Meet and network with over 200 attendees representing port authorities, terminal operators and shipping lines. For more information on attending, sponsoring or speaking, contact the events team: visit: greenport.com/congress tel: +44 1329 825 335 email: congress@greenport.com
2025 Goal :
130 million of HAROPA PORT’s investment programme earmarked for energy transition and innovation
The blades and nacelles plant commissioned in 2022 in Le Havre is a demonstration of HAROPA PORT’s leading role in the wind energy sector.
HAROPA PORT, France’s leading port for energy transition is connected to all continents through first-rate international maritime services. It extends along the Seine River axis, from Le Havre to Paris via Rouen, providing an intricate transport and logistics system, and offering a global and end-to-end carbon-free service.
HAROPA PORT generates an annual maritime and fluvial activity of 110 Mt, representing approximately 160,000 jobs
ANDREW WEBSTER Chief Executive Officer, Mercator Media Ltd
Dear Delegate,
On behalf of Mercator Media Ltd and GreenPort Magazine, I would like to welcome you to Le Havre for the 19th GreenPort Congress and the 11th GreenPort Cruise Conference, hosted by HAROPA Port.
HAROPA Port is France’s number 1 logistics hub and stretching from Le Havre to Paris, the port complex possesses a total of over 16,000 hectares of area and 12 million sqm of warehousing space available along the Seine Axis. With connections to every continent, it ranks in the top 20 of the world’s most connected ports, serving an extensive hinterland whose heart is along the Seine Valley and the Paris area, together forming the biggest consumer market in France and the second largest in Europe, with over 25 million consumers.
We are delighted that this years’ programme features so many industry leaders; senior port officials, policy advisors and senior environmental officers speaking from across Europe, as well as representation from leading cruise ports, the European Sea Ports Organisation, the International Association of Ports and Harbors and the EU TEN-T Coordinators. The Congress & Cruise elements of GreenPort continue to be fully integrated this year and participants will benefit from parallel Congress & Cruise streams during day one of the conference. Sustainability is at the heart of the conversation for 2024 with experts covering a variety of topics from Green Corridors and multimodal services development to decarbonisation investments and successful port integration. Participants at will gain a wealth of knowledge from the joint opening session which will discuss building a sustainable future: priorities and challenges for meeting net-zero.
We would like to thank HAROPA Port for hosting this year’s event and organising the Welcome Reception, Conference Dinner and Port Tour, all of which provide delegates with unparalleled networking opportunities and a chance to see some of the projects covered in the programme in action within the port. We would also like to thank NatPower and ABB for sponsoring this year’s event as well as all our supporters and participants for attending. A special thanks to our speakers who make our conferences unique and provide valued content throughout the event. We hope you will find Congress beneficial and please put next year’s dates in your diaries. Our European Conference will be held in October 2025, and the host port will be announced at the conclusion of this year’s conference.
Andrew Webster
CHRISTOPHE BERTHELIN CEO ad interim, HAROPA PORT
Dear delegate,
It is a great pleasure to welcome you on the Seine Axis, in Le Havre, the host town of HAROPA PORT’s headquarter and a great honor for us to welcome the 2024 edition of the GreenPort Cruise & Congress.
Since the 1st of June 2021 the ports of Le Havre, Rouen and Paris merged to create the Major Seine axis River- and Seaport – HAROPA PORT the french leading port and single port authority on the Seine Axis.
Today port means much more than tonnage – the port industry is a strong vector of the energy transition and an accelerator of the ecological transition. HAROPA PORT researches, experiments with and supports the development of ever more environmentally friendly approaches to port operation and development.
Multimodality is central to HAROPA PORT’s missions. Indeed, the development of massified freight transport is the first lever to be used to reduce the negative impacts associated with the logistics chain (pollution, noise, congestion, accidents). The ecological, economic and societal stakes are so high that France’s leading port has set itself ambitious targets for 2025: 20% modal transfer for maritime container transport and 40% for bulk traffic.
Based along the whole length of the Seine, HAROPA PORT also endeavours to protect the local regions in which it is developing: management of natural spaces, conservation of biodiversity and ecological habitat continuity, protection of the human habitat for local residents.
Our ongoing strategic project 2020-2025 is also part of the goal to decarbonise, working alongside various partners – local government and manufacturing industry – to address the challenge set by France’s national low-carbon strategy (SNBC) and the European Green Deal of the European Commission to limit global warming. HAROPA PORT was for example the first French port to develop a plan to reduce carbon emissions in its local areas.
Last but not least, we were very involved in the organisation of the last Olympics in Paris to contribute to something unique in the Olympics history – making the opening ceremony outside a stadium on one of the beautifull river of the world : La Seine. Our teams worked very hard to improve water quality and to be able to ease the energy transition of inland fleet to make this river a Green corridor for goods and passengers.
The Olympic and Paralympic Games has been a fantastic opportunity to promote river transport. The ambition of HAROPA PORT and its partners is to use inland waterways to transport construction materials both upstream and during the event. We signed a collaboration agreement with Paris 2024 with the aim of integrating the entire river ecosystem into the organisation and running of the Games and accelerating the energy transition of the Seine axis. This event was the opportunity to continue the greening of ports and to increase the number of urban river logistics solutions. HAROPA PORT has already electrified its quays and the boat tours companies are continuing to convert their fleets. Beyond the Games, the port is also committed to ensuring that all future river transport projects offer “zero emission” operation.
For HAROPA PORT, the legacy of Paris 2024 will be embodied in the ports of tomorrow: with shared use of the Seine and more virtuous logistics.
We are looking forward to welcoming you to a fruitful congress with productive exchanges amongs port and maritime industry professional an we wish you an enjoyable stay in Le Havre !
Best regards
Christophe Berthelin
2025 Goal :
89 additional electric terminals along the Seine River axis
On top of the 13 already installed, continuing the electrification of marine and river wharfs for cruise ships and freighters.
HAROPA PORT, France’s leading port for energy transition is connected to all continents through first-rate international maritime services. It extends along the Seine River axis, from Le Havre to Paris via Rouen, providing an intricate transport and logistics system, and offering a global and end-to-end carbon-free service.
HAROPA PORT generates an annual maritime and fluvial activity of 110 Mt, representing approximately 160,000 jobs.
Priorities & challenges for meeting net-zero
Hear about the latest developments in the electrification of ports, cruise terminals and equipment
An update on recent projects and developments on creating green corridors
A chance to hear from experts on the latest sustainability investments and the work being done to tackle the environmental, social and economic impacts of cruise operations Session
Are all ports equal? A look at seaports vs. inland enabling practicable implementation options for compliance, cost/risk reduction, environmental protection, and sustainability. Session
An update on the latest projects in cruise infrastructure and development
A look into the adaptations needed to meet decarbonisation goals and address ecological transitions for logistics and supply chains
Session 4.2: Investments
A look into the latest investment initiatives supporting sustainability of ports
Session 5: Exploring the impact of revised TEN-T Guidelines
(EU Regulation 2024/1679, Adopted on June 13, 2024) and EU Funding on the green transition of the maritime sector
Session 6.1: Successful Port Integration for Meeting Net-Zero
Equitable, international collaboration to benefit communities and the environment Session 6.2: Green Fuel
A review of the progress being made to meet the 2050 goals for decarbonisation and current projects in place
Kristiansand, Norway
Rostock, Germany
Bergen, Norway
Southampton, UK
Aarhus, Denmark
Hamburg, Germany
Oslo, Norway
Miami, USA
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Bremerhaven, Germany
Copenhagen, Denmark
Sydney, Australia
…more to come…
CHRIS WOOLDRIDGE
Science Coordinator EcoPorts EcoSLC, and Visiting Research Fellow, Cardiff University, UK
Chris has worked on Research & Development and Training with the port sector since 1982 specializing in the environmental management of port and shipping operations. He contributed to the development of the EcoPorts tools and methodologies, and is active in their implementation internationally supported by the cooperation between ECOSLC (www.ecoslc. eu), the European Sea ports Organization (ESPO, www.espo.be) and the American Association of Port Authorities (www.aapa-ports.org). He acts as Reviewer of the EcoPorts’ Self-Diagnosis Methodology (SDM).
His training qualifications include qualified certification through the Course Developers Workshop under the UN Train-Sea-Coast Programme, and the LRQA Environmental Management Systems Auditor Training Course, Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance training Services, which are certified by the International Register of Certificated Auditors (IRCA).
Chris has delivered training courses on a range of environmental issues throughout Europe and in India, Ivory Coast of Africa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos, Taiwan, Malaysia and Colombia. He was Director of Studies, Marine Geography in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, UK until 2011.
Secretary General of the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) since 1/08/2013. Before taking up this function, Isabelle has been working as Director of the European Federation of Inland Ports (EFIP) and Senior Advisor of ESPO for four years.
She studied Law (University of Namur and KULeuven) and European Law (UCL Louvain). Before joining EFIP, she worked in EU Public Affairs for almost 20 years. After a short period at the European Commission (DG Agriculture), she worked in an EU Public Affairs consultancy. In 1994 she started working in the European Parliament, as a political assistant and between 1999 and 2009 she was the political assistant of Dirk Sterckx, where she was mainly active in transport and port-related fields. She is co-author of the handbook “Zo Werkt Europa” (1st edition 2007, 2nd edition 2010, 3rd edition 2015).
ANTONIS MICHAIL Technical Director IAPH & WPSP, IAPH
Dr Antonis Michail is an engineer in background with specialisation on the environmental management of ports and freight transport systems at Master and PhD level, and with more than 15 years of professional experience in these fields. Since February 2018, Antonis joined the World Ports Sustainability Program (WPSP) of the International Association of Ports and Harbours (IAPH) as the person responsible for the technical developments and projects under the umbrella of the program. Before that, Antonis was holding the position of Senior Policy Advisor on sustainability and safety matters at the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) from 2009 to 2017. Since back in 2003, Antonis was involved in the EcoPorts network of ports from various posts, including managing projects and coordinating the network’s activities and development until 2017.
LAMIA KERDJOUDJ Secretary General, FEPORT
Lamia KERDJOUDJ-BELKAID is the Secretary General of FEPORT, the Federation of European Private Port Companies and Terminals since March 2014.
She has a professional experience of more than 20 years during which she held different positions within the maritime and logistics sector.
Among others, she has been for more than seven year the Public Affairs manager of the French Shipowners’ Organization and had the opportunity to work on the three ERIKA Packages as well as on Port packages 1 and 2. Between 2009 and 2012, she has also been appointed as a senior expert and advisor in the framework of several European projects financed by different General Directorates of the European Commission.
Besides her professional experience acquired within trade associations and thanks to her interactions with EU institutions, Lamia KERDJOUDJ-BELKAID has worked for more than ten (10) years for private companies and corporations (among others Capmarine, Budd SA, CATRAM, EGIS) and has been in charge of consulting and business development assignments. In 2009, she has created her own company, a consultancy specialized in strategy and international development.
Lamia KERDJOUDJ-BELKAID holds different Master Degrees in shipping, transport and logistics, British Literature and Applied Psychology. In 2008, she obtained an Executive MBA from ESSEC and Mannheim Business Schools.
CEDRIC VIRCIGLIO
Strategic Planning Director, HAROPA Port
Graduate in Contemporary History (University of Strasbourg) and in Politics and Public Affairs in Europe (Sciences Po Strasbourg). He is a specialist in European issues, particularly in the fields of transport, research & innovation and cohesion policy.
Cédric Virciglio started his professional career as Europe Project Manager at the Fondation Entente Franco Allemande. He was also ERDF Project Manager in charge of transport infrastructure at the Champagne-Ardenne Regional Equipment Directorate and Director of the Alsace Europe Office - the Representation to the European Union in Brussels of Alsatian local authorities and consular bodies until June 2017.
In January 2017 he was also appointed prefigurator of the future “Grand Est Europe Office”. At the same time, he is involved in many training courses related to European affairs (Science Po Lille, University of Strasbourg, ENA, University of Lorraine…) and is an expert evaluator for the High Council for the Evaluation of Research and Higher Education (HCERES).
In July 2017, he was recruited by GIE HAROPA - the alliance of the ports of Le Havre, Rouen and Paris as Head of European and International Affairs. He was in charge of defining, steering, implementing the European and international strategy for HAROPA and developing the alliance’s visibility and influence at the European and international level. He is also the Chairman of the Intermodal, Logistics & Industry Committee (ILICO) of the European Sea Port Organisation (ESPO) since July 2019.
Since 1st of June 2021 and the creation of the Seine Axis major River and Sea port - HAROPA PORT, born with the merger of the ports of Le Havre, Rouen and Paris, Cédric Virciglio hold the position of Strategic Planning Director. A department that includes equity investment, strategy, European affairs, international development, consulting and training.
NICOLETTE VAN DER JAGT Director General, CLECAT
Nicolette van der Jagt is the Director-General of CLECAT, the European organization of Logistics Service Providers and Freight Forwarders, since 2012. CLECAT is a Brussels based association with a collective membership of more than 19.000 companies in freight forwarding, logistics and customs services through its 24 national associations. Previously, Nicolette was for 10 years Secretary General of the Brussels based European Shippers’ Council representing the national and international freight interest of industry - national shippers’ councils from around Europe. Through this experience she has extensive knowledge of freight transport in all modes in transport. Nicolette holds degrees in international relations and European studies from the Universities of Utrecht (NL) and Strasbourg (FR).
The key to driving efficiency and growth at your port? It all starts with improving your sustainability. Get expert advice wherever you are on your journey.
n Experts in maritime operations and Green Ports consultancy
n Global experience backed by local knowledge
n Ongoing decarbonisation support and Net Zero guidance
How green is your port?
Take our Green Ports Maturity Scan to see how your port performs today – and what areas to focus on tomorrow.
Continue the conversation at GreenPort Congress and Cruise 2024
We’ll be in Le Havre, France from 23 to 25 October and ready to discuss your port’s sustainability needs at our stand. Are you curious about ways to decarbonize your port operations or want to learn more about green shipping corridors? Join our two congress presentations. See you there!
Hear about the latest developments in the electrification of ports, cruise terminals and equipment.
DR. MARK VAN DER VEEN
Director of the Graduate School of Business, University of Amsterdam
Dr. Mark van der Veen is director of the Graduate School of Business at University of Amsterdam, responsible for the MSc programmes in Business Administration, Finance, Accountancy & Control and Entrepreneurship. His focus in teaching and research has always been on the interaction between business and sustainability. For his PhD research at Erasmus University Rotterdam, he studied the organization and success of green product development projects. Mark was involved in several national and international studies on port environmental management, including ECOPORTS in Europe, and auditing and training projects with seaports in Vietnam and Cambodia. His special interest is in the strategic, economic and organizational aspects of port environmental management.
Onshore Power Supply Expert, HAROPA Port
Hervé GERAUD was in charge of the Port of Le Havre’s electricity division from 2008 to 2019. During this period, he and his teams oversaw maintenance and new works on the port’s high and low voltage electrical distribution equipment. In this context, he identified the economic and environmental challenges associated with the development of the shore connection for ships berthed at HAROPA PORT.
Hervé GERAUD has been appointed Project Manager for Onshore Power Supply (OPS) in 2019. His responsibilities cover all issues related to the development of OPS, including technical, economic and organisational aspects, as well as communication with the port stakeholders concerned
Current tasks and responsibilities:
• Follow-up of the works to implement the shore connection for the Le Havre cruise terminal,
• Studies for the implementation of the shore connection for the “Port 2000” and “Terminaux Nord” container terminals,
• Studies for the implementation of the quay connection for the Le Havre ferry terminal,
• Project manager for the construction of the new centralised control building for the François 1er lock,
• Energy Sobriety Contact for the Le Havre Territorial Division.
ROLAND TEIXEIRA President, EOPSA
Roland Teixeira is President of the European Onshore Power Supply Association (EOPSA), Europe’s premier association regrouping OPS’ top port electrification experts.
As a former GE executive, Roland oversaw installation of OPS for inland shipping in Rotterdam back in 2008. This was a successful partnership between GE, Eneco, Stedin and Port of Rotterdam.
Alongside EOPSA, Roland is spearheading, in partnership with H2air, a multi-MW smart grid decarbonisation program in the Port of Cherbourg together with key offshore wind players and chairs WFO’s subcommittee on Environment, Cohabitation and Biodiversity.
PETER CASTBERG KNUDSEN CCO and Partner, Powercon
Peter Castberg Knudsen is a partner in PowerCon, one of the leading suppliers of shore power systems.
