Más contenido relacionado

Presentaciones para ti(20)

Similar a Envisum first_results_2017(20)


Envisum first_results_2017

  1. Environmental impact of low emission shipping: measurements and modelling strategies Passenger Ship Sustainability Southampton | Nov 14-15, 2017 Sari Repka
  2. Source: Rolls Royce Photo: Anna Reunamo Photo: Jörg Beecken Sulphur Emission Control Area impact categories: The big picture of EnviSum Environmental impacts Benefits of clean nature and biodiversity as valued by citizens and society Costs: potential inefficiency Health impacts Benefits of reduced mortality and illness for citizens and society Costs: potential inefficiency Business impacts: ecological goods Benefits of enhanced commercial ecological resources (e.g. fish, crops, forest) for businesses and society Business impacts: compliance Costs of compliance for the maritime industry, its customers, and society Business impacts: innovation Benefits for cleantech industries and on innovation inducement in cleaner shipping Administrative impacts Costs of administration, including direct and indirect administration costs Macro-economic impacts The macroeconomic perspective: e.g. national competitiveness Lähteenmäki-Uutela A., Repka S., Haukioja, T., Pohjola T. 2017. How to recognize and measure the economic impacts of an environmental regulation: case SECA. Journal of Cleaner 154:553-565.
  3. Air pollution avoided due to SECA (2015) SO2 SO4 SIA PM2.5
  4. Tri-city 2014 NO2 [g/m3] Tri-city 2014 SO2 [g/m3] Tri-city 2014 PM10 [g/m3] Tri-city 2014 PM2.5 [g/m3] Local model calculation results Tri-City pollutant total concentrations
  5. Tri-city 2014 Ships – berthing NO2 [g/m3] Tri-city 2014 Ships – manouevring NO2 [g/m3] Tri-city 2014 Ships – berthing SO2 [g/m3] Tri-city 2014 Ships – manouevring SO2 [g/m3] Local model calculation results Tri-City pollutant concentrations resulted from port operation
  6. • SECA restrictions did not result in a dramatic increase in scrubber installations • Low fuel prices and high investments cost of EGCS on ships has pushed owners to low sulphur fuel oil option • Global SOx emissions reductions in 2020 may contribute to the increased interest and cost-effectiveness of EGCS • Black carbon not decreased with scrubbers • The results of the surveys conducted on ships equipped with EGCS indicate a number of technical aspects requiring modification and improvement Efficiency of scrubbers and particle emissions
  7. Measurements on LNG-powered vessels ongoing • Two LNG carriers with main propulsion: Dual-Fuel Diesel-Electric (DFDE) and Fuel LNG/HFO/MDO have been investigated • Further attempts are made to organize survey on ships propelled with LNG • Difficulty in getting access to additional ships, methane slip detected
  8. Example of ship measurements CO2 SO2_5s, SO2, CH4 NOx
  9. • The sniffer method is fully operational, for fixed sites and airborne measurements • English Channel: 13 % of the ships were doing fuel switching too early starting at 4W when leaving the SECA • Around Denmark and southern Baltic and North sea there is in general good compliance rate, 96 % at great Belt bridge, 94 % from airborne. • Some specific ship owners/lines are often encountered with high emissions (flag less important) • Several ferry lines have been operating with malfunctioning scrubbers. • Some cruiser lines makes long term tests with permission from non SECA flagtest • Enforcement still insufficient Results on compliance with SECA regulation
  10. First empirical Results: Economic Impacts of SECA in BSR • Again: No high SECA impact in BSR due to low bunker prices • Survey revealed highest impact on “innovation” & “branding” • #scrubber installations in BSR stagnating (ca. 85) • Danish participants were 6 times more positive about overall impact of SECA compared to Estonians • Ports feared a negative change of modal split and of cargo flows while the ship- owners were relaxed • Also: No clear direction for future fuel • Eastern BSR-EU countries are more positive towards LNG • BSR ships and ferry lines use LS fuel/MGO, scrubber or LNG • LS fuel/MGO: majority of the ships in BSR • LNG ferries: Tallink Silja and Viking Line • Scrubber: Color Line, Scandlines, Stena • LNG driven ships use parallel MGO for auxiliary engines • Supply of LS fuels is expected to grow but MGO cheaper than ULSFO • BSR is on the forefront of clean shipping campaigns, but • Ports delayed in building infrastructure and offering alternative fuels • NECA regulations in BSR from 2021 • No parallel use of scrubber and Selective Catalytic Reduction SCR • Problem: scrubber residual treatments
  11. Under construction: EnviSuM Investment Calculator Web Application Prototype • Risk management and times series analysis for spread of different fuel types • Portfolio management analysis • Asset allocation management • Creating a dashboard based on available and future possible solutions
  12. FURTHER INFORMATION Project Manager, PhD Sari Repka Project Manager University of Turku, Finland Tel. +358-40-8019206 E-mail: @EnviSuMproject Video: