) from ships in the North American Emission Control Area (ECA) will be subject to more stringent controls than the limits that apply globally, as a result of the entry into force as from 1 August 2011 of amendments to MARPOL Annex VI of the International Maritime Organization (IMO). This means that there are currently three designated ECAs, the other two being sulphur oxide ECAs: the Baltic Sea area and the North Sea area.
The North American ECA will take effect 12 months after the amendments enter into force, giving the shipping industry one year before it has to comply with the ECA requirements. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the cost of implementing the ECA standards is estimated at US$3.2 billion, while the health-related benefits could be as much as US$110 billion in the US in 2020.
Shift in emission sources
Air pollutant emissions from international shipping continue to rise, while those from land-based sources in Europe keep on slowly shrinking.
Since 1980, total European emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2) – the most significant acidifying pollutant and an important precursor to health-damaging secondary fine particles (PM2.5) – from land-based emission sources have fallen by more than 80 per cent, from around 53 million tonnes in 1980 to 9.1 million tonnes in 2009.
Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), non-methane volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and ammonia have also gone down, although to a lesser extent. VOCs have more than halved since 1980, while NOx and ammonia emissions have dropped by 35 and 39 per cent, respectively.
Since the late 1990s, emissions of primary fine particles (PM2.5) have been attracting increasing attention, mainly because of their negative impacts on health. However, these emissions are not as well documented as those of other air pollutants, and many countries lack emissions data for the 1990s. Between 2000 and 2009 it is estimated that emissions of PM2.5 from land-based sources have fallen by a quarter, from 2.9 to 2.2 million tonnes.
Emissions from international shipping in European waters show a steady increase. Since 1980, ship emissions of SO2 have gone up from 1.7 to 2.4 million tonnes (a 41 per cent increase), and those of NOx from 2.4 to 3.9 million tonnes (61 per cent).
The data in Table 1 is taken from figures reported by countries themselves to the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution, and was compiled by the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP). The Convention’s EMEP keeps track of the ways in which emissions from one country affect the environment in others. The EMEP report also provides an overview of calculations for source-receptor relationships (including transboundary movements between countries), covering acidifying, eutrophying, photo-oxidant, and particle pollution.
For most European countries the biggest share of depositions of sulphur and nitrogen emanate from outside their own territory, and an increasing share of the depositions originate from international shipping.
Table2: European emissions of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides (as NO2), VOCs, ammonia, and PM2.5 (kilotonnes). Data for 2000 and 2009 is from the 2011 EMEP report, while data for 1980 and 1990 is from earlier EMEP reports. Russia in the table refers only to the western parts of the Russian Federation.
For 2009 it was estimated that ship emissions were responsible for ten per cent or more of the total depositions of both sulphur and oxidised nitrogen compounds in more than half of the EU’s 27 member countries (see Table 2).
Table 2: European countries that have the highest proportion of air pollutant depositions of sulphur and oxidised nitrogen.
In some countries, such as Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Ireland, Portugal and the United Kingdom, ship emissions already make up approximately one fifth or more of total pollutant depositions.
Christer Ågren
The Gothenburg Protocol
The Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) dates back to 1979 and covers 51 parties in Europe and North America. It is extended by eight protocols that specify emission reduction commitments and identify specific abatement measures to be taken. Cooperation under the convention includes development of policies and strategies to cut emissions of air pollutants through exchanges of information, consultation, research and monitoring.
The Gothenburg Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone was signed in 1999 and entered into force in 2005. It sets binding national emission ceilings for 2010 for four pollutants (SO2, NOx, VOCs and NH3), contains emission limit values for a number of specific emission source categories such as large combustion plants and road vehicles, and requires the use of best available techniques.
For more information: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/
Sulphur emissions from shipping to be slashed
EU ship fuel sulphur standards are to be aligned with international standards, meaning that the global limit should come down to 0.5 per cent in 2020, and the stricter limit applied in sulphur emission control areas is to be further lowered to 0.1 per cent in 2015.
On 15 July the European Commission tabled a proposal for stricter control of harmful sulphur emissions from international shipping. The proposal incorporates global standards that were unanimously agreed three years ago by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) into EU law.
Environment Commissioner Janez Poto?nik said: “This proposal is an important step forward in reducing air emissions from the fast-growing maritime transport sector. It will help resolve the persistent air quality problems that continue to affect millions of Europeans.”
With nearly half of Europe’s population living in areas where EU air quality objectives are still not met, air pollution is one of the main environmental worries facing citizens.
European emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2) from land-based sources have decreased significantly over the past 20-30 years. Without further action, ship emissions around Europe could exceed the total of EU land-based emissions by 2020, according to current trends (see Fig. 1).
Figure 1: Projected SO2 and NOx emissions for 2020 from EU land-based sources and from international shipping in European sea areas in the absence of additional control measures (kilotonnes).
Ships traditionally use heavy fuel oil with a sulphur content of up to 4.5 per cent for propulsion (although the global average ship fuel sulphur content is around 2.7 per cent), compared with an EU limit of 0.001 per cent for road fuels.
The proposed legislation revises an existing EU directive on the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels and incorporates the 2008 IMO standards into EU law to ensure their proper and harmonised enforcement by all EU member states. It will also improve the effectiveness of the IMO standards as they would be monitored and enforced under the EU regime, which is more effective than the international system.
Under the proposal, the maximum permissible sulphur content of marine fuels used in designated Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA), namely the Baltic Sea and the North Sea including the English Channel, will fall from the previous level of 1.5 per cent to 0.1 per cent, as of 1 January 2015. In other sea areas, a sulphur limit of 0.5 per cent will apply as from 1 January 2020, as compared to the previous maximum level of 4.5 per cent (see Fig. 2).
Figure 2: International standards for the maximum allowed sulphur content of marine fuels (per cent).
By extending the stricter 0.1 per cent sulphur standard to passenger ships outside of SECAs from 2020, the proposal goes beyond what is required by the IMO.
As an alternative to using low-sulphur fuels, ships will be allowed to use equivalent technologies such as exhaust gas cleaning systems or alternative fuels such as liquefied natural gas (LNG).
According to the Commission, this equivalence option will significantly lower compliance costs (by 50-88 per cent) and help promote innovative solutions.
The expected cost to the shipping industry of the new standards is between €2.6 billion and 11 billion per year in 2020, but these costs are far outweighed by public health savings of up to €34 billion/year. In addition, there are significant benefits related to environmental improvements, such as reduced acidification damage to ecosystems.
The lower bound of costs is based on ships fitting exhaust cleaning techniques (scrubbers), while the upper bound assumes a fuel switch to lower-sulphur distillates.
According to the Commission’s Impact Assessment, the health benefits associated with full implementation of the IMO’s 2008 standards are at least between €3 and €13 for every €1 spent, and the benefits are even greater for the SECAs, at least between €5 and €25 for every €1 spent.
The results of a public consultation showed that the overwhelming majority of respondents wanted more European sea areas to be designated as SECAs. Green groups want it for the much needed health and environmental benefits, and several industry groups – especially Nordic ones – want it on the grounds that an EU-wide SECA would address intra-sectoral competition issues.
While the Commission concludes that such an extension of the SECA coverage is likely to offer net benefits and address competitiveness concerns, it does not have the competence to propose this to the IMO – any such proposals must come from member states bordering the sea area in question. The same applies to designation of nitrogen oxides (NOx) Emission Control Areas. (There are currently no NOx ECAs in Europe, but the whole coastline around the USA and Canada – out to 200 nautical miles – has been designated as a combined SO2/NOx ECA.)
There have also been calls to introduce ship emissions standards for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) into EU law. The Commission’s response is that this could be considered in the future, and that it will continue to support member states in developing proposals for additional ECAs and emission limit values for submission to the IMO.
Experience with the implementation of existing legislation has shown that there is a need for a stronger monitoring and enforcement regime. In response to this, the proposal includes a more unified reporting and verification procedure, and sampling provisions aligned with international standards.
Fuel quality impacts not only the environment but is also important for ship safety, and the Commission concludes that “ultimately there may be a role for establishing mandatory fuel quality standards for marine fuels placed on the market in the EU”, as this would help guarantee that the fuel actually conforms to the recognised international standards.