Peter is an experienced Shore Power specialist with 10 years of experience in managing and delivering Shore Power projects across Europe and the US. His expertise spans engineering, project management, and sales, giving him a comprehensive understanding of the technical and commercial aspects of shore power solutions. Throughout his career, Peter has successfully overseen the implementation of more than 40 shore power systems, helping ports and maritime industries reduce emissions and transition to more sustainable energy sources. His passion for innovation and sustainability drives his commitment to delivering high-impact, energy-efficient solutions tailored to the evolving needs of the industry.
Cologne, Germany
Mr. Martin Tiling is a distinguished professional currently serving as the Head of for the Shore Power Business Unit at igus GmbH. He holds a university degree in Business Administration, which has equipped him with the necessary skills and knowledge to excel in his role. He is a member of IEC 80005-1 working group which focuses on creating international standards for shore power systems. At igus GmbH, Mr. Tiling is responsible for overseeing the Shore Power Business Unit, which focuses on providing customized cable management and connection systems. These systems are designed to reduce air pollution, noise, and vibration, aligning with increasing environmental awareness and stricter regulations. Under Mr. Tiling’s leadership, the Shore Power Business Unit at igus GmbH is making significant strides in promoting cost effective and environmentally friendly technologies in ports around the world.
Best practices from the Port of Hamburg becoming Europe’s shore power pioneer
Table of Content:
1. The European pioneer in shore-side power supply
2. The legal framework
3. The Connection Dilemma
4. The Technology – iMSPO
5. The Engineering Process
6. The Future – Go Zero
1) The European pioneer in shore-side power supply
The Port of Hamburg is a European pioneer in shore power supply. After several years of successfully supplying cruise ships in the Port of Hamburg with shore power, the technology is now also being used for cargo ships. This makes the Port of Hamburg the first port in Europe to offer shore power for both container and cruise ships. Recently, the “Vasco de Gama” (IMO 9706889) of the CMA CGM Group, the global player for sea, land, air, and logistics solutions, became the first container ship to be regularly supplied with shore power at Container Terminal Hamburg (CTH). The technology that is used to make the physical connection between the vessel and the shoreside power distribution network was developed and successfully deployed by igus. These innovations provide CTH with the flexibility to provide 7.5MVA of clean power from the grid to any other vessel that may berth at this terminal today or in the future. Specifically, the igus Mobile Shore Power Outlets or iMPSOs that have been deployed along each of the terminal’s three mega-ship berths have allowed the port to take a major leap forward in achieving its emissions reduction goals.
The emission reduction challenges that the Port of Hamburg is facing are common in the fight to reduce global emissions created by maritime activities. New regulations and internal company directives aimed at reducing GHG emissions and pollutants within the ports are driving the consideration and planning of shore power installations all over the world. This is the result of ocean-going vessels or OGVs being identified as one of the largest emitters of GHG and pollutants as they burn fuel to run their generators to provide electricity while they stand idle at berth.
This new need for shore power solutions creates the need for an experienced, global partner who can provide solutions that can adapt to many different individual site-specific conditions. These solutions should always comply with the international standards that are in place to guide the design process, ensuring safety, proper operation, and compatibility between systems that are installed around the world. This standardization allows first adopters like the Port of Hamburg to make confident investments in leading emissions reduction shore power technology such as the igus Mobile Shore Power Outlet.
Figure 2: Shore power solution by igus has been recently installed at the Port of Hamburg (Source: Port of Hamburg)
Consequently, many ports have set clear goals regarding shore power supply at their ports. One example: Five major Western European ports - Hamburg, Bremerhaven, Rotterdam, Antwerp, and Le Havre - have jointly agreed to supply container ships of a size of 140,000 TEU with shore power by 2028 at the latest.
The immediate goal of implementing shore power is the reduction of GHG emissions and pollutants coming from the vessels, with the long-term goal of having the electricity supplied to the vessels coming from green, renewable energy sources such as solar and wind farms.
The Paris climate protection agreement in 2016 set new goals and requirements for the maritime industry, leading the sector to take greater responsibility for its impact on the environment, climate change, and health. This promoted investments in new technologies such as cleanerburning fuels and alternative propulsion systems using wind or electricity. Local regulations are also driving the adoption of clean technologies like shore power in ports: California was the first US state to mandate shore power technology in ports in 2007. The California Air Resources Board issued regulations requiring certain types of vessels to use emission reduction systems, which were expanded in 2010. In 2018, the IMO issued guidelines encouraging the use of shore power. In 2022, the US Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, providing funding and incentives for the implementation of shore power systems. In China, pilot programs for shore power were launched in ports like Shanghai and Qingdao in 2015, followed by guidelines from the Ministry of Transport to promote shore power infrastructure. The 2020 Five-Year Plan included shore power projects as part of environmental and emission reduction efforts. Stricter regulations have since promoted the use of shore power. The EU plans to ban greenhouse gas emissions from ships at berth by 2030, with some ports implementing this as early as 2025.
When planning a shore power installation, every port and terminal presents its own set of unique challenges. Different tidal ranges, quay designs, and equipment arrangements create the need for flexible solutions that can adapt to the needs required to service different vessel sizes and berthing arrangements. In the case of shore power enabled cargo ships, a cable reel onboard deploys two cables with special connectors down to the quay to be plugged into an outlet. This seemingly simple process that was originally conceived to service a few ships with a common connection point is no longer so simple. Changing vessels, increases in shore power enabled vessels and the need to connect 100% of these vessels have all played a part in making it next to impossible to design a working solution using the fixed outlet methodology and maintaining compliance with the IEC 80005-1 international standards.
A new solution was needed, so an analysis of the existing equipment and connection procedures was performed to identify the specific challenges associated with existing installations. This analysis yielded 3 common factors across fixed outlet type installations that prevented the desired performance level.
1. The variance in locations where the onboard cable management system is located,
2. Cable deployment length limitations and
3. Berthing arrangement needs for both single and multi-ship configurations to maximize loading productivity.
The shore power outlet locations on the quay need to align with the position from which the cables are deployed from the vessel. Many factors can influence where this cable drop position is located on the vessel. Both the size of the vessel and the location of the bridge can influence this drop point position as some vessels use an AMP container located somewhere between the bridge and stern while some vessels have cable reels located at the bridge. With many different vessels currently calling on a terminal and the possibility of different vessels calling in the future it can create an impossible number of needed outlet locations to plan. When these factors are added to the possibility of both port and starboard berthing, the number of needed shoreside outlet locations increases again. The choice between starboard and port berthing often depends on various factors such as the port’s layout, prevailing winds, and the vessel’s design.
4: The challenge of the huge variance of vessel shore power locations
The relative vertical motion of the vessel to the quay due to tidal range coupled with variance in freeboard due to loading in extreme cases can create a range of motion over 18m/60ft. The need to accommodate this motion can have a significant impact on the cable remaining to make connections from the right or left of the fixed outlet. In the case of the AMP container systems, the length of the cable is determined by the diameter of the cable reel which must fit inside a standard container. It is written in the standard that only 10m/33ft of extra cable must be supplied making the maximum range of a cable deployment +/-10m/33ft or 20m/66ft. With two cables weighing approximately 10kg/m (6.7lbs/ft) this would mean handling 200kg (440lbs) of cable to make a connection at full deployment.
Large efforts are being made to maximize vessel density on long quays by accommodating various vessel Lengths Overall (LOA’s), thereby optimizing the use of available space.
The berthing alignment to a specific meter/foot marker is crucial for achieving an optimized container loading flow. This along with the planning efforts to maximize vessel density on long quays by accommodating multiple combinations of vessel lengths challenging the classic 1:1 berth-to-vessel layout creates even more possibilities for connection points.
In summary, even with extensive planning, all of these factors make selecting locations to install a fixed shore power outlet that will allow all vessels to connect challenging. If the goal is to choose a fixed shore power outlet location that will also provide 100% future-proof connection flexibility it is next to impossible.
Therefore, ports like the Port of Hamburg have chosen the igus Mobile Shore Power Outlet to solve the challenges associated with the connection dilemma. The iMSPO self-propelled system can deliver a shoreside socket outlet connection point for the ship’s cables wherever it is needed along the berth up to a distance of 400m and more. With the mobile sockets moved to a position directly below the cable drop point, the ship cables can easily be connected. The Shore Power Solutions portfolio from igus offers multiple configurations to best fit the individual situation for the customer. The preferred mounting location for the iMPSO system is on the quay face above the fendering system. If there is not enough room to mount the system in this location as was the case with the iMSPO systems for CTH, there are other options that include mounting the system on support columns or directly to the deck of the quay. In greenfield projects, there is also an option to install the system in a trench in a configuration where the socket trolley operates on top of the trench while the cables are protected inside. Many combinations and configurations are possible to fit different site conditions around the world.
In addition to the standard iMPSO there are other possible mobile shore power outlet variations like the igus Shore Power e-chain Reel. This is a special solution that was developed for a case where there was not enough space for an iMPSO system in any configuration and there was no possibility of digging into the quay to install fixed outlets. In this case, a special ground rover energy chain was developed to roll on the quay deck and supply a mobile socket box mounted onto an AGV that could operate on a narrow path of less than 1m/3.28ft in between the crane and bollards providing a continuous connection range of 125m/375ft.
igus roll e-chains systems with special continuous flex cables enable the iMSPO to cover long distances easily handling the required heavy cable fill weights while minimizing wear providing a planned service life of over 20 years. The iMSPO system is simple to operate and maintain with all functions of the system controlled by a single control unit. It is designed to comply with all IEC 80005-1, Annex D - 6.6kV, 7.5MVA standards and satisfies the EU Machinery Directive of 2006/42/EC. For durability in the maritime environment, it features the same corrosion protection system used in the offshore industry as well as IP67 ratings for all electrical components.
There are many advantages to deploying an iMPSO system on a terminal. When considering the investment in a shore power system, the iMPSO is a one-time investment that provides 100% connection capability for all vessels and ensures that zeroemission goals can be reached not only today but also in the future without the need for adaptations or additions. From an operational perspective, dead zones no longer exist giving the operations team freedom from having to align the vessel to the shore power connection instead of compromising the exact optimal container flow berthing position. Installing an iMSPO provides operators with a repeatable and predictable connection procedure that is simple to perform for every vessel. This means faster connections and disconnections as performing a connection with an iMPSO takes less than 15 minutes to complete and never requires more than 2 people. The ability to exactly position the sockets eliminates any excess cable handling creating a safer and more ergonomic system for the workers to use. Workers no longer have to carry the heavy ship cables and leave them lying on the deck which prevents injuries, eliminates trip hazards, and removes the potential for the medium voltage cables to be damaged while exposed without protection.
Ensuring the safety of medium voltage equipment is paramount so the design of the iMSPO follows all requirements of the IEC 800051 standards and the EU Machinery Directive. Critical components have been type-tested per the standard and the test results are available for customers to review. To ensure the safety and functionality of our products, we have a 4,000m. test laboratory at igus in Cologne. Around a third of our test laboratory is located outdoors. This allows us to test our shore power energy chain systems for their suitability in wind and weather under real conditions – both on long travels and vertically on test towers. Clear signalling for operational feedback and shore power supply status has been included in the design to enhance the safety and usability of the product.
Maintenance planning with an iMSPO system is much easier with less equipment to maintain as there are fewer shore power outlets, less backend equipment, and a smaller, simpler overall electrical system to test. The iMPSO system is built to be easily maintained with readily available parts, minimal parts marked for wear, and a planned service life of 20 years with regular inspections and maintenance. As an operator at the port, this means igus will support you with a full-service program making the iMPSO system 100% hands-off regarding maintenance and service.
All of these benefits add up to significant cost savings when considering the TCO of a shore power system. Additional savings can be realized from the elimination of the extensive construction and expensive berth outage time that it takes to dig the holes in the reinforced concrete required to install shore power vaults in the ground. This type of construction is not needed with an iMSPO installation. Also, because of the electrical layout of the iMPSO, less cabling is needed to reach multiple pits and the switchgear associated with these pits can be eliminated yielding a smaller footprint needed for the electrical distribution house.
Every shore power project begins with a study and exchange of information to develop a clear understanding of the site conditions and needs of the project. Even though the iMPSO is a component within the greater system needed to realize a working shore power solution, we understand the entire project scope and can provide guidance and partners to cover every aspect of the project. This includes designs for greenfield terminals, designs for brownfield terminals without existing infrastructure, and cost-effective designs to revitalize existing fixed installations that are out of service because they no longer provide the capability that is needed.
A project can get started with a simple review of the quay layout and definition of the desired results regarding connection flexibility. iMSPO systems can be deployed in many configurations and there are many solutions for adjusting and augmentations to the fendering system to create the space needed for an iMSPO. These recommendations will be made when we review the quay layout and can be included in a budget cost.
Figure 10: The demand of reliable shore power supply will grow more and more.
Ports striving to reach their “Zero-Emission” goals need innovative solutions to enable smart investments in technologies that provide critical benchmark results like 100% capability and future-proof flexibility. In the case of shore power, the question is no longer if we can plug in, but now how fast and safely can we plug in with the expectation of 100% connection of all vessels? Shore Power connection systems should seamlessly integrate into the workflow as smoothly as a standard mooring operation. At igus, we do not want you to have to focus on the shore power equipment and connection procedure. We want to give you technology that makes it easy to focus on your core business – moving containers.
ABB Shore power solutions are effective in avoiding local emissions in terminals during port calls, where ships can connect to the local grid ABB’s shore connection technology onboard ships as well as onshore ports and terminals have the strictest regulatory compliance. ABB’s technology is available for different types of vessels and ports. abb/marine
ABB is taking part in GreenPort event, October 23-25th, in Le Havre, come and meet us!
An update on recent projects and developments on creating green corridors.
DR. MARK VAN DER VEEN
Director of the Graduate School of Business, University of Amsterdam
Dr. Mark van der Veen is director of the Graduate School of Business at University of Amsterdam, responsible for the MSc programmes in Business Administration, Finance, Accountancy & Control and Entrepreneurship. His focus in teaching and research has always been on the interaction between business and sustainability. For his PhD research at Erasmus University Rotterdam, he studied the organization and success of green product development projects. Mark was involved in several national and international studies on port environmental management, including ECOPORTS in Europe, and auditing and training projects with seaports in Vietnam and Cambodia. His special interest is in the strategic, economic and organizational aspects of port environmental management.
MEGAN TURNER
Environment and Sustainability Manager, Port of Dover
Megan Turner (BScHons) is the Environment and Sustainability Manager at the Port of Dover. She has worked at the port for 3.5 years and has been responsible for calculating the ports carbon footprint and producing SECR (Streamlined Energy and Carbon Reporting) reports during this time. She has also been involved in a range of energy projects; she was instrumental in delivering Dover’s first PAQS (Ports Air Quality Strategy), producing an ESOS report (Energy Saving Opportunity Scheme) and collaborating with project partners to deliver the Dover Clean Ferry Power Project (Clean Maritime Bid funded project). Alongside this she has experience in, ISO 14001 implementation, environmental compliance and regulation, waste management and a wide range of biodiversity monitoring.
The Port of Dover (PoD) handles £144 billion trade and 33% of all UK trade with the EU. With 120 daily ferry movements, it is capable of clearing 110 miles of freight traffic per day, making it a vital part of the EU-UK trade route. It is also home to an award-winning cruise terminal, cargo terminal and marinas. In 2022 the Port released its sustainability policy, which includes its ambitious net zero targets;
• Net zero for scope 1 and 2 by 2025
• Net zero for scope 1,2 and defined scope 3 by 2030
• Longer term ambition to be a high-volume green corridor from 2030 onwards.
As a result of this long-term ambition, in 2023 the Port of Dover, and its consortium partners, conducted a Green Corridor at Short Straits (GCSS) feasibility study as part of the UK’s CMDC (Clean Maritime Demonstration Competition) funding. The GCSS consortium aimed to: (i) identify and analyse the full value chain, including all stakeholders (ii) Identify viable energy pathway options, including synthetic fuels, ammonia, hydrogen (combustion and fuel cell), LNG and electrification for marine and landside port and customer vessels/vehicles, (iii) Identify relevant regulation and policy, (iv) produce a GC business case and, (v) produce a GC delivery plan. Each identified energy pathway entailed a careful analysis of associated potential wellto-wake/wheel emissions and any likely economic and operational impact on the delivery of this Short Strait.
The Port of Dover is closing the gap every day between the UK and the world by connecting trade, travel, visitors and communities locally-globally, collaborating with local and international partners to create a more seamless, sustainable and tech-enabled port.
The Port of Dover background
The Port of Dover is closing the gap every day between the UK and the world by connecting trade, travel, visitors and communities locally -globally, collaborating with local and international partners to create a more seamless, sustainable and tech -enabled port.
As the UK’s busiest international ferry port and a vital gateway for the movement of people and trade, Dover handles £144 billion of trade per year, 33% of UK trade in goods with the EU and welcomes over 11 million passengers.
