Chapter 1. Environmental impact of shipping

“…Ships emit various global warming pollutants, including carbon dioxide (CO₂),

black carbon (BC), nitrogen oxides (NO_x) and nitrous oxide (N₂O)…”

(Shipping Impacts on climate Report, 2010-2013)

Over 90 per cent of world trade is carried by marine vessels. But, unfortunately, because they burn greater amount of fuel than any other means of transport, ships create significant impact on environment (emissions of water and air) and human health.[6]

According to data from “World Emissions Report” and “Trends in Global CO₂ Emissions Report”, only the United States, China, Russia, India and Japan emit more carbon dioxide than the world’s shipping fleet.

But, however, carbon dioxide emissions from marine vessels are growing up and scientists predict the increase of emissions level from 3% in 2007 to 18% in 2020.

Along with this, vessels emit the environment not only by greenhouse gases, but by ballast water, oil splits, wastes, etc. – all these create imbalance in ecosystems of oceans. Changes in molecular structure of oceans: concentration of sail and other microelements, density of waters and ice melting, changes in fauna and flora, temperature instability of waters are the results of emissions.[7]

Organizations and committees try to achieve potential emission reduction targets in the international shipping sector in three distinct types of measures:

- Technical and operational improvements to vessels;

- Use of alternative fuels;

- Other measures, which may include market-based instruments

As the shipping industry is under-regulated, these environmental and public health impacts will escalate tremendously as global trade triples over the next two decades—until new air pollution and no-discharge laws are enacted by national and international bodies.

It will, therefore, be extremely challenging, and expensive, to reduce emissions of CO2 from international shipping, particularly if trying to achieve economy-wide emissions reduction targets under a hypothetical equal burden-sharing approach. There are several options, but at present most of them are not economically viable.

Greenhouse Gases (GHG)

According to the information from sources, in 2007, it was estimated that international shipping accounted for 2.7% of global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂)[8]

According to Research of International Maritime Organization (IMO) of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from shipping, total emissions from International shipping were 843 megatons (Mt) CO₂ in 2007 and from global shipping approximately 1,000 Mt CO₂ (3.3%) and both of them still grow up.[9]

CO₂ emissions from international shipping are projected to increase rapidly in future years as growth in the volume of world trade is anticipated to outstrip growth in global GDP. Based on IMO (2009) research, emissions will increase to between approxi­mately 2000 Mt and 3000 Mt CO₂ in most mid-range assumptions in next twenty years

Unlimited growth of maritime GHG emissions would significantly increase the share of these emissions in total emissions, assuming that other anthropogenic emissions are reduced in order to keep the temperature increase below 2^o C, as agreed by major emitters in the Copenhagen Accord. In order to contribute to meeting the temperature target, shipping will have to reduce its absolute emissions considerably.[10]

If emissions will came to that level or higher, than global change in climate would be terrible and everything will change around us.

Black Carbon

Regarding to reports, ships generate 15-30% of the world's smog-forming emissions. By burning fuel, vessels pollute environment of black carbon, which is a potential warmer both in the atmosphere and when lying on snow and ice.[11]

Black carbon, more commonly known as soot, is made up of fine particles created by the incomplete combustion of a carbon fuel source, such as oil or coal. Aging engines and poor engine maintenance can also contribute to incomplete combustion.

Such smog-forming emission could result in melting of ice in area of Northwest Passage way. A lot of voyages were made within the last five years and we can see how it effects on climate. Black carbon covers ice ground and creates fast melting under sun lights.

Reducing black carbon from ships could slow warming, saving time for further steps in reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

Ballast and waste waters

Shipping transport emits by discharging household wastes and bilge water, dumping ballast water and wash water from tankers, emission of exhaust gases, leaching of anti-foul paints, pollution with toxic materials, etc. A lot of rubbish washes ashore – all these create imbalance and pollution in ecosystems of ocean waters and coastline zone.

It is very important to keep waters clear and in balance. Organisms, which live in water, such as plankton or coral reefs – are fragile to these changes. Coral reefs filter water as trees filter air on land. Plankton is important in life cycle of sea creatures. And if we destroy them – we will destroy not only some species but also it may cause damage to the fishing industry or any other sea production.[12]

According to statistics:

- Ship exhaust contains harmful air toxics that cause cancer, respiratory illness and premature death.

- Ship air pollution often disproportionately harms low-income for people that live near ports.

- More than one in 10 children has asthma in the world's biggest port cities.[13]

The prevention on pollution of any kind (air, land or water) must be considered as a mandatory rule for shipping industry to avoid terrible results in changes of environment in the nearest future.

There are different options that could be applied for reduction of shipping emissions, including design improvements and upgrades, operational improvements, alternative fuels, and renewable energy technologies.

It is possible to identify potential fuel savings associated with many of these abatement options:

- Potential improvements in the design of ships include optimising the design of the underwater hull and propeller, recovering energy from the propeller and engines and after body flow control systems.

- Operational improvements include strategic operational measures, such as using larger ships or travelling at lower speeds, optimal hull maintenance and the upgrading of propellers and engines, and improved operations on board the ship, i.e. energy management and voyage optimisation.

- The most promising alternative fuels are liquefied natural gas and wind power (e.g. sails), although other sources of energy, such as solar energy and biofuels have some potential to be used on ships.

Implementation barriers to emission reduction measures vary by region and by ship category. The understanding of barriers in OECD countries is better than in non-OECD countries:

- The main implementation barriers in OECD countries include principal/agent problems (ownership-port-customer), lack of information about abatement measures and their exact effects and materiality (i.e. a difficultly in implementing measures that lead to small reductions in emissions and costs).

- In non-OECD countries, fuel subsidies and a certain type of information costs may have a higher impact than in OECD countries.[14]

The rapid growth in shipping is leading to high prices of new build ships, which in turn reinforce the conservatism of shipyards, whose order books are full with around 30% of existing capacity on order at this point in time.[15]

There is a shortage of qualified ship crew personnel, particularly at the officer level, which is important in the context of introducing operational abatement measures and a continuing growth in shipping.

Recent increases in fuel prices will potentially be exacerbated by imminent low sulphur fuel regulations, which have the potential to increase fuel prices further for some operators.

A response to increased fuel prices is to reduce speeds, with consequent reductions in GHG emissions. However, speed reduction does not necessarily happen in response to increased prices; whether an operator can reduce speeds to save costs and reduce emissions depends on the market in which they operate.

Additionally, if ships travel at lower speeds then larger fleets are needed to transport the same amount of goods. However, there is currently little spare capacity in most sectors; this, along with the full order books, means that speed reduction is unlikely to be able to deliver significant reductions in emissions.

Together, these findings underline that, under business-as-usual, the shipping sector is unlikely to achieve the scale of emissions abatement required – even though abatement options exist – without policy intervention.

The shipping sector is a significant source of non-greenhouse gas pollutants, in particular NO_X, SO₂ and particulate matter. These, and other, air pollutants from shipping contribute to a range of negative impacts on human health, including premature mortality, lung cancer and a range of respiratory and cardiovascular problems.

The environmental impacts of these air pollutants are also of concern; these include: the acidification of natural ecosystems and freshwater bodies; the eutrophication of terrestrial and coastal ecosystems; increased corrosion to buildings and materials; deposition of toxic polycyclic organic matter; and visibility impairment and regional haze.

A range of NO_X and SO₂ abatement technologies are currently available which could aid the reduction of these negative impacts. However, there are important trade-off considerations associated with many of these options, as reducing both NO_X and SO₂ can, in some cases, increase CO₂ emissions.

Whilst the use of alternative marine fuels and energy systems could be successful in reducing both air pollutants and GHGs, there are significant financial considerations, and they may require phasing in over time.

However, introducing operational and/or behavioural changes can have a ‘win-win’ effect in terms of pollutant emission reductions in the short term, where these changes result in reductions of CO2 and all other pollutants.

It is possible, using professional judgement, to estimate the CO₂ abatement potential of applying various technological and operational abatement measures to existing and future ships.

Estimates suggest that there is the potential to reduce CO₂ emissions from existing ships by around 10% through operational measures and by retrofitting various technical measures.

Emissions from new state-of-the-art ships could be reduced by up to 30% per vessel compared to emissions of existing ships through design measures.

In the future, a 2022 state-of-the-art ship might emit around a third fewer CO₂ emissions than existing ships, while by 2050 a new ship might be emitting half as much CO₂ as a current ship. If such ships were powered by liquid natural gas (LNG), CO₂ emissions could be reduced by a further 10%, although there are disadvantages of using this fuel on ships.

The potential application of a carbon price for the shipping sector was examined, and this analysis indicated that carbon prices of between €50 and €200 per tonne of CO₂ could lead to significant future reductions in total global emissions from the shipping sector when compared to baseline BAU projections.

By 2050, reductions in CO₂ emissions of between 18% and 33% could be achieved when compared to the baseline business as usual (BAU) projection for the same year. The total abatement performance would be dependent on the level of the carbon price. It should, however, be stressed that even after a 33% reduction against the BAU projection for 2050, total emissions in that year would be more than double today’s levels.

There is also a trend towards larger ships, which might introduce economies of scale, thus reducing the amount of CO₂ emitted per tonne-km.

It was not possible to identify the costs associated with all the potential abatement measures, although an analysis of the cost-effectiveness of a couple of the measures (waste heat reduction and kite sails) suggests that these were cost-effective ways of reducing CO₂ emissions.

The potential earnings from a particular ship can be maximised by operating at the particular optimal speed. Hence, when ships operate at the optimal speed, speed reductions would be economically and environmentally beneficial.

For any ship, the optimal speed to maximise earnings is reduced as fuel prices increase; and vice versa. Similarly, if a carbon price was added to the price of fuel, the optimal speed of operation of a particular ship would decrease.

Speed reductions have the potential to reduce GHG emissions, so if undertaken in response to increasing fuel prices (or the introduction of a carbon price), they would also make economic sense; on the contrary, when fuel prices are declining, it is economically optimal to increase speeds, which leads to increased emissions. ^[16]

---

Дата добавления: 2015-07-20