Responding to concerns from some industry groups about the expected increase in shipping costs, Transport Commissioner Siim Kallas said: “Transposing into EU law the standards unanimously agreed in the IMO would be a step towards further improving the sustainability of waterborne transport. I am very glad that the proposal includes a variety of short and medium-term accompanying measures to help the sector face this challenge”.
The Commission’s Impact Assessment suggests that the European Commission and member states use and adapt existing public support instruments to assist industry in the transition towards the new standards, especially the SECA limit. This could include financial support to invest in new technologies such as exhaust gas cleaning systems and support wider supply and uptake of LNG as a fuel for ships.
The Commission have made it clear, however, that a delay in the 2015 SECA limit – as has been suggested by some industry groups – is not an option, neither at EU level nor attempting to push for a delay at the IMO.
Air pollutant emissions from ships have been estimated to cause 50,000 premature deaths a year in Europe, as well respiratory illnesses, aggravation of heart disease, and acidification of sensitive ecosystems with subsequent damage to biological diversity.
Not surprisingly, environmental organisations welcome the Commission’s proposal: “With many ships using fuel over 3,500 times dirtier than car fuel we are pleased to finally see EU action on air pollution from ships,” said Bill Hemmings from Transport & Environment.
However, the environmental organisations say that more should be done, and are calling on EU legislators to extend the stricter SECA sulphur standard of 0.1 per cent to all European seas.
With the current proposal this limit will apply only to the North Sea and the Baltic Sea, while ships operating in the Mediterranean (which accounts for more than half of European ship emissions), in the North-eastern Atlantic and in the Black Sea will be exempt from this standard. Moreover, the same strict standard (0.1%) should also apply to all cruise and passenger ships as from 2015.
Nitrogen oxides emissions from ships are also great a concern, say the environmental organisations, but there are still no EU standards or EU measures in place for controlling their release.
Christer Ågren
The Commission proposal can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/transport/ships_directive.htm
Download PDF : AcidNewsAN3-2011
Port of LA begins seawater scrubber testing
3 Oct. 2011
Testing will be conducted on the Horizon Hawk
The Port of Los Angeles along with students from the California State University of Long Beach (CSULB), Horizon Shipping Lines and Rolls Royce Marine, have begun testing a new seawater scrubber system for shipping vessels.
According to reports, the seawater scrubber system will be monitored over the next three years and aims to reduce emissions of shipping vessels by as much as 85% by 2013.
Seawater scrubbers are pollution control devices that use liquid to wash unwanted pollutants from a vessels exhaust stream.
“The main goal for our project is to improve our local air quality,” said Hamid Rahai, professor at CSULB and co-principal investigator overseeing the project.
“The driving force behind this project is that we provide technology that meets the California Air Resources Board requirements. That way we can actually reduce the pollution in the area and at the same time develop a technology.”
California regulations require that ships within 24 nautical miles of land must use low sulphur fuels which are cleaner and more refined than tradition marine fuels.
The Port of LA is testing a variety of technologies to determine which is best suited to reach their goal of reducing air pollution. This will be the second type of technology that the port is testing.
According to reports, the scrubber system has the potential to save millions of dollars in fuel by allowing ships to use lower grade fuel at all times, while still meeting emission requirements.
“One of the major things we’re going to do is sample the discharge water to make sure it meets International Maritime Organization (IMO) requirements,” said Rahai.
“Actually, there’s not that much baseline data available, so this will be a significant step to provide the baseline data in terms of what kind of discharge water we have and how it’s going to impact the ecosystem.”
Rahai added that the next step in the project will be to determine how successful the scrubber system is and what kind of policies will be implemented to require shippers to adapt the technology.
The team has sailed on a 12-hour trip on board the Horizon Hawk and will travel from Los Angeles to Oakland.
Testing will also be carried out on sailings trips to Guam and Shanghai.
Samantha Cacnio, Vancouver News Desk, 3rd October 2011 21:31 GMT
Comments? Email editor@bunkerworld.com.