As the UK’s busiest international ferry port and a vital gateway for the movement of people and trade, Dover handles £144 billion of trade per year, 33% of UK trade in goods with the EU and welcomes over 11 million passengers.
Dover is also an award-winning cruise port, delivering world class travel and visitor experiences to the most prestigious cruise lines. With a growing and diversifying cargo business operating from state-of-the-art facilities, a brand-new marina which is a major feature of the exciting waterfront development, and opportunities for further expansion in the future, Dover’s proud history dating back 400 years has a new modern twist.
Dover is also an award -winning cruise port, delivering world class travel and visitor experiences to the most prestigious cruise lines. With a growing and diversifying cargo business operating from state -of-the-art facilities, a brand -new marina which is a major feature of the exciting waterfront development, and opportunities for further expansion in the future, Dover’s proud history dating back 400 years has a new modern twist.
In March 2022 the Port released it’s sustainability policy with ambitious targets to reduce it’s carbon footprint as well as releasing seven continuous improvement targets (figure 1).
In March 2022 the Port released it’s sustainability policy with ambitious targets to reduce it’s carbon footprint as well as releasing seven continuous improvement targets (figure 1)
GCSS Feasibility
GCSS Feasibility study
This feasibility study was an 8 month project (Jan -Aug 2023) and the project partners were:
• Port of Dover – project lead
• JG Maritime
• Warwick Manufacturing Group (WMG) - University of Warwick
• Ikigai Capital
This feasibility study was an 8 month project (Jan-Aug 2023) and the project partners were:
• DFDS
• JG Maritime
• University of Kent
• Port of Dover – project lead
• Irish Ferries
• Schneider Electric
• Warwick Manufacturing
• SSE
• ABB
• Ikigai Capital Group (WMG) - University of Warwick
• University of Kent
• DFDS
• Irish Ferries
• Schneider Electric
The project covered 5 Work packages:
• ABB
• WP1: Full value chain identification and analysis
• SSE
• WP2: Identification of viable energy pathway options
• WP3: Identification of regulations and policy
• WP4: Green corridor business case
• WP5: Green corridor delivery plan
The project covered 5 Work packages:
• WP1: Full value chain identification and analysis
• WP2: Identification of viable energy pathway options
• WP3: Identification of regulations and policy
• WP4: Green corridor business case
• WP5: Green corridor delivery plan
WP1: Full value chain identification and analysis
The following steps were carried out to inform what the priority of the Port should be, and what needs to be delivered at Dover:
• Defining the boundary and scope of the Green Corridor (both marine and land side)
• Identification of the key stakeholder groups within the Green Corridor
• Engagement with 20+ organisations to understand, for each stakeholder group:
- Overall decarbonisation strategy
- Interaction with Port of Dover
- Zero emission/low carbon vehicle or vessel adoption plans and progress
• Identification of supply-side decarbonisation interventions, and prioritisation based on:
- Share of overall corridor carbon emissions
- Port of Dover influence over decarbonisation solution
- Likely third-party investment requirements
• Other ancillary work carried out as part of value chain analysis to stress test supply-side decarbonisation options:
- Consideration of timelines and costs for electrical network upgrades for a potential phased approach to meet end user electrification requirements.
- Engagement with local authorities on potential feedstock availability for a smallscale, low carbon energy from waste (‘EfW’) solution.
- Engagement with renewable energy developers to test options for private wire supply of power from renewable sources (e.g., solar PV).
- Desktop analysis on volumes and timelines for production and distribution of alternative marine fuels (i.e., hydrogen, methanol, and ammonia).
Based on engagement with various companies and industry representatives from the stakeholder groups, the priority supply-side decarbonisation interventions/projects that need to be delivered over the next 5-10 years have been summarised below:
Rationale: Ferry operators (DFDS, P&O, Irish Ferries) have expressed a preference for battery electric or hybrid solutions, subject to price and charging infrastructure availability on both sides of the channel.
Port of Dover interaction: Full electrification of the ferries (i.e., for propulsion across channel), based on current available technology, would require charging infrastructure on both sides of the channel to provide sufficient power for crossings.
Rationale: Cruise and cargo operators have expressed strong interest in the availability of shore power to turn off engines whilst at berth. It is anticipated that they will only require shore power for their ‘hotel loads’ as they are likely to transition to alternative fuels (methanol, hydrogen, ammonia) for propulsion, which would be supplied at other Port locations where they currently refuel.
Port of Dover interaction: Shore power for cruise and cargo vessel ‘hotel loads’ requires charging infrastructure at the Port of Dover, specifically at the Western Docks, where the cruise and cargo terminals are located.
3. Sustainable multi-fuel infrastructure as standalone stations and EV charging collocated with truck stops/Heavy Goods Vehicles (‘HGVs’) services or motorway service stations.
Rationale: Vehicle operators have expressed likely refueling/recharging requirements on A-roads leading up to London (A2/A20) as they transition to zero emission/low carbon options. This is because, based on current technology, the range/autonomy of hydrogen fuel cell or battery electric vehicles (‘BEV’) is far lower compared to their fossil counterparts meaning European hauliers would have to refuel/charge on the UK-side. Furthermore, for EV charging infrastructure this is likely to be collocated with existing truck stops/HGV service/motorway service stations where vehicles have significant dwell times and hence can charge during idle periods. Other fuels in contrast, such as biomethane (bio-CNG, bio-LNG) or hydrogen could be supplied on a standalone basis, as they have shorter refueling times.
Port of Dover interaction: Refueling/EV charging infrastructure for passing traffic (trucks, coaches, passenger vehicles) is unlikely to be developed at the Dover Port given the severe space constraints and land available for such developments within the Port boundary. Hence, this infrastructure is likely to be developed and delivered by third parties along the road network in Kent leading to the Port terminals.
In scope of the fuel pathway study are the emissions associated with PoD operations, both water and landside, as well as ferry emissions. Included in the PoD land-side operations are forklifts, cranes, plant and machinery, as well as a fleet of cars and vans. The water-side vessels include tugs, a dredger, 2 pilot vessels and a survey vessel.
DFDS, P&O and Irish Ferries operate the Dover-Calais/Dunkirk ferry crossings. DFDS operate six ferries, P&O operate three ferries of which two are hybrid, and Irish Ferries operate three.
Table 1 presents PoD landside vehicles and current fuels used. As part of efforts to reduce emissions at point of use and improve local air quality, PoD transitioned most of the water and land-side operations to HVO in late 2022. HVO is incompatible with LPG powertrains.
Table 1. Current fuels used by PoD
WP2: Identification of viable energy pathway options
Green Corridors
In scope of the fuel pathway study are the emissions associated with PoD operations, both water and landside, as well as ferry emissions. Included in the PoD land -side operations are forklifts, cranes, plant and machinery, as well as a fleet of cars and va ns. The water-side vessels include tugs, a dredger, 2 pilot vessels and a survey vessel.
DFDS, P&O and Irish Ferries operate the Dover -Calais/Dunkirk ferry crossings. DFDS operate six ferries, P&O operate three ferries of which two are hybrid, and Irish Ferries operate three.
2023
The graphs and table below show the forecasted emissions for PoD vessels, plant and machinery and the average ferry across a range of alternative fuels: 2022
Table 1 presents PoD landside vehicles and current fuels used. As part of efforts to reduce emissions at point of use and improve local air quality, PoD transitioned most of the water and landside operations to HVO in late 2022. HVO is incompatible with LPG power trains.
PoD vessels (2 Tugs, 2 Pilot vessels, a Dredger and a work boat) MGO HVO
Ferries
Table 1. Current fuels used by PoD 2022 2023
Forklifts
MGO + ULSFO MGO + 2 hybrid ULSFO/ electric
LPG LPG
PoD vessels (2 Tugs, 2 Pilot vessels, a Dredger and a work boat) MGO HVO
Cranes
Ferries
Gas Oil HVO
MGO + ULSFO MGO + 2 hybrid ULSFO/ electric
Forklifts LPG LPG
Plant and Machinery
Cranes
Cars and Vans
Plant and Machinery
Cars and Vans
Gas Oil HVO
Gas Oil HVO
Petrol/Diesel Petrol/HVO
Gas Oil HVO
Petrol/Diesel Petrol/HVO
The graphs and table below show the forecasted emissions for PoD vessels , plant and machinery and the average ferry across a range of alternative fuels:
Figure 3. Average ferry forecast emissions per day
Table 2. Percentage decrease in emissions (scope 1,2 and 3) for viable fuels
Figure 3. Average ferry forecast emissions per day
Table 2. Percentage decrease in emissions (scope 1,2 and 3) for viable fuels
Table 2. Percentage decrease in emissions (scope 1,2 and 3) for viable fuels
As the preference for the ferry operators was understood to be electric, four supply and demand scenarios were developed by the consortium. A high-level summary of these is provided in Table 3 below and the data behind these scenarios was analysed in detail with full predicted duty cycles produced for each.
As the preference for the ferry operators was understood to be electric , four supply and demand scenarios were developed by the consortium. A high -level summary of these is provided in Table 3
Table 3. Supply and Demand scenarios
Grid import Existing 11kV, 4.2MVA New 33kV, 20MVA New 33kV, 50MVA New 132kV, 80MVA
Ferries in operation 2 Hybrid 4 Hybrid 5 Hybrid + 5 Electric 12 Electric
Peak demand
Mean demand
5.09MW (inc. port base load) 27MW 112MW 162MW
2.57MW (inc. port base load) 7MW 31MW 60MW
It was key that any future design incorporated the existing networks where possible. Upgrades to these networks were identified, to allow for future growth and resilience. The port has 3 existing HV networks. Two in the Western Docks and one in the Eastern docks. However, there are no cross feeds, so each network is solely dependent on its own grid supply. Any new supply required for scenario 2, 3 & 4 would be used to supply the existing networks with a secondary supply.
It was key that any future design incorporated the existing networks where possible. Upgrades to these networks were identified, to allow for future growth and resilience. The port has 3 existing HV networks. Two in the Western Docks and one in the Eastern docks. However, there are no cross feeds, so each network is solely dependent on its own grid supply. Any new supply required for scenario 2, 3 & 4 would be used to supply the existing networks with a secondary supply.
WP3: Identification of regulation and policy
WP3: Identification of regulation and policy
A key deliverable and output from this regulatory and policy work activity was to outline the required, currently missing regulatory initiatives, fit -for-purpose policy measures, financial incentives, and safety regulations. This was achieved by collating all the work done within the regulatory and industry stakeholders’ workshops and mapping the various regulatory and policy initiatives, measures, incentives, and safety regulations into an enhanced version of the Green Corridors Policy Framework matrix from the Next Wave Report:
A key deliverable and output from this regulatory and policy work activity was to outline the required, currently missing regulatory initiatives, fit-for-purpose policy measures, financial incentives, and safety regulations. This was achieved by collating all the work done within the regulatory and industry stakeholders’ workshops and mapping the various regulatory and policy initiatives, measures, incentives, and safety regulations into an enhanced version of the Green Corridors Policy Framework matrix from the Next Wave Report:
5. Identification of missing policy measures
policy measures
Figure 7. Identification of missing safety regulations
WP4 focused on identifying the optimal configuration of options across the corridor and value chain, while minimising overall costs and emissions. The approach required an understanding of the networkwide challenge and the identification of an inclusive and representative conceptual model, and hence an estimation into the annual additional costs of delivering the corridor, as well as the direct and indirect environmental impacts.
All optimisation models that were developed to address the required estimations, as well as the methodology and approach were fully integrated into a bespoke interactive multi-stakeholder decision support application (backed by over 4,000 lines of programming codes) to allow the stakeholders to freely see the impact of various decisions on costs, emissions and ultimately the delivery of the Green Corridor.
As the key deliverable from this work package led by the University of Kent, all aspects of the business plan analysis have been embedded within the developed innovative decision support application with 5 main modules and 7 submodules These modules allowed stakeholders to change and update all assumptions within the app lication such as grid capacity, electricity cost, carbon price, purchase and upgrade costs of ferries etc. This would then allow for updated electrical demand profiles, CAPEX and OPEX cost ings and emissions reductions to be calculated, making sure that if timescales o r costs changed the Ports and ferry operators could get up to date information surrounding duty cycles and costs. One of the other modules within the app is the marine-side decarbonisation module. Within this module an illustrative route map (figure 8) showing the milestones along the route to net zero is provided with clickable buttons which once clicked on, trigger various calculations and optimisations in the background of the app and present in real-time a detailed output containing the total CAPEX a nd its breakdown, the cost for each kwh delivered at the port for ferry use, emissions saved, grid size upgrade required, and BESS size required with its optimal composition of options available.
As the key deliverable from this work package led by the University of Kent, all aspects of the business plan analysis have been embedded within the developed innovative decision support application with 5 main modules and 7 submodules. These modules allowed stakeholders to change and update all assumptions within the application such as grid capacity, electricity cost, carbon price, purchase and upgrade costs of ferries etc. This would then allow for updated electrical demand profiles, CAPEX and OPEX costings and emissions reductions to be calculated, making sure that if timescales or costs changed the Ports and ferry operators could get up to date information surrounding duty cycles and costs.
Figure 8. Route map submodule with the ‘here and now’ milestones selected
Figure 8. Route map submodule with the ‘here and now’ milestones selected
One of the other modules within the app is the marine-side decarbonisation module. Within this module an illustrative route map (figure 8) showing the milestones along the route to net zero is provided with clickable buttons which once clicked on, trigger various calculations and optimisations in the background of the app and present in real-time a detailed output containing the total CAPEX and its breakdown, the cost for each kwh delivered at the port for ferry use, emissions saved, grid size upgrade required, and BESS size required with its optimal composition of options available.
All in all, the developed GCSS DSD app provides several advantages and key added values to carry out the business plan analysis. In particular, the integration of all developed modelling and optimisation methodologies within this innovative decision support system application has allowed the analysis of an unlimited set of scenarios instead of restricting the analysis to a limited set. This allows the stakeholders to freely refine assumptions adopted and see the result and impact on costs and emissions in real-time. The tool has also been instrumental in aiding other consortium members to decide the best courses of action and decide a viable route map, investment strategy and implementation plan.
It is worth adding that while this tool is bespoke for the Green Corridor at Short Straits, it can be simply extended for use by other ports and corridors within the UK and beyond.
Feasability study c onclusion
All in all, the developed GCSS DSD app provides several advantages and key added values to carry out the business plan analysis. In particular, the integration of all developed modelling and optimisation methodologies within this innovative decision support system application has allowed the analysis of an unlimited set of scenarios instead of restricting the analysis to a limited set. This allows the stakeholders to freely refine assumptions adopted and see the result and impact on costs and emissions in real-time. The tool has also been instrumental in aiding other consortium members to decide the best courses of action and decide a viable route map, investment strategy and implementation plan. It is worth adding that while this tool is bespoke for the Green Corridor at Short Straits, it can be simply extended for use by other ports and corridors within the UK and beyond.
The overall findings of the project helped to identify the timescales on which stakeholders in the value chain would be looking to decarbonise and the future fuels they were currently considering. This helped us understand that for the ferries (responsible for 825,000 tonnes of carbon annually) electrification is the way forward, most ly due to the short transit route of 27 nautical miles. As a result of this, the project began to investigate the future energy demands from these vessels which highlighted the huge deficit in electricity (projected peak demand of 162MW for all electric vessels) that the Port of Dover will face in the future if the ferries fully electrify. This allowed us to investigate
The overall findings of the project helped to identify the timescales on which stakeholders in the value chain would be looking to decarbonise and the future fuels they were currently considering. This helped us understand that for the ferries (responsible for 825,000 tonnes of carbon annually) electrification is the way forward, mostly due to the short transit route of 27 nautical miles. As a result of this, the project began to investigate the future energy demands from these vessels which highlighted the huge deficit in electricity (projected peak demand of 162MW for all electric vessels) that the Port of Dover will face in the future if the ferries fully electrify. This allowed us to investigate possible sources for this electricity as well as the costs that may be involved in this increase in energy and upgrading the Ports’ internal electrical networks. A breakdown of the scenarios investigated can be seen below in figure 9. These scenarios were based on both the ferry operators planned timescales for changing vessels as well as the grid availability information that we were able to obtain through the project. The scenarios show both the mean and peak electrical demand that was modelled for the specific mix of vessels in each scenario, the grid capacity available to that timescale (and therefore the BESS requirements required to supplement this grid) as well as the CAPEX cost.
investigated can be seen below in figure 9 These scenarios were based on both the ferry operators planned timescales for changing vessels as well as the grid availability information that we were able to obtain through the project. The scenarios show both the mean and peak electrical demand that was modelled for the specific mix of vessels in each scenario, the grid capacity available to that timescale (and therefore the BESS requirements required to supplement this grid) as well as the CAPEX cost.
Updates since feasibility study completion
Updates since feasibility study completion
Since project completion the Port has continued to consult with the ferry operators and the Port of Calais to stay updated with any changes to our ferry operators plans or timelines. We have also begun working on highlighting possible berth areas for charging infrastructure as well as commissioning a feasibility study from UKPN to understand both the amounts of power and timelines of any electrical upgrades that are possible from the UK grid.
Since project completion the Port has continued to consult with the ferry operators and the Port of Calais to stay updated with any changes to our ferry operators plans or timelines. We have also begun working on highlighting possible berth areas for charging infrastructure as well as commissioning a feasibility study from UKPN to understand both the amounts of power and timelines of any electrical upgrades that are possible from the UK grid.
Since receiving updated and more detailed information from the UK grid the overall CAPEX of the project is now projected to be around £160 million and timescales of availability of power may cause delays to achieving a green corridor in line with the Ports’ and ferry operators’ ambitions.
As a result of this updated information the Port is currently looking at alternative routes to both fund and accelerate the speed at which power could be delivered and are currently investigated both private wire solutions to local renewable productions sites as well as PPA agreements through 3 rd party frameworks that may install and own all the required infrastructure.
Since receiving updated and more detailed information from the UK grid the overall CAPEX of the project is now projected to be around £160 million and timescales of availability of power may cause delays to achieving a green corridor in line with the Ports’ and ferry operators’ ambitions.
As a result of this updated information the Port is currently looking at alternative routes to both fund and accelerate the speed at which power could be delivered and are currently investigated both private wire solutions to local renewable productions sites as well as PPA agreements through 3rd party frameworks that may install and own all the required infrastructure.
Head of International Public Affairs and Sustainability, Port of Gothenburg
Edvard Molitor is the Head of International Public Affairs & Sustainability in the Port of Gothenburg and is responsible for external relations in a global context with a special focus on sustainable development and decarbonization of ports and shipping. He is the key representative of the port authority within global organizations and associations on matters related to sustainability and environment.
In 2021 Mr Molitor was appointed vice chairman of the Climate & Energy Committee of the International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH), the main representative of the port community within the International Maritime Organization.
Mr Molitor is also a Board Member within the Environmental Ship Index, and from 2017 to 2020, Mr Molitor chaired the Sustainable Development Committee of the European SeaPorts Organisation.
Mr Molitor has a wide international experience of environmental management, sustainable development, maritime operations, and marine pollution response, and holds a M.Sc. degree in Aquatic and Environmental Engineering from Uppsala University.
Mr Molitor has previously worked at SSPA Sweden AB, at the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) and at the Swedish Coast Guard Headquarters.
When the Clydebank Declaration was signed at COP26, the signatories aimed for six corridors to be in place by 2030. However, within just a few years more than 50 different green corridor projects have been initiated around the globe, with a greater variety in size, type, ambition, and partnerships than anyone could have imagined.
The Port of Gothenburg - a forerunner in sustainability since many decades - was early on in establishing green corridors, together with North Sea Ports and the Port of Rotterdam. Through the work on these two corridors, Port of Gothenburg has gained valuable insight into how to establish green corridors, including both challenges and opportunities. This paper describes some examples of the work that has been done so far, showing how port authorities can work together to connect all the players within the field of green corridors to achieve true results in line with the promises made in the Clydebank Declaration.
The Clydebank Declaration was signed by Sweden at COP26, stating that countries shall promote the climate transition of the shipping industry by supporting and encouraging green shipping corridors. Following this, the Port of Gothenburg has moved forward with two green corridor projects. The two green corridors are fundamentally different and will contribute to the decarbonization of shipping in very different ways. While one aims for increased use of biofuel in existing vessels the other is heading for brand new vessels using ammonia.
The green corridor between Gothenburg and Rotterdam was kicked off with a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed during a Dutch state visit to Sweden, in the presence of their majesties King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia of Sweden and King Willem Alexander and Queen Maxima of the Netherlands. As part of this initiative, the ports established a common framework for cooperation to stimulate the use of new alternative fuels which are needed to reach full maritime decarbonization and contribute substantively to the goals of the Paris Agreement, which is the main purpose of Green Corridors and the Clydebank Declaration.
Both Gothenburg and Rotterdam were already actively involved in the development of more sustainable fuels for shipping. For example, Port of Gothenburg has facilitated the bunkering of methanol for RoPax ferries on a smaller scale since 2015 and published general methanol operating regulations for ship-to-ship bunkering on a larger scale already in 2022. The Port of Rotterdam similarly launched the world’s first barge-to-ship methanol bunkering operation in May 2021.
For this corridor however, it was soon discovered that the best option to move forward on was the small product tanker segment, where ambitious shipowners were already running their vessels on LNG with a clear aim of switching to LBG as soon as possible. The work within this corridor has therefore focused on making LBG available in both ports at a competitive price level. On an overall level, the work has also continued towards making the port call itself more efficient through digital port calls, thereby enabling another step towards the Just in Time-concept. In Gothenburg, the very same vessels have also recently been connected to onshore power, which is a world first for this segment.
For the Sweden-Belgium Green Shipping Corridor, the original MoU was signed in 2022 between North Sea Port, Port of Gothenburg and shipowner DFDS, with an aim to work together to decarbonize the shipping corridor between Sweden and Belgium and to create a scalable solution. In 2024, the corridor was enlarged with Port of Antwerp-Bruges and at the same time the new main target was formulated; by 2030, two ammonia-fueled ro-ro vessels are expected to operate on the route between Sweden and Belgium, potentially making it the world’s first green ammonia shipping corridor for freight vessels.
In this corridor, the ports of Gothenburg, North Sea Port and Antwerp-Bruges also work as transportation hubs as well as important origin and destination zones of industrial activity, and the ammonia-vessels will be complemented by electric trucks and rail transport on land, as well as onshore power supply for the vessels. The corridor potentially connects 11 European countries through sea, land, and rail routes from Norway in Northern Europe to Spain in the South. Efforts are therefore intensified by the ports to facilitate electric terminal operations and enable safe ammonia bunkering. Furthermore, the partners are planning to start producing significant amounts of renewable electricity.
The green corridors to and from Gothenburg stand out as smaller in number of partners than many other initiated corridors around the world, which has made them faster and more agile in their development. Even though the corridors in Gothenburg only include a small number of actual project partners, cooperation remains an important factor for the success of green corridors. The Port of Gothenburg is therefore heavily involved in various groups and organisations that discuss the development of green corridors to ensure an effective implementation. These include for example the European SeaPorts Organisation (ESPO), the International Association of Port and Harbors (IAPH), the World Ports Climate Action Program (WPCAP), and the Global Maritime Forum with the Getting to Zero Coalition (GMF/GtZ). Moreover, to ensure the highest level of technical knowledge in the approach, the projects in Gothenburg have been further defined and developed in close collaboration with the Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping (MMMCZCS).
While there has been a lot of development on green corridors, one must still admit that none of the initiated green corridors around the globe nor the ones in Gothenburg have yet managed to create a fully functioning corridor using truly fossil free fuel. This all comes down to one remaining issue; a reliable business case that can close the price gap between conventional fossil fuels and new alternative fuels with less climate impact. There are many ongoing developments that will help to close this price gap, and it is the aim of the ongoing projects to make sure that as soon as the signatories of the Clydebank Declaration can deliver the incentives they signed for and really close the price gap, the maritime community will be ready to deliver truly green corridors.
The two green corridors in Port of Gothenburg are fundamentally different in what they aim to achieve and how, but nonetheless they are both built around the idea of scaling up and sharing knowledge, experience, and ambitious targets. The realization of green corridors before 2030 as described in the Clydebank Declaration, is within reach. The real challenge, however, will be to move from a limited number of corridors to a new normal of shipping without the use of fossil fuels.
Technical Director, Royal HaskoningDHV
Richard Willis is Technical Director Port Operations & Technology, with over 30 years’ experience of the port and shipping industry, working on smart & green port development projects around the world. He has hands-on stevedoring and operational management experience, followed by over a decade of business transformation with technology for all types of ports & cargo terminals around the world.
The Irish Sea region boasts a thriving short sea shipping corridor, connecting the UK’s industrial heartland with Northern Ireland, Ireland, and mainland Europe. Additionally, it hosts the Liverpool City Region (LCR) Freeport, with the UK’s primary transatlantic port at its centre.
The UK Government has signed up to the Clydebank Declaration, aiming to establish Green Shipping Corridors within the next decade, with links to UK ports; operating zero carbon vessel sailing and port-side operations, as a key part of the nation’s decarbonisation mission.
Liverpool City Region and Belfast City Council have set Net Zero ambitions for 2040 and 2050 respectively, and there are several ongoing green energy projects with potential to provide the corridor with its energy needs (e.g. the Mersey Tidal Power project and the Hynet hydrogen production project in Liverpool, and the Green Seas Consortium, North Wind offshore wind project in Northern Ireland).
The ~130 nautical mile shipping corridor studied in this report is one of the busiest in the Irish Sea and there are two main shipping operators that service different sectors every day:
• Stena Line’s roll on roll off (RoRo) & passenger ferry services
• BG Freight’s container feeder services
The study focused on answering the question: what are the shipping and port infrastructure solutions to support decarbonisation on this future Green Shipping Corridor?
For all shipping operations, energy is used by the vessels when they are berthed in port and when the vessels are sailing between two ports; these two parts are:
• The ‘hotelling demand’, which represents the power demand onboard the ship when it is berthed in port, to run its basic systems.
• The ‘propulsion demand’, which includes the power required for sailing the vessel (such as engines and propellers) while the vessel is transiting between ports.
To provide power to berthed vessels in port, onshore power supply (shore power) of electrical power to remove the need for onboard vessel (diesel) power generation is the most accessible solution.
A (conservative) hotelling power demand value for the BG Freight and Stena Line vessels of 2 to 3 megawatts (MW) was estimate. For a Stena Line ferry, that amounts to an annual energy demand of ~3,900 megawatt-hours (MWh) at each port, equivalent to the annual energy demand of > 1,350 homes. Stena operate three of the vessels on this route, increasing the utilisation of future shore power facilities.
Two main solutions are available to reduce or eliminate the emissions associated with the vessels’ sailing operations:
• Onboard electrification: Operating a fully electric vessel in the Irish Sea faces significant technological challenges and, with today’s battery technology, is (currently) impractical beyond shorter distances, due to battery size/weight and in-port charging times.
• Transition to low and zero emission fuels: The adoption of low-carbon liquid fuels for powering vessels along the 130 nautical mile corridor, is a viable option. Due to lower energy densities, larger volumes of these fuels are required for the same journey. Among these alternative fuels, e-methanol is emerging as industry preferred and yet still necessitates ~2.3 times the volume of fuel compared to marine diesel. A more significant challenge is the sourcing and supply of new fuels to vessels within the regional geography, either with local generation or transport from fuel hubs needed.
The infrastructure changes required to enable a green shipping corridor between the two ports are as follows:
• Adaptation of existing infrastructure for the supply and fuelling of methanol
• Significant investment in the National Grid in both ends of the corridor.
- In Liverpool a new Energy System Operator (ESO) substation near the port and additional high-voltage distribution within Seaforth Dock is required.
- In Belfast, a new high-voltage cable across the city to establish connections with the existing ESO substation at 5km distance.
• Designing and constructing new terminal infrastructure, including new quayside structures, installation of high-voltage cable network, new port substations or even on-site solar PV energy generation.
Collaboration holds the key to low carbon sea freight
Collaboration is essential for the successful development of an Irish Sea green shipping corridor. All key stakeholders, including the UK Government, shipping companies, port operators, energy network operators, local communities, and the wider value chain, must actively participate.
Three common themes were identified during discussions with these stakeholders:
1. There is no single solution to solve the complexities of the decarbonising the corridor. While each solution can be deployed at varying scales, diversity will be the key to success, each contributing gains in carbon reduction and supporting the web of initiatives.
2. A combination of e-methanol and shore power is currently the most promising option. In terms of performance as an alternative marine fuel, e-methanol is racing ahead of hydrogen or ammonia with all stakeholders engaged showing a preference for the fuel, backed by real-world investments. Shore power is vitally important, backed with renewable generation, as a low carbon solution with dual benefits of removing all air pollutants from berthed vessels, benefitting global objectives and neighbouring communities.
3. Innovation is expensive and risk, yet scaling is needed for financial viability. Shipping companies highlight that the scale of operation needed for only this corridor creates a tough business case to justify the significant investment. A broader green shipping arena needs to mature further, across the UK and Europe, with alternative fuel supply chains strengthening and port infrastructure improving.
Technical solutions are not the only aspect to consider for a green shipping corridor development; progress will only occur if the ecosystem can embrace and deliver change, which requires place leadership , skills and resources, policy and regulation change, investment sources.
Main recommendations towards government leaders to allow for a supportive ecosystem and to reduce the impact of these barriers include:
1. Stricter environmental legislation, policies, and strategies within the UK, to support and enforce decarbonisation in maritime shipping, ideally aligning with the EU carbon policies
2. Subsidies, incentives, and support for green shipping, particularly for shore power installations, to support the high cost of connection to the grid, in addition to incentives to reduce the price for alternative fuels and electricity relative to current fossil fuels.
3. Commitment to public-private co-investment in green maritime, building on the success of the currently time limited financial support provided by established bodies such as UK SHORE and its partner organisations. This could involve investment in an Irish Sea green shipping corridor ‘Living Laboratory’.
4. Support to develop the parallel skills needed for the green shipping corridor in the region, through funding for education programmes.
5. Set up a single management board to oversee the regional green shipping transition and the future direction of the corridor, bringing together all the stakeholders and maximising value of investment and sharing of lessons learned, for the wider benefit of UK maritime.
The study sets up a practical future course of action, with a series of pilot projects for asset owners, operators, investors, and government to engage with.
A range of 29 pilot projects was developed in collaboration with industry representatives, seeking to build on their motivations and existing plans. From this engagement, some pilot projects emerged as the priority first steps. These projects underwent rigorous assessment and stakeholder feedback to consider their viability, feasibility and desirability. A collection of four preferred pilot projects is presented in the following pages.
Aim: To design a site-bespoke commercial model for investment in shore power so that faster infrastructure and vessel investments can be attracted.
Implementing shore power has different economic implications to various stakeholders in broad supply chains. There are already incentive programs in renewable energy generation markets. The project should:
• Assess such models and analyse whether they can be implemented in this context.
• Develop an incentivised commercial model for shore power on regular vessel services (such as leasing, construction subsidy, electricity subsidy, etc.) to appeal to private investors.
• The above model will be tested on investors in this market (ports, venture capital, shipping lines etc) to consider public private partnership (PPP) and private-wire models to facilitate shore power investments.
• Assist in understanding the relevance of green shipping incentive schemes/tariffs.
Theme Finance and Funding
Location Liverpool
Potential sponsor Port Authority
Stakeholders Shipping, DNO, etc
Costs £ Duration 6-12 months
Aim: To evaluate and forecast the economic feasibility of supply chain options for electricity and alternative fuels use, to guide capital investment, working within energy supply chain constraints; gauge scalability using a future supply/ demand model.
The use of electricity and alternative fuels in Irish Sea shipping has to be informed by the energy supply chains. The energy demand in Irish Sea shipping in the future can be estimated for different scenarios and energy supply options will be investigated from a supply chain point of view considering all available energy sourcing/generating opportunities in the Irish Sea and wider region.
The study will be carried out using what-if scenario simulations, with input from stakeholder engagements. The simulations will evaluate the feasibility and cost/benefit of a wide range of options, which can then be used to guide capital investment. This will also study scalability and applicability across the UK, using lessons learned from the Irish Sea.
To include:
• Connections to grid/alternative fuel supply chain and storage.
• Different charging/bunkering options, incl. onshore & offshore.
• Operations/growth/demand with different vessels capacities/types.
Theme Finance and Funding
Location Irish Sea
Potential sponsor Department for Transport / UKRI / UK SHORE / Shipping companies
Stakeholders Ports, Vessel operators, DNOs
Costs £
Duration 1-2 years
Aim: To have a trial production (and plan for scale-up) of e-methanol and methanol-diesel blends, using offshore wind energy and industrial collaboration for feed/waste.
Design the process and identify a site for a trial production of e-methanol. This uses power from offshore wind (zerocarbon) and biogenic CO2 as a (waste) product from water treatment or industrial waste to blend into e-methanol liquid fuel. The waste heat generated can be supplied to local industry or residential purposes.
Methanol will be generated, stored and then used on Irish Sea vessels (or port workboats) to both reduce carbon emissions directly and show the benefits/lessons for methanol usage in shipping locally.
The project will create a demonstrator for e(lectro)- methanol generation, partnering with local industries, for supply to shipping in Belfast. This will capture valuable lessons for further scale-up planning and investment
Theme Energy supply
Location Belfast
Potential
sponsor
Stakeholders
TBC
QUB, Stena Line, Barnets network and generators
Costs ££££
Duration 2-5 years
The full study for “Irish Sea Green Shipping Corridor” is available for download on our website. This concept development project was carried out by Catapult Connected Places, supported by Royal HaskoningDHV, Mersey Maritime, University of Liverpool, Queen’s University Belfast, and Liverpool John Moores University. Thanks to the port & shipping community of the Irish Sea for their support.
Executive Director, Marlogmind & Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation, Rutgers University
Dr Sotirios Theofanis is an internationally acknowledged expert and manager, with extensive experience in administrative, high level managerial, consulting, and academic activities in the fields of port planning, management, and operations, as well as in freight, intermodal and maritime transport and logistics.
Currently, Executive Director, MARLOGMIND PC, Greece; Honorary Professor, University of York, UK; Affiliated Faculty, CAIT, Rutgers University, UK; and Member, Board of Governors, University of Macedonia, Greece.
Ex- Expert and Director for Ports, Hellenic Ministry of Merchant Marine, Greece; Ex- President and CEO, Piraeus Port Authority SA, Greece; Ex- President and CEO, Thessaloniki Port Authority SA, Greece; and Director, Freight and Maritime Program, CAIT, Rutgers University, USA.
A chance to hear from experts on the latest sustainability investments and the work being done to tackle the environmental, social and economic impacts of cruise operations.
VALERIA MANGIAROTTI Marketing Manager, Port System Authority of the Sardinian Sea
Valeria is a lawyer from 1992, she became a lawyer at the Court of Appeal of Milan. She hold a degree in law from the Catholic University of Milan Italy. She attended a master’s in common law at the London school of economics LSE in London the UK.
She worked in a lawyer farm for 10 years in the Court of Appeal of Milan and Cagliari.
She started her professional career at Port Authority of Cagliari, Sardinia, in 2002. She got involved in the cruise industry in 2004.
Valeria is in charge of the Port Network Authority of the Sardinian Sea; she is marketing manager she is responsible for leading the marketing activities of the Sardinian Ports while giving support to the expansion of Port Network Authority of the Sardinian Sea.
Valeria has gained, over more than 20 years of professional experience, a consolidate expertise in the cruise sector holding roles in maritime associations and collaborating with national and EU institutions. In particular, she has consolidated experience in setting up and organizing all facilities and equipment of cruise ports; in this context, she has dealt with the cruise companies all aspects of environment and sustainability.
She is responsible of Green ports and PNRR od the Sardinian ports, in particular of OPS one shore power supply.
JAMIL OUAZZANI
Director of Marketing & Strategic Intelligence, SGPTV SA (Tangier City Port Management Company)
Jamil Ouazzani has been the Marketing and Strategic Intelligence Director at the Tangier City Port Management Company in Morocco since June 2017.
Previously, Jamil was an International Manager who held senior positions in companies specializing in Data Intelligence, Brand development strategy consulting, Media, and Tourism.
EVEN HUSBY
Head
of
Environment, Port of Bergen
Head of Environment at the Port of Bergen and Director of the Environmental Port Index (EPI), Husby holds a Master of Science from the University of Edinburgh.
His current focus is advancing EPI as an efficient tool for ports to assess the environmental impact of visiting ships.
Previously, Husby worked as an international consultant specialising in environmental accounting solutions, with additional expertise in project management, information technology and Geographic Information Systems (GIS).
Are all ports equal? A look at seaports vs. inland enabling practicable implementation options for compliance, cost/risk reduction, environmental protection, and sustainability
CHRIS WOOLDRIDGE
Science Coordinator EcoPorts EcoSLC, and Visiting Research Fellow, Cardiff University, UK
Chris has worked on Research & Development and Training with the port sector since 1982 specializing in the environmental management of port and shipping operations. He contributed to the development of the EcoPorts tools and methodologies, and is active in their implementation internationally supported by the cooperation between ECOSLC (www.ecoslc. eu), the European Sea ports Organization (ESPO, www.espo.be) and the American Association of Port Authorities (www.aapa-ports.org). He acts as Reviewer of the EcoPorts’ Self-Diagnosis Methodology (SDM).
His training qualifications include qualified certification through the Course Developers Workshop under the UN Train-Sea-Coast Programme, and the LRQA Environmental Management Systems Auditor Training Course, Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance training Services, which are certified by the International Register of Certificated Auditors (IRCA).
Chris has delivered training courses on a range of environmental issues throughout Europe and in India, Ivory Coast of Africa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos, Taiwan, Malaysia and Colombia. He was Director of Studies, Marine Geography in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, UK until 2011.
CEDRIC VIRCIGLIO
Strategic Planning Director, HAROPA Port
Graduate in Contemporary History (University of Strasbourg) and in Politics and Public Affairs in Europe (Sciences Po Strasbourg). He is a specialist in European issues, particularly in the fields of transport, research & innovation and cohesion policy.
Cédric Virciglio started his professional career as Europe Project Manager at the Fondation Entente Franco Allemande. He was also ERDF Project Manager in charge of transport infrastructure at the Champagne-Ardenne Regional Equipment Directorate and Director of the Alsace Europe Office - the Representation to the European Union in Brussels of Alsatian local authorities and consular bodies until June 2017.
In January 2017 he was also appointed prefigurator of the future “Grand Est Europe Office”. At the same time, he is involved in many training courses related to European affairs (Science Po Lille, University of Strasbourg, ENA, University of Lorraine…) and is an expert evaluator for the High Council for the Evaluation of Research and Higher Education (HCERES).
In July 2017, he was recruited by GIE HAROPA - the alliance of the ports of Le Havre, Rouen and Paris as Head of European and International Affairs. He was in charge of defining, steering, implementing the European and international strategy for HAROPA and developing the alliance’s visibility and influence at the European and international level. He is also the Chairman of the Intermodal, Logistics & Industry Committee (ILICO) of the European Sea Port Organisation (ESPO) since July 2019.
Since 1st of June 2021 and the creation of the Seine Axis major River and Sea port - HAROPA PORT, born with the merger of the ports of Le Havre, Rouen and Paris, Cédric Virciglio hold the position of Strategic Planning Director. A department that includes equity investment, strategy, European affairs, international development, consulting and training.
ANTONIS MICHAIL Technical Director IAPH & WPSP, IAPH
Dr Antonis Michail is an engineer in background with specialisation on the environmental management of ports and freight transport systems at Master and PhD level, and with more than 15 years of professional experience in these fields. Since February 2018, Antonis joined the World Ports Sustainability Program (WPSP) of the International Association of Ports and Harbours (IAPH) as the person responsible for the technical developments and projects under the umbrella of the program. Before that, Antonis was holding the position of Senior Policy Advisor on sustainability and safety matters at the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) from 2009 to 2017. Since back in 2003, Antonis was involved in the EcoPorts network of ports from various posts, including managing projects and coordinating the network’s activities and development until 2017.
Chemical Engineer & University Lecturer, Polytechnic University of Catalonia
Dr. Martí Puig is a Chemical Engineer with fifteen years of professional experience in the areas of research and teaching. His research has focused on environmental aspects of risk; particularly in the environmental management of seaports.
Dr. Martí Puig graduated as a Chemical Engineer from the School of Industrial Engineering of Barcelona (ETSEIB) of the Polytechnic University of Catalonia (UPC). In 2009, he moved to the University of Cardiff (Wales, United Kingdom) to carry out the Final Degree Project, framed within the European mobility program ERASMUS.
After graduation, on the years 2010 and 2011 he worked at Cardiff University as a researcher in the PPRISM (Port Performance Indicators: Selection and Measurement) project. This project aimed to determine indicators that would demonstrate the impact of the port sector on society, the environment and the economy. In June 2012, Dr. Puig was awarded an MPhil Master at the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the Cardiff University (United Kingdom), with the title ‘Selection and implementation of Environmental Performance Indicators for sustainable port operations’.
Then, in September 2012 he returned to Barcelona and began his doctoral thesis at the UPC. The thesis was entitled Methodology for the selection and implementation of environmental aspects and performance indicators in ports and aimed to develop a methodology that would help port authorities identify and evaluate the environmental aspects and indicators most appropriate for them. As part of his PhD., Dr. Puig successfully developed two online tools, TEAP and TEIP, which are available and freely accessible (www.eports-upc.cat). Dr. Puig graduated in November 2016 with the rating of Excellent Cum Laude.
During the completion of the thesis, Martí worked as an associate researcher in several EU-funded projects. The most prominent projects are PERSEUS (Policy-oriented marine Environmental Research in the Southern EUropean Seas) and PORTOPIA (Port Observatory for Performance Indicator Analysis). The first was to evaluate the impacts of human activity in the Mediterranean and Black seas; the second one was to define and integrate port sector indicators in a digital platform (Service Cloud). As part of the completion of the thesis and the development of projects, Dr Puig visited several European port terminals and analyzed their environmental management and monitoring programs.
Mega ports are pivotal in the global supply chain, influencing both economic and environmental domains. These ports are essential hubs that facilitate international trade, connecting various transportation modes such as shipping, railways, and road networks. As the global economy becomes more interconnected, the importance of mega ports transcends beyond logistics, significantly impacting employment, community development, and environmental sustainability (Lim et al., 2019)
It is widely known that port activities have diverse effects on the environment, affecting the water, soil, sediments and air. One of the main concerns is the release of Green House Gas (GHG) emissions, especially from ships, since between 70% and 100% of port emissions originate from shipping activities (Merk, 2014). These environmental impacts are significantly magnified in the context of mega ports, which are defined as large port facilities with extensive infrastructure and the capacity to handle a high volume of cargo.
To address these environmental challenges, ports are increasingly adopting strategies focused on Climate Change Mitigation (CCM) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) (Jiang et al., 2020) This paper explores the key strategies currently in place and examines the extent to which they have been implemented among mega ports worldwide.
The study employs a structured research methodology to achieve its objectives. It begins by defining the concept of mega ports and identifying the global ports that meet this classification. Following this, the environmental priorities of these mega ports are identified using data from the Self-Diagnosis Method (SDM), a survey tool developed within the ECOPORTS project funded by the European Commission. The research also includes a review to identify proactive measures within the port sector aimed at mitigating climate change impacts.
The study defines seven key CCM strategies based on this review and creates a checklist to assess the compliance of mega ports with these strategies. The methodology concludes with an analysis of resilience measures for CCA, focusing on how ports can adapt to the long-term impacts of climate change.
Mega ports are characterized by their extensive infrastructure, high cargo capacity, and significant geographical extension. Despite the lack of a standardized definition in existing literature, this study defines mega ports as those handling over 5 million TEUs annually. Based on data from the World Shipping Council (World Shipping Council, 2024), the study identifies the top 30 mega ports worldwide, including prominent ports such as Shanghai, Singapore, and Rotterdam. Table 1 provides the list of top container ports with more than 5 million TEUs/year.
*Million Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit (TEUs)/year, corresponding to the average 2017-2021.
Environmental priorities for mega ports were identified through the SDM questionnaire. The results indicate that both mega ports and the broader EU port sector prioritize climate change and air quality as their top environmental concerns. This common focus reflects the urgency of addressing these global challenges. However, differences in subsequent priorities highlight varying regional and operational contexts. For instance, while mega ports emphasize water quality and port development, the EU port sector prioritizes energy efficiency and noise reduction.
Table 2. Top environmental priorities of mega ports and EU ports 2023.
Based on the responses of classified mega ports to the SDM
The study identifies seven key strategies for mitigating climate change in mega ports, based on a review of academic papers, industry reports, and case studies. These strategies are crucial for reducing GHG emissions and promoting sustainability within the port sector.
One of the most critical strategies for reducing GHG emissions in mega ports is the facilitation of alternative fuels. Ports are collaborating with energy providers to increase the availability of low-sulfur fuels and alternative energy sources like LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas), hydrogen, and biofuels. Currently, only about 1% of vessels operate on alternative fuels, though this is expected to increase as new ships are increasingly equipped to use cleaner energy (Larrea, 2022). Despite the potential of alternative fuels, the study notes significant challenges, including the risk of investments becoming obsolete before their payback period and the lack of market support for certain technologies. Therefore, the industry must collaborate on research and development (R&D) to ensure a smooth transition to cleaner fuels. The research has demonstrated that 63.3% of mega ports provide alternative fuels supply to vessels.
OPS, also known as cold ironing, involves providing electrical power to ships at berth from the shore, allowing them to shut down their engines and reduce emissions. This strategy significantly cuts down on air pollutants like NOx, SOx, and particulate matter, and also reduces noise pollution (Ashrafi et al., 2020). However, implementing OPS requires substantial infrastructure investments and faces challenges related to standardization, electricity billing, and grid capacity. Despite these challenges, the study finds that 80% of mega ports have adopted OPS, supported largely by public financing.
Implementing environmentally differentiated port fees is an economic strategy that rewards ships with lower emissions by reducing their fees. This incentive encourages shipping companies to invest in cleaner technologies. However, the adoption of this strategy is relatively low, with only 36.6% of mega ports implementing it. The study suggests that the low adoption rate may be due to the significant role that port fees play in port revenues, making it challenging for port authorities to offer discounts without compromising their financial stability.
Low Emission Zones (LEZ) within port areas and strict berth standards are other strategies to reduce emissions. LEZ are designated areas where strict emissions standards are enforced, and ships that do not meet these standards are either restricted or required to adopt cleaner technologies. Similarly, berth standards set environmental performance criteria for vessels docked at the port. The study finds that 73.3% of mega ports have established LEZ or similar berth standards, reflecting a strong commitment to controlling emissions at the source.
The implementation of EMS is crucial for mega ports aiming to enhance their sustainability efforts. EMS provides a structured framework for managing environmental impacts, setting GHG reduction targets, and ensuring continuous improvement. The study reveals that all mega ports surveyed have integrated GHG reduction targets into their EMS, highlighting a universal commitment to mitigating climate change impacts.
Digitalization and the adoption of smart port technologies are vital for improving operational efficiency and reducing emissions. Technologies like Just-In-Time (JIT) operations help minimize idle times for vessels, reducing fuel consumption and associated GHG emissions (Larrea, 2022) The study underscores the potential of smart technologies to revolutionize port operations, noting that 66.7% of mega ports have implemented digital systems to enhance efficiency and sustainability.
Mega ports are increasingly turning to renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, and tidal energy, to power their operations and reduce reliance on fossil fuels. Despite the potential benefits, the adoption of renewable energy remains relatively low, with only 53.3% of mega ports confirming implementation. The study highlights the need for greater investment and commitment to renewable energy to achieve long-term sustainability goals.
The study provides a detailed analysis of the implementation levels of the seven CCM strategies across mega ports. The findings show a high level of commitment to GHG reduction targets and OPS, with 100% and 80% adoption rates, respectively. However, the implementation of environmentally differentiated port fees and renewable energy generation is less widespread, indicating areas where further progress is needed.
Table 3 summarizes the percentage of acceptance, non-acceptance, and unconfirmed information for each strategy, providing a clear picture of the current state of climate change mitigation efforts in mega ports.
Table 3. Percentages of implementation of CCM strategies in mega ports
6. Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) strategies in mega ports
Beyond mitigation, mega ports must also adapt to the impacts of climate change, such as rising sea levels and extreme weather events. The study outlines several Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) strategies that ports can implement to enhance their resilience:
• Risk assessments and vulnerability studies: Conducting thorough assessments helps ports identify specific climate risks and plan appropriate mitigation measures.
• Port personnel training: Undertaking initiatives to enhance the skills, knowledge, and abilities of port personnel to effectively manage climate change challenges.
• Infrastructure upgrades: Investing in resilient infrastructure, such as elevated quays and reinforced berths, is essential to withstand the effects of rising sea levels and storms.
• Smart technologies: The integration of smart technologies, such as automated flood barriers and sensor-equipped quays, helps ports adapt to changing environmental conditions.
• Durable materials and innovative engineering solutions: Using materials that can withstand environmental stressors and adopting innovative engineering solutions, such as floating infrastructure, can significantly enhance the resilience of ports.
• Integrated coastal management and nature-based solutions: Collaborating with local governments and environmental agencies to implement coastal management strategies and restore natural ecosystems, like mangroves, helps protect ports from the impacts of climate change.
• Real-time monitoring and early warning systems: These systems enable ports to anticipate and respond to extreme weather events, ensuring the safety of personnel and assets.
The study underscores both the achievements and challenges in implementing Climate Change Mitigation (CCM) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) strategies in mega ports. While there is a clear commitment to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through initiatives such as Onshore Power Supply (OPS) and GHG reduction targets, significant obstacles remain in adopting environmentally differentiated port fees and renewable energy generation. Overcoming these challenges will require collaborative efforts among port authorities, industry stakeholders, and policymakers. Additionally, the study emphasizes the need to integrate CCA strategies into port operations, as climate change increasingly impacts global trade and infrastructure. To enhance resilience and sustainability, ports must proactively adopt measures that address these evolving risks.
The authors acknowledge the support of the IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) research project #2021-026-3-600 “The role of mega ports in climate change”.
References
Ashrafi, M., Walker, T. R., Magnan, G. M., Adams, M., & Acciaro, M. (2020). A review of corporate sustainability drivers in maritime ports: A multi-stakeholder perspective. Maritime Policy & Management, 47(8).
ESPO. (2023). ESPO Environmental Report 2023. Jiang, C., Zheng, S., Ng, A. K. Y., Ge, Y. E., & Fu, X. (2020). The climate change strategies of seaports: Mitigation vs. adaptation. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 89. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102603
Larrea, M. (2022). El papel de los puertos en la transición energética
Lim, S., Pettit, S., Abouarghoub, W., & Beresford, A. (2019). Port sustainability and performance: A systematic literature review. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 72, 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.04.009
Merk, O. (2014). International transport forum discussion papers 2014/20. Shipping emissions in ports.
World Shipping Council. (2024, January 30). The Top 50 Container Ports
BIOGRAPHY
Senior Project Manager, Panteia Nederland
Rob is senior project manager at Panteia and coordinator of the Shipping and Ports unit. Rob studied Civil Engineering, Economics and Psychology. Before Panteia, he worked for the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, the Port of Rotterdam Authority and the Ministry of Finance, where he worked on Public Private Partnerships and the National Ports Council. At Panteia, Rob carries out many projects in the field of greening transport corridors and ports, seaports as well as inland ports. Many of these deal with greening the waterborne transport sector. Rob is director for Clean Energy Hubs for which he developed a roadmap for the realisation of a network of bunker points for alternative fuels. In recent years, Rob is also active for the Green Inland Ports project. An important part of this is the set-up of an Environmental and Sustainable Management System (ESMS).
Freight Transport and Ports Consultant, Panteia
BIOGRAPHY
Dr Ioanna Kourounioti is a consultant with experience in research in the area of freight transport and logistics. Ioanna has been working in the field of transport and mobility since 2011. She is an expert in EU transport policy, freight transport demand analysis, port container terminals, EU freight transport policy, multimodal transport and transport infrastructure, road transport, freight transport and logistics. She has extensive experience in data collection and analysis, market analysis, EU policy analysis, evaluation and impact assessment, stakeholders’ engagement and consultation, events organisation, training, and capacity building. Currently Ioanna is working on the Green Inland Ports Project and specifically on setting up the Environmental Sustainable Management System for inland ports.
Currently the whole port sector is experiencing a period of dynamic change in terms of the commercial, political, social and environmental context in which the activities and operations of the ports are being carried out. For every individual port, priority issues change with time as clearly demonstrated by successive reports from the sector.
In the context of this project the definition of an inland port made by European Federation of Inland Ports (EFIP) is applied. EFIP defines inland ports as intermodal nodal points in the transport and logistic chain, combining inland waterway transport with rail, road, and maritime transport (www.inlandports.eu).
In the context of the GRIP project we also define the SMART and Sustainable Port as follows:
• Sustainable - Inland ports aim to develop and execute practices to monitor and reduce their negative environmental effects. Inland ports engage with their local communities and manage their operations in a way that ensures the equilibrium between environmental performance, operational and business efficiency and social responsibility.
• SMART – Inland ports can set SMART- Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-bound- goals to help them focus their efforts and increase the chances of achieving their goal of sustainability and ensure their financial viability. To do so, apart from setting SMART goals and implementing sustainable practices, they are required to keeping up to date with developments in freight transport and logistics such as digitalisation, automation, new technologies (electrification etc,) and offering innovative services (such as fostering Inland Waterways (IWW) city logistics services.
Each inland port has its unique characteristics in terms of location, type and size of activities, connectivity and available modes of transport. However, given that inland ports, along with global supply chains, are going through of phase of transition and change they are in need for cost-effective and practicable tools to navigate this transition and further develop themselves as efficient nodes.
This paper presents a first approach to develop an Environmentally Sustainable Management System (ESMS). The ESMS is developed in the context of the European funded project Green Inland Ports.
Description of GRIP ESMS
The GRIP -ESMS consists of two modules the process component and the content component. The process component consists of the main process steps that can be followed when applying the GRIP-ESMS.
The GRIP -ESMS consists of two modules the process component and the content component. The process component consists of the main process steps that can be followed when applying the GRIP-ESMS.
The GRIP-ESMS consists of two modules the process component and the content component.
Figure 1 The two modules of the GRIP-ESMS
The GRIP-ESMS consists of two modules the process component and the content component.
The process component consists of the main process steps that can be followed when applying the GRIP-ESMS are presented in Figure 8.
1. Determine the current status. In this step the current status of the inland port is a series of question in which each ports needs to reply. The SAM is a tool that help inland ports assess their environmental performance and readiness. By answering the SAM set of questions, ports can identify their current status and track improvements over time. The more questions a port can answer with a “yes,” the more advanced and sustainable it becomes, the more environmental “ready” it is. This methodology serves as a benchmark for each port to assess its own development. During this step the port can also apply the emissions calculation tool to calculate what is the current level of environmental emissions and to identify hot spots in its operations.
2. Identification of SEAs: After the first step each inland port identifies the most important SEAs1 it needs to address. For example, a port would like to focus on decreasing its GHG Emissions, improve the soil quality or promote modal shift. Each inland port can identify one or more SEA. It should be noted here that another important priority that a port wants to set is the digitalization. The Digital aspect is closely related to environmental sustainability as digitalization can help to monitor and better control the environmental aspects of the port and to identify the emissions and the sustainable practice.
more environmental “ready” it is. This methodology serves as a benchmark for With the term SEAs we mean the environmental related issues that the port needs to address. A SEA could be the reduction of G HG emissions, improve the waste management or implement digital tools to collect environmental related data.
1 With the term SEAs we mean the environmental related issues that the port needs to address. A SEA could be the reduction of GHG emissions, improve the waste management or implement digital tools to collect environmental related data.
Figuren 2 The proces component of GRIP ESMS
3. Identification of list of goals per SEA. For each SEA defined in the previous step each a list of SMART goals is identified as well as the timeline for the achievement of these goals.
- Input on environmental management: The results of the emissions calculation tools can be used to identify what is the current situation and hot spots in terms of emissions. Based on this input each port set goals on how to decrease GHG emissions. In addition, good practices of environmental actions in ports provided in the content module can be used as inspiration.
- Input on modal shift: Good practices of modal shift for short range IWW can be applied for the identification of goals.
- Input on digitalization: The digitalization vision in the content module can provide input on which tools and which aspects should a port digitalize to improve its environmental performance.
All goals set by the port should be in accordance with the national, international and EU legislation. GRIP tasks provide input to ensure this check.
4. Identification of list of actions per SEA. To achieve the goals set in the previous step each inland port needs to identify a set of actions. Input from the content module is
Figure 3 Identification of goals and actions per SEA and input needed.
Figure 3 Identification of goals and actions per SEA and input needed.
applied here. Specifically:
- Input on environmental management: The good practices of environmental actions in ports provided in the content module can be used as inspiration.
- Input on modal shift: Good practices of modal shift for short range IWW can be applied for the identification of goals.
- Input on digitalization: The Digitalization guidelines and roadmap in the content module can provide input on which tools and which aspects should a port digitalize to improve its environmental performance.
Same as above all actions are checked with the legislation to ensure regulatory conformity.
5. Economic Evaluation: Once a set of actions is identified then we need to evaluate the economic feasibility of the proposed actions. The roll-out potential, a cost effectiveness analysis and or a feasibility can be performed.
6. Roadmap development. A sustainability strategy is defined where the key SEAs, the goals per SEA and the proposed actions are described together with the timeline for their implementation.
Inland ports are frequently located close to urban environments and has strong relationship with the local communities. As a parallel process stakeholder consultation is proposed to ensure the inclusion the local stakeholder environment. The consultation can be carried out when the SEAs, the targets and the actions are identified.
In the next section we present the content that is necessary to complete this process component.
The GRIP-ESMS content component provides input during the target, actions and economic evaluation.
The content component consists of:
The GRIP-ESMS content component provides input during the target, actions and economic evaluation.
Figure 1 The GRIP-ESMS content component
Figure 1 The GRIP-ESMS content component
The content component consists of :
1. Good practices: Good practices of environmental performance and of the implementation of IWW solutions.
2. Guidelines: We provide a set of guidelines to:
a. Engage stakeholders. Guidelines when, how and which type of stakeholders are developed.
b. Digitalization vision.
c. Economic evaluation (cost-effectiveness, feasibility, roll-out potential). The economic evaluation guidelines and roll-out potential are being included.
d. Meet international and European regulations.
3. Tools: Tools to calculate the GHG emissions of an inland port.
Although the process component remains unchanged over time the content component needs to be updated and enriched and after the end of the GRIP project.
As presented in the previous section we envisage the development of the GRIP-ESMS as a modular approach. Each port can apply one or more steps of the GRIP-ESMS process depending on the problems requested to solve and the available resources.
Figure 2 GRIP – ESMS implementation
As presented in the previous section we envisage the development of the GRIP-ESMS as a modular approach . Each port can apply one or more steps of the GRIP-ESMS process depending on the problems requested to solve and the available resources.
Below we present a few examples of how we forsee a first implementatie of te ESMS-tools.
Figure 2 GRIP – ESMS implementation
Example 1 (light implementation)
A small inland port wants to identify the level of its environmental readiness. The inland port replies to the Self-Assessment Method and we identify the level of the environmental readiness of the port and identifies which are the key environmental aspects that are missing.
Benefits:
A small inland port wants to identify the level of its environmental readiness. The inland port replies to the Self-Assessment Method and we identify the level of the environmental readiness of the port and identifies which are the key environmental aspects that are missing.
Benefits:
• GRIP-ESMS can assist the level of environmental maturity of the inland port and can help the port identify which are the key environmental aspects that can be improved in the coming years.
Example 2
A port wants to decrease Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions by 20% in the next ten years Therefore, its defined key SEA is the reduction of the GHG emissions. Via the calculation tool the port can calculate the current emissions and identify hot spots. The best practices can help the port identify which actions can be more effective in
A port wants to decrease Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions by 20% in the next ten years. Therefore, its defined key SEA is the reduction of the GHG emissions. Via the calculation tool the port can calculate the current emissions and identify hot spots. The best practices can help the port identify which actions can be more effective in its case to reduce emissions. Benefits:
1. Emission calculation, identification of hotspots, effective policies selection.
An inland port wants to define a sustainable port roadmap until 2035. In this example the entire process and all available content can be implemented to help the port transition to 2035.
The GRIP – ESMS which ensures that the inland ports that apply it develop in a sustainable way while complying with international environmental regulations. It builds clear environmental responsibilities, helps inland ports put in place SMART objectives and targets regarding their environmental sustainability and economic viability and give them something to aim for. The GRIP-ESMS aims to create an equilibrium between environmental performance, operational and business efficiency and social responsibility and includes components and guidelines that if applied they can deliver both economic and environmental sustainability. It proposes a system that ensures internal business sustainability of an inland port while defining the appropriate environmental management measures that can mitigate the effects that port operations can have to the external environment (noise, air and water pollution etc.). The GRIP -ESMS is a process tool that aims to deliver environmental protection and sustainable development in the inland ports that apply it.
The version presented in this port consists of the first approach to developing an ESMS for inland ports. These versions will be enriched in the coming months and tested with the 10 pilot ports.
NORBERT GRECH
Senior Manager - Ports & Yachting Directorate, Transport Malta
‘The three key elements in motivation are intensity, direction, and persistence: Intensity: It describes how hard a person tries. This is the element most of us focus on when we talk about motivation.’
Have studied hard both in Malta and in UK, which is illustrated in my professional colourful experience, with my expertise in technical, engineering, operations & management highlights all my achievements, holding a Foundation Technical & Engineering Diploma, Management Diploma from the University of Henley Reading UK and an MMBA in Understanding Petroleum Dynamics from EuroMoney London UK.
Working in the public sector and in the local industry, has taught me so much and have built a good report and network with many professional people from various sectors.
Starting in 2000 in a worldwide semiconductor organization, STMicroelectronics and spent slightly more than a decade exploring and funnelling in my mind hydrogen . In 2013 jog down to a Ministry at Government of Malta with most remarkable milestones were HOGs’ events logistics organisation and several policies creations.
Lately, my personal milestones, 2017 and 2022, where in 2017 I have Establish and Implementing and Development of the National Traffic Control Centre, being proactive in legislation, to Implement the created methodologies. (Budgeting, Business Development) In 2022, Project Management, Coordination of the Implementation of the HVSC Project, Onshore Power Supply, and development of the electricity infrastructure required for cruise liners. (Establish the shipto-shore unit).
TIM VERHOEVEN Projects & Policy Manager
Sustainable Shipping, Port of Antwerp-Bruges
Tim Verhoeven is a Port Environment Expert at the Port of Antwerp – Bruges. His focus lies on climate impact and air emissions of shipping.
As an environmental expert with over 15 years of experience in his field, he has built up a wide range of expertise regarding port operations, port excellence and environmental impact of shipping.
In his current role, he is representing the view of the Port of Antwerp – Bruges on sustainable shipping and the port’s role as a worldwide frontrunner.
He is involved in projects on alternative fuels, onshore power supply and port incentives and active on international and European maritime policy.
Sharing knowledge and strong connections are essential to develop the Port as a home port for a sustainable future.
CHRYSANTHI KONTOGIORGI Chemical Engineer, Port of Piraeus
Chrysanthi Kontogiorgi holds a degree in Chemical Engineering from the School of Chemical Engineering of the National Technical University of Athens as well as an MSc in Materials Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Master’s Program “Materials Science & Chemical Process Technologies”, NTUA. Works at Piraeus Port Organization S.A. since 2002. She has held the position of Deputy Manager of the Property and Environmental Services Department, while since 2008 she has held the position of Head of the Environmental Protection Department of PPA SA.
It has over 20 years of experience in environmental management and port environmental licensing and in the handling&management of dangerous cargoes in ports. He is a member of the Sustainable Development Committee of ESPO and has participated in several EU cofinanced projects related to the development of environmental infrastructure as well as other environmental projects for the environmental management of ports and the implementation of environmental quality monitoring programs in ports. She is member of ESG Committee of PPA.
She has attended seminars and has been certified in the fields of alternative fuels (Lloyd’s Maritime Academy, Certificate in Alternative Fuels Green & Blue fuels, LNG, LPG, Methanol, Ammonia, Hydrogen, CO2 Capture, Zero emissions fuels), in the principles of ESG reporting (in alternative waste management (Certificate on Sustainable Waste Management – Recycling and Biological Treatment), in the management and transport of dangerous goods (ADR certified).
The ship.energy platform provides a comprehensive, accurate – and always independent – view of the multi-faceted global marine fuels industry and its evolving and critical role in the decarbonisation of shipping and ports.
A key element of the ship.energy offering is Bunkerspot magazine which, for over 20 years, has delivered news, analysis, articles and interviews about the technical, operational, commercial, environmental and legal aspects of bunkering. Over that time, the magazine has established itself as a world leader in providing information and insights on the marine fuels sector, which is delivered by a strong and highly experienced editorial team alongside top industry experts.
As the shipping and port sectors are evolving to meet energy transition targets and ambitions, Bunkerspot magazine is keeping its readers abreast of these changes and developments, as well as innovations and trends in maritime and vessel technologies.
To discuss how your organisation can benefit from the market intelligence and solutions provided by ship.energy, contact: Lesley Bankes-Hughes, Managing Director Tel: +44 1295 814455, Email: lesley@ship.energy
www.ship.energy
Day 2 DAY 2
ANAËLLE BOUDRY Senior Policy Advisor, ESPO
Anaëlle Boudry works at the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) in the role of Senior Policy Advisor and advises on matters related to sustainable development, energy and blue growth. ESPO is the principal interface between European seaports and the European institutions and its policymakers. Dedicated to the waterborne transport sector, she also worked for two years as policy advisor in the European Federation of Inland Ports (EFIP), focusing her attention on EU energy and climate policy.
Anaëlle holds a Master degree in Political Sciences, International Relations and Diplomacy from the University of Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, graduating with the highest honour.
Chemical Engineer & University Lecturer, Polytechnic University of Catalonia
During the development of the thesis, Martí also collaborated as an assistant lecturer in the subject ‘Control, Verification and Audit’ taught in the Master of Chemical Engineering of the Polytechnic University of Catalonia (UPC).
Between 2017 and 2023, Martí worked as an environmental consultant in Alenta medio ambiente, leading the environmental risk analysis department. He carried out a large number of Environmental Risk Analysis (ARMAs) for industrial facilities in the chemical, petrochemical, pharmaceutical, gas and waste management sectors, among others. Martí also led environmental audits in port terminals and undertook other port-related projects.
From September 2018 to July 2023, Martí also worked in the UPC as Associate Lecturer, teaching the subject Environmental Technology and Sustainability in the Industrial Engineering degree. In September 2023, Dr. Puig joined the UPC as a Lecturer, developing teaching and research in the Chemical Engineering Department of the UPC. As part of his academic responsibilities, Dr. Puig is currently supervising a PhD candidate whose research focus lies in the field of port environmental management. He also has participated in the supervision of several final degree and final master project.
Currently, Dr. Puig serves as a scientific coordinator of Ecoports, an EU initiative promoted by ESPO. In this role, he writes periodic reports analyzing the environmental performance of EU ports and contributes annually as an author of the ESPO Environmental Report.
Martí is the author of 10 scientific articles, 2 book chapters, and 3 articles in sector magazines, as well as more than 20. communications in conferences and congresses.
CHRIS WOOLDRIDGE
Science Coordinator EcoPorts EcoSLC, and Visiting Research Fellow, Cardiff University, UK
Chris has worked on Research & Development and Training with the port sector since 1982 specializing in the environmental management of port and shipping operations. He contributed to the development of the EcoPorts tools and methodologies, and is active in their implementation internationally supported by the cooperation between ECOSLC (www.ecoslc. eu), the European Sea ports Organization (ESPO, www.espo.be) and the American Association of Port Authorities (www.aapa-ports.org). He acts as Reviewer of the EcoPorts’ Self-Diagnosis Methodology (SDM).
His training qualifications include qualified certification through the Course Developers Workshop under the UN Train-Sea-Coast Programme, and the LRQA Environmental Management Systems Auditor Training Course, Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance training Services, which are certified by the International Register of Certificated Auditors (IRCA).
Chris has delivered training courses on a range of environmental issues throughout Europe and in India, Ivory Coast of Africa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos, Taiwan, Malaysia and Colombia. He was Director of Studies, Marine Geography in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, UK until 2011.
www.europeanenergyinnovation.eu
A look into the adaptations needed to meet decarbonisation goals and address ecological transitions for logistics and supply chains.
CHRIS WOOLDRIDGE
Science Coordinator EcoPorts EcoSLC, and Visiting Research Fellow, Cardiff University, UK
Chris has worked on Research & Development and Training with the port sector since 1982 specializing in the environmental management of port and shipping operations. He contributed to the development of the EcoPorts tools and methodologies, and is active in their implementation internationally supported by the cooperation between ECOSLC (www.ecoslc. eu), the European Sea ports Organization (ESPO, www.espo.be) and the American Association of Port Authorities (www.aapa-ports.org). He acts as Reviewer of the EcoPorts’ Self-Diagnosis Methodology (SDM).
His training qualifications include qualified certification through the Course Developers Workshop under the UN Train-Sea-Coast Programme, and the LRQA Environmental Management Systems Auditor Training Course, Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance training Services, which are certified by the International Register of Certificated Auditors (IRCA).
Chris has delivered training courses on a range of environmental issues throughout Europe and in India, Ivory Coast of Africa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos, Taiwan, Malaysia and Colombia. He was Director of Studies, Marine Geography in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, UK until 2011.
Multimodality Project Director, HAROPA Port
Pierre de Bellabre is a graduate of the Rennes Institut des Études Politiques and holds a Masters 2 degree in Transport & Mobility from the Ecole des Ponts ParisTech and the Ecole d’Urbanisme in Paris. He has held the post of HAROPA PORT Multimodality Project Director since April 2024. Pierre de BELLABRE began his career with the Réseau Ferré de France (RFF) rail infrastructure authority in 2011. Holding general responsibility for socioeconomic research, he was in charge of executing market studies and building traffic forecasting models for freight.
Pierre later transferred to world of consultancy on strategy and organisation, providing support to numerous actors in the transport sector, among them:
- port authorities, mainly for their multimodal goals and issues. He has assisted many ports, HAROPA PORT in particular, in consolidating rail flows with their hinterland;
- other infrastructure managers and transport operators, helping them define their development strategies, investment pathways, reorganisation projects and pricing strategies;
- organising authorities for the negotiation of contracts with transport operators. Pierre de Bellabre can also point to professional experience in engineering services and he has worked with major industrial firms in the rail sector, providing support for their engineering and R&D programmes, especially in the rail signalling domain.
Pierre has been with HAROPA PORT since April 2024 in the post of Multimodal Project Director. As such, he is charged with defining HAROPA PORT’s multimodal strategy and overseeing its implementation. This covers rail, river and road issues and the facilitation of goods throughput across the whole of HAROPA PORT.
He is answerable to Deputy CEO Antoine Berbain who heads the Paris regional office and multimodality.
Commercial Manager – Logistics, Port of Moerdijk
Kyra Lemmens is an experienced commercial manager with a demonstrated history of working in the field of international shipping & logistics.
From 2023 she is responsible for maintaining and increasing the shortsea volume via the port of Moerdijk in close collaboration with the terminals, shortsea shipping lines, rail operators and other logistic companies in the port.
Until 2022 Kyra was Business Developer at iTanks, a knowledge and innovation platform for port related industry with the aim to accelerate innovations to make operational processes more safe, efficient, and sustainable.
From 2010 until 2018 she was as Sr. Project Manager at Rotterdam Port Promotion Council, responsible for international projects to initiate and expand international cargo flows for logistic companies via the port of Rotterdam.
JAYAND BALADIEN
‘Building the ultimate Dutch circular hotspot together’
How Port of Moerdijk makes work of the energy transition
Port for the community
A significant area in the Port of Moerdijk has been reserved for circular chemicals industry Port of Moerdijk’s Commercial Director Jayand Baladien tells us all about it, looks ahead to the raw materials transition and lists the challenges involved. ‘’We must solve problems together. We’ll all benefit from that ’
HOW SUCCESSFUL HAVE RECENT YEARS BEEN FOR YOU COMMERCIALLY?
‘You can answer that question from various angles . We are primarily a port. Transshipment has seen some ups and downs in the last three and a half years. Volumes rose during the corona period due to an increase in Dutch consumerism. Those were highly successful years for us. We saw a fall in the container segment last year, although transshipment of bulk cargo increased. In the first two quarters of this year, you see that the economy is cooling off and volumes are dropping. That’s a national trend affecting all sea ports We’ve worked hard on the modal shift in recent years. We’re encouraging transport by rail and waterborne transport instead of by road. Regrettably, most transport is currently by lorry. When volumes are under pressure, transport companies want to keep their fleet on the road Rail and inland shipping transport are not flexible enough to still be an alternative when volumes are falling.’
AND WHAT’S THE SITUATION WITH RENTING OUT THE GROUNDS?
‘Positive. Three new companies have been added in the past four years: Mitsubishi Metal Recycling, Air Liquide and Van der Vlist. Logistics property developer DHG has also expanded and we’ve entered into good contracts with DSV and Lidl, among others, for our new logistics park. The situation with new companies settling in Industrial Park Moerdijk is a bit more complicated. The industry has had some good years but things have not been going so well the last eighteen months. That goes for the industry as a whole. And of course, we are adhering fully to our requirements in terms of circularity for Industrial Park Moerdijk too.’
WHAT ARE YOU MOST SATISFIED ABOUT, SINCE YOU STARTED HERE AS COMMERCIAL DIRECTOR THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO?
‘The fact that Logistics Park Moerdijk (LPM) has been allocated, that there’s almost 1 million square metres, allowing us to double our total warehousing capacity in Moerdijk We worked on that for three years. DSV laid the first stone for the new warehouse on the park in March. We also created an internal road, including a flyover across the A17, connecting the existing port area with the new LPM – but only for freight traffic This extra bit of infrastructure should reduce the burden on the motorways and maintain accessibility And it also enables us to promote the multimodality Lorry movements can transport freight to short sea, inland shipping and rail terminals.’
THE PORT OF MOERDIJK ALSO HAS A ROBUST CHEMICALS INDUSTRY COMPONENT IN INDUSTRIAL PARK MOERDIJK. DOES THAT CONSIST MAINLY OF SHELL CHEMICALS PARK MOERDIJK?
‘Shell was the first party to locate in Industrial Park Moerdijk and it’s also the biggest. Unlike the refinery in Pernis, where fuels are produced, the chemicals park makes basic chemicals for plastics. Parties affiliated with Shell, such as LyondellBasell, Syensqo and KLK OLEO, also located here. Those companies produce chemicals for detergents and industrial coatings, among other things. Shell supplies them with products for that. In addition, Moerdijk has an energy producing cluster, where you’ll find the Attero waste-to-energy plant, which processes one million tonnes of waste a year, the RWE energy plant, a BMC where electricity is generated from chicken manure and Slibverbranding Noord-Brabant (SNB) which produces energy from sludge.’
IS IT TRUE THAT IN THE EXPANSION OF MOERDIJK INDUSTRIAL PARK, YOU’RE FOCUSING ONLY ON CIRCULAR BUSINESSES?
‘There is still 80 hectares of ground available. Of that, 25 hectares is earmarked for logistics, which require connections to water and rail. We’ll be putting that on the market this autumn. Of the remaining 55 hectares, 30 are reserved exclusively for circular chemicals industry. We’re doing that as part of our commitment to the future, looking only for industry that is future-resilient. We don’t want to be adding to CO2 emissions, we want to become CO2 negative Basically, we’re focusing on three pillars Firstly, the production of new plastic from waste plastics. Shell could be a buyer, for example. Secondly, one of the things the West Brabant region is known for is the cultivation of sugar beet. Sugar beet is perfect for the absorption of CO2.
‘WE’RE LOOKING ONLY FOR INDUSTRY THAT IS FUTURE-RESILIENT’
How great would it be if sugar beet could serve as raw material for the production of bio-based chemicals, such as methanol. The third pillar is circular batteries. When you look at the energy and raw materials transition in the Netherlands, large numbers of batteries are used. At the end of their lifespan, you could recover the raw materials from them and use them to make new batteries. That way, you can make the whole chain circular. This doesn’t exist in the Netherlands yet Moerdijk is an excellent place to facilitate something like that.’
‘The grounds at Moerdijk Industrial Park are in the high environmental category of 4 to 6. You’re talking heavy industry You don’t want to locate that on industrial estates near residential areas; so the port is the perfect place. We have a lot of knowledge and logistics expertise in this cluster so it’s the ultimate location for activities like that.’
ON THE SUBJECT OF LOCATING, ARE YOU EXPERIENCING ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS FROM THE CURRENT SOMEWHAT INCLEMENT INVESTMENT CLIMAT E?
‘One of the greatest challenges at present is the lack of clarity regarding nitrogen. It creates a barrier, even though several companies are looking for a solution by electrifying their production processes The congestion on the grid is another thing making it complicated for companies to locate Macroeconomic factors also play a part: the interest rate is significantly higher than it was four years ago . And another important point is that Europe – unlike the US and China – is not giving any pro-industrial signal Here in the Netherlands, we aren’t making a choice, which makes matters unclear for industrial companies looking to invest here. And make no mistake: we’re talking investments of 150 million euros in a surface area of 25,000 square metres While for a similar surface area for warehousing, you’re looking at an investment of 10 million euros. That’s a whole different ball game. Investments like this have to be recouped in thirty years, but you have to see that as feasible otherwise no-one is going to invest If you’re the Dutch government, you don’t have to embrace everything, but do at least make choices No answer at all is the worst possible answer.
Businesses will then look elsewhere. Every week, I talk with two businesses interested in locatin g here Some have good plans, not only in terms of the euros, but also from the point of view of climate and the strategic position of the Netherlands. I recently lost a lead. That company ticked all the boxes but could get absolutely no clarity about a 3 MW connection to the electricity grid They just didn’t get an answer, and that’s unacceptable It's unprofessional and it lost me the lead. We can’t leave this up to the utilities company alone. Clarity is really necessary if we are to resolve congestion of the grid.’
DOES THAT ALSO APPLY TO THE NITROGEN ISSUE ?
‘We’ve been stuck with this issue for years now I know a party in Moerdijk that wants to expand, has the money for it from the parent company and had purchased ground Yet they called it off at the last minute because of the emissions during the construction. And all the while, goods are imported to the Benelux countries from Germany, which causes more emissions than production here would We too are prevented from expanding our railway yard because that would cause nitrogen emissions. But I’m still optimistic. These are matters that must be possible to resolve. Let’s tackle them together – we’ll all benefit together too ’
HOW ARE YOU PREPARING FOR THE RAW MATERIALS TRANSITION ?
‘On the one hand, by searching for the kind of industry I was talking about earlier and on the other, by taking a next step with the current players at Moerdijk. We meet every quarter with the Moerdijk industrial group to share knowledge and discuss matters. We also collaborate with companies. For example, one company wants to add an activity to the production process but has to apply for a permit to do so. We help with that, with the aim of having it go as smoothly as possible ’
IS IT RIGHT THAT MORE SPACE IS NEEDED FOR THE RAW MATERIALS TRANSITION ?
‘Yes, all transitions take space and – because space is limited in our country – it has to be dealt with smartly it Every year, three and a half million tonnes of naphtha is transported from Pernis to Moerdijk through a pipeline. The process is much more laborious when
you realise that the space used doubles because existing and new processes have to run adjacent to each other. You can’t just switch off a power plant for three years until a new plant is completed. We need power for the intervening period too.’
‘MOERDIJK IS AN EXCELLENT PLACE TO FACILITATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT’
LASTLY: HOW DO YOU INCREASE SUSTAINABILTY AS A PORT A UTHORITY ?
‘We have BREEAM certification. All our activities are linked to sustainable tenders. When installing infrastructure, we look at the circular applications of the raw materials – for asphalt, for example Thanks to our solar park, the port authority is energy negative In conclusion: we’re not only a sustainably operating port authority, we also have a clear vision of how the port should look in the future. We will have to resolve any problems together There’s a good reason why the Port of Moerdijk’s pay-off is “Connecting you” ’
Jayand Baladien studied technique at de Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences and business studies at the University of Applied Sciences in The Hague. He has worked in Moerdijk since 2013, initially in various positions at Wuppermann, and has been commercial director at Port of Moerdijk since December 2020 .
Text: Annemiek Govaart and Amber Prinsen
One major theme for Moerdijk Port Authority, besides the focus on modal shift and raw materials transition, is the energy transition. So up till now, at Moerdijk port and industrial estate, we have been mainly concerned with infrastructure and available space, with the same major challenges regarding grid congestion as elsewhere in the Netherlands.
The Cluster Energy Strategy (CES) gives insight into which infrastructure our businesses need. For example, it makes clear that the current electricity grid is inadequate, compared to the ambitions of our industry. Based on the conclusions in the first CES, the MIEK (multi-year infrastructure energy and climate programme) now includes the realisation of a new 380/150kV station at Moerdijk to meet future needs Talks with TenneT and Moerdijk Municipality about location and the participation process are already in full swing.
At present, the CES is being drawn up for the third time, to once more give insight into demand and supply among our industrial clients and to coordinate with the grid operators, so they can anticipate the expected demand In addition, a start is being made in CES 3.0 on addressing the challenges accompanying the raw materials transition; possibly an even greater challenge and one we want to commit to fully.
SYNERGY
As well as in the CES, Moerdijk port authority also collaborates with other partners on the energy transition For example, Pilot MIEK for the Moerdijk region was set up two years ago, initiated by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the province of Noord -Brabant and the port authority The fact is that there are multiple infrastructure projects heading for Moerdijk.
By way of this pilot, the port authority hopes to help accelerate, expand and enhance those projects. The Delta Rhine Corridor (DRC) is a pipeline system for hydrogen, among other things, and runs from Rotterdam, past Moerdijk, and on to Germany There is also capacity reserved in this DRC for CO2 and direct-current connections for industry (TenneT). It’s not yet clear which route the DRC will take but we know that the SVB strip in the Netherlands is the starting point.
Another infrastructure project is VAWOZ (exploration of landfall wind at sea). The wind generated on the North Sea could possibly make a landfall at Moerdijk (as long as the 380kv station gets realised). This too will have an impact on space Lastly, a heat pipeline may possibly be laid from the RWE plant in Geertruidenberg to Moerdijk. Moerdijk is increasingly referred to as “Power Port”
As a port authority, we are personally carrying out a number of projects around the energy transition. Six months ago, for example, we joined forces with TNO and various emitters to start a study on our grounds into the possibilities for integrated CO2 capture - the DIMMER project (Decarbonising the Industry of Moerdijk by Managing Emissions Regionally).
The more companies that take part, the lower the costs of the concept. This would make it economically feasible for both large and small emitters in M oerdijk to capture their CO2 emissions Sadly, the integrated CCS approach proved to be impossible in practice, resulting in us now focusing on the integration of infrastructure for a CCS network.
Another project is Zero Emission Services (ZES). It’s a battery system that provides exchangeable energy containers for new and existing inland shipping vessels. The containers are fully charged with green electricity and when empty, can be exchanged in no time for fully charged ones at one of the exchange and charging stations
We are also working with various partners on the realisation of two shore-based power connections for sea-going vessels. There have been such connections for inland vessels for more than ten years but the connections for sea-going vessels demand more capacity and come with the necessary technical challenges. They will be ready for maritime shipping by the end of 2024.
As the port authority, we’re proud that since the 1960s, Port of Moerdijk has grown into a multi-modal hub with European charisma, for sustainable logistics and process industry We are a maritime port of national importance.
We are aware of not only the challenges that face us tomorrow, but also of the greater ones for our living environment. We aim to play a role in tackling them. On the one hand, through focus on modal shift, by contributing to sustainability and accessibility On the other, by dealing smartly with space, because as a port and logistics and industrial hub, we are the ideal location for the raw materials and energy transitions.
Port of Moerdijk has the potential to expand as a place where knowledge and innovation come together Safety and sustainability are anchor values for us A subject such as circular chemicals industry is at the top of our agenda
As a port authority, we are the ultimate connector To facilitate transitions, we work with businesses, governments, knowledge partners, local residents, the region and across borders. We want to expand the scope and impact of Port of Moerdijk Reliable, resolute. Connecting you, connecting tomorrow.
Head of Strategic Development, Port of Triest
Head of Strategic Development and Coordinator of Special Projects Unit, Port Network Authority of the Eastern Adriatic Sea - port of Monfalcone and port of Trieste, Italy, EU.
Head of the Unit since Year 2017, a crew of 11 professionals. Previous experience in EU funds and financial blending, international relations, safety, strategic planning and as analyst of maritime sector and trades.
A land borne individual, discovering to be a sea & ocean enthusiast
ULRICH MALCHOW Managing Director,
Port Feeder Barge
Ulrich Malchow started his career as a shipping trainee in the liner division of Hapag-Lloyd AG in Hamburg. Subsequently he studied naval architecture and mechanical engineering at the University of Hamburg and later at the Technical University of Aachen (RWTH Aachen). Following his studies, he joined the Thyssen group of companies as a management trainee. At the group’s Blohm+Voss shipyard Ulrich rose to head both the sales and projects department for commercial vessels and mega yachts.
After leaving the shipyard he became managing director of the biggest barge operator within the port of Hamburg. Later Ulrich founded Port Feeder Barge GmbH to design, develop and eventually operate the new type of a “Port Feeder Barge” for advanced container logistics within the port of Hamburg.
In parallel Ulrich was appointed full professor for Maritime Economics in 2011 at Bremen University of Applied Sciences for 5 years.
Currently he serves also a senior consultant specialising in intermodal and maritime logistics as well as in carbon capture for ships.
The HAROPA port group consisting of the ports of Le Havre, Rouen and Paris was founded in 2021 to…
• build up a highly effective regional logistics system,
• shift more cargo and in particular containers to the mass transport modes of rail and river,
• make use of innovations to improve the performance and competitiveness of the ports,
• decarbonize the transport and cargo handling along the Seine axis.
A new type of harbor vessel to be operated within and between the ports of Le Havre and Rouen could help to continue on that path.
The Port Feeder Barge (PFB) is a self-propelled container barge which is equipped with its own full size container crane, providing independency from the availability and most importantly from the high costs of the quayside gantry cranes. Hence, contrary to conventional barges it can offer a green and competitive alternative to road haulage.
The internationally patented concept has been developed to considerably improve the internal container logistics in major and minor container ports and to reduce its ecological footprint. Key element of the self-propelled pontoon type of vessel of 168 TEU capacity is its own full-scale heavy duty container crane mounted on a high column which normally could only be found on seagoing vessels (Fig. 1). The PFB is of double-ended configuration, intended to make it extremely flexible in connection with the sideward mounted crane. Due to the wide beam of the vessel no operational restrictions (stability) for the crane shall occur. The vessel is equipped with 2 electrically driven rudder propellers at each end in order to achieve excellent manoeuvrability and the same speed in both directions. Hence the vessel can easily turn on the spot or even navigate sidewards. All containers are stowed on deck while half of them are secured by cell guides, the other half is not, enabling the vessel to carry also containers in excess of 40ft length as well as any over-dimensional boxes or even break bulk cargo. 14 reefer plugs allow for the carriage of electrically driven temperature controlled boxes.
Unusual for a shipboard crane it is equipped with an automatic spreader extendable from 20 to 45ft including a turning device. A telescopic over height frame to handle container flats with over height cargo is also carried on board. While it looks like a standard shipboard crane, all its mechanical components have been especially designed for continuous operation – unlike standard shipboard cranes, which are designed for operation only every few weeks when a seagoing vessel is in a port which lacks from quayside cranes. The on-board crane has a capacity of 40 tons under the spreader with an outreach of 27 meters (maximum outreach: 29 m). With a skilled driver the crane performance is estimated to 20 moves/hour.
Fig. 1: Port Feeder Barge (computer rendering)
Main Data
Type: self-sustained, self-propelled, double-ended container barge
Length o.a.:
Beam o.a.:
Height to main deck:
m
m
m
Max. draft (as harbour vessel): 3.10 m
Deadweight (as harbour vessel): 2,500 t
Tonnage: approx. 2,000 GT
Fuel: hydrogen, ammonia, methanol or battery
Propulsion: 2 x 2 electrical rudder propeller of 4 x 280 kW
Speed: 7 knots at 3.1 m draft
Class: GL Ж 100 A5 K20 Barge equipped for the carriage of containers, Solas II-2, Rule 19 Ж MC Aut
Capacity: 168 TEU (thereof 50% in cellguides), 14 reefer plugs
Crane: LIEBHERR CBW 49(39)/27(29) Litronic (49 t at 27 m outreach)
Spreader: automatic, telescopic, 6 flippers, turning device, over height frame
Accommodation: 6 persons (in single cabins)
is working independently from quayside equipment at a deep sea terminal requiring only a small gap between two deep sea vessels (computer rendering)
Due to its short length of 64 meters the PFB needs only a small gap between two deep sea vessels at a terminal for self- sustained operation (Fig. 2). When berthed, the PFB is able, without being shifted alongside the quay, to load or discharge 84 TEU in three layers between the rails of a typical quayside gantry crane (Fig. 3b). This is more than sufficient with a total loading capacity of 168 TEU. That is why the full outreach of the crane is not always needed. Berthing the vessel with the crane on the opposite side of the quay (Fig. 3a) would speed up the crane operation as the turning time of the outrigger is less. The height of the crane column is sufficient to serve even high quays in open tidewater ports at low tide while stacking the containers in several layers.
Due to its short length of 64 meters the PFB needs only a small gap between two deep sea vessels at a terminal for self- sustained operation (Fig. 2) When berthed, the PFB is able, without being shifted alongside the quay, to load or discharge 84 TEU in three layers between the rails of a typical quayside gantry crane (Fig. 3b). This is more than sufficient with a total loading capacity of 168 TEU. That is why the full outreach of the crane is not always needed. Berthing the vessel with the crane on the opposite side of the quay (Fig. 3a) would speed up the crane operation as the turning time of the outrigger is less. The height of the crane column is sufficient to serve even high quays in open tidewater ports at low tide while stacking the containers in several layers.
The operation of the PFB is not limited to inside seaports. As the hull is classified according to the notification for seagoing vessels the operation in (sheltered) open waters off a coast is also possible which opens some further interesting opportunities for employment.
The operation of the PFB is not limited to inside seaports. As the hull is classified according to the notification for seagoing vessels the operation in (sheltered) open waters off a coast is also possible which opens some further interesting opportunities for employment.
The vessel can be physically operated by a minimum crew of 3 whereas in total 6 persons can be accommodated in single cabins.
The vessel can be physically operated by a minimum crew of 3 whereas in total 6 persons can be accommodated in single cabins.
Bundling containers by waterborne transport is already much more energy efficient per TEU than road haulage of single containers and causes less emissions per TEU. Also the standard shipboard crane of the PFB is less energy consuming than the huge quayside gantry cranes of which many are meanwhile designed to serve 20,000 TEU vessels and above. These cranes are completely over dimensioned and consequently work only at very low efficiency when serving small vessels like inland barges.
Bundling containers by waterborne transport is already much more energy efficient per TEU than road haulage of single containers and causes less emissions per TEU. Also the standard shipboard crane of the PFB is less energy consuming than the huge quayside gantry cranes of which many are meanwhile designed to serve 20,000 TEU vessels and above. These cranes are completely over dimensioned and consequently work only at very low efficiency when serving small vessels like inland barges.
The PFB is running on electricity for propulsion and its crane. The energy supply can be arranged 100% carbon free if the respective energy storage medium are available and produced by renewable energies. As per now 4 green storage media are available in principle (hydrogen, ammonia, methanol, battery). The fuels can be converted into electricity either by means of a combustion engine or by a fuel cell. In total 7 different combinations are available (Fig. 4). For the special case of the PFB it might be advisable to 'containerize' also the energy storage, as the PFB could 'load' the energy with its on-board crane In this case also the energy supply to the vessel could be easily arranged by using intermodal modes. All 3 types of fuel can be carried in special tank containers which has been common practice for decades now. Battery containers have been already introduced into inland shipping as well.
The PFB is running on electricity for propulsion and its crane. The energy supply can be arranged 100% carbon free if the respective energy storage medium are available and produced by renewable energies. As per now 4 green storage media are available in principle (hydrogen, ammonia, methanol, battery). The fuels can be converted into electricity either by means of a combustion engine or by a fuel cell. In total 7 different combinations are available (Fig. 4). For the special case of the PFB it might be advisable to ‘containerize’ also the energy storage, as the PFB could ‘load’ the energy with its on-board crane. In this case also the energy supply to the vessel could be easily arranged by using intermodal modes. All 3 types of fuel can be carried in special tank containers which has been common practice for decades now. Battery containers have been already introduced into inland shipping as well.
4: Possible alternatives for energy supply
Choosing the most favorable combination is not an easy task as many aspects have to be considered (e.g. prices, efficiencies, weights, availability, technology readiness, logistics, safety, handling, maintenance). Some of them are depending very much on the specific local conditions.
Choosing the most favorable combination is not an easy task as many aspects have to be considered (e.g. prices, efficiencies, weights, availability, technology readiness, logistics, safety, handling, maintenance). Some of them are depending very much on the specific local conditions.
As the PFB has an air draft of approx. 20 m on the river Seine the Pont Guillaume-le-Conquérant Bridge in Rouen marks the upriver limit for PFB operation. However, there are many container handling facilities with water access existing within and between the ports of Le Havre and Rouen with certainly a lot of containers to be moved in between (Fig. 5). This is what can be shifted to the PFB
As the PFB has an air draft of approx. 20 m on the river Seine the Pont Guillaume-leConquérant Bridge in Rouen marks the upriver limit for PFB operation. However, there are many container handling facilities with water access existing within and between the ports of Le Havre and Rouen with certainly a lot of containers to be moved in between (Fig. 5) This is what can be shifted to the PFB.
For simple reasons the costs of a container carried by the PFB (incl. handling by its crane) are lower than by road haulage: The specific investment per TEU (incl. crane) into the PFB (168 TEU) is less than into a truck (1-2 TEU), especially when potential subsidies are being considered (provided both are running on the same fuel). Furthermore, the specific personnel costs per TEU of the PFB are much lower than of truck: With a typical crew of 4 the PFB can be almost regarded as an ‘autonomous floating truck’ with only 0.02 ‘drivers’/TEU (not even depending on any artificial intelligence for autonomous navigation)!
For simple reasons the costs of a container carried by the PFB (incl. handling by its crane) are lower than by road haulage: The specific investment per TEU (incl. crane) into the PFB (168 TEU) is less than into a truck (1-2 TEU), especially when potential subsidies are being considered (provided both are running on the same fuel). Furthermore, the specific personnel costs per TEU of the PFB are much lower than of truck: With a typical crew of 4 the PFB can be almost regarded as an 'autonomous floating truck' with only 0.02 'drivers'/TEU (not even depending on any artificial intelligence for autonomous navigation)! ����
Further container facilities are planned to be developed by HAROPA. However, the expected number of containers for some of the new facilities would not justify the investment into quayside cranes. While having a PFB in service there is no need for such cranes.
Further container facilities are planned to be developed by HAROPA. However, the expected number of containers for some of the new facilities would not justify the investment into quayside cranes. While having a PFB in service there is no need for such cranes.
Fig. 5: Existing container handling facilities within and between the ports of Le Havre (above) and Rouen
Fig. 5: Existing container handling facilities within and between the ports of Le Havre (above) and Rouen.
Deploying the PFB on a regular basis as a liner service ('bus mode'), e.g. one round trip per 48 hours with a fixed starting point and a regular sequence of calling points, would also allow the booking of single containers.
Deploying the PFB on a regular basis as a liner service (‘bus mode’), e.g. one round trip per 48 hours with a fixed starting point and a regular sequence of calling points, would also allow the booking of single containers.
As far as hinterland transport of containers is concerned, inland navigation is facing a dilemma in almost all container ports. On the one hand there is a common understanding that its share in hinterland transport has to be substantially increased – for capacity and climate/environmental reasons. On the other hand, inland waterway vessels often have to berth at the facilities which are only tailor made for the biggest container vessels (24,000 TEU). Not surprisingly but most disadvantageously inland navigation enjoys the last priority when it comes to berth allocation.
As far as hinterland transport of containers is concerned, inland navigation is facing a dilemma in almost all container ports. On the one hand there is a common understanding that its share in hinterland transport has to be substantially increased – for capacity and climate/environmental reasons. On the other hand, inland waterway vessels often have to berth at the facilities which are only tailor made for the biggest container vessels (24,000 TEU). Not surprisingly but most disadvantageously inland navigation enjoys the last priority when it comes to berth allocation.
Inland barges have to call at many facilities. E.g. in Rotterdam the average number of terminal calls per vessel is about 10 whereas in about 50 % of the calls only less than 6 containers are handled! This kind of inefficient and not coordinated ‘terminal hopping’ is very time consuming and each delay at a terminal results in an incredible accumulated waiting time during the entire port stay. Not surprisingly only 1/3 of the port time is used for productive loading/unloading operation.
Inland barges have to call at many facilities. E.g. in Rotterdam the average number of terminal calls per vessel is about 10 whereas in about 50 % of the calls only less than 6 containers are handled! This kind of inefficient and not coordinated 'terminal hopping' is very time consuming and each delay at a terminal results in an incredible accumulated waiting time during the entire port stay. Not surprisingly only 1/3 of the port time is used for productive loading/unloading operation.
The PFB could ease this dilemma by acting as a dedicated 'floating terminal' for inland navigation. During its daily round voyage the PFB was collecting and distributing the containers also for inland navigation and would act as a consolidator. Once a day, the PFB calls at a dedicated berth to meet with the inland barges where the containers are being exchanged ship-to-ship by its own gear, independently from any terminal equipment. Not even a quay is needed but the transhipment operation could take place somewhere
The PFB could ease this dilemma by acting as a dedicated ‘floating terminal’ for inland navigation. During its daily round voyage the PFB was collecting and distributing the containers also for inland navigation and would act as a consolidator. Once a day, the PFB calls at a dedicated berth to meet with the inland barges where the containers are being exchanged ship-to-ship by its own gear, independently from any terminal equipment. Not even a quay is needed but the transhipment operation could take place somewhere midstream at the dolphins as a virtual terminal call for the inland barges (Fig. 6). With a capacity of 168 TEU the PFB has enough buffer capacity for intermediate stowage of the containers. 6
containers
Infrastructure Development for Multimodal Services
midstream at the dolphins as a virtual terminal call for the inland barges (Fig. 6). With a capacity of 168 TEU the PFB has enough buffer capacity for intermediate stowage of the containers
6: The Port Feeder Barge is serving an inland barge midstream (computer rendering)
Especially the transhipment between bigger and smaller inland barges which nowadays takes place in Gennevilliers to facilitate river transport of container up to the urban Paris region with all the low bridges could be already done in Rouen by the PFB
Especially the transhipment between bigger and smaller inland barges which nowadays takes place in Gennevilliers to facilitate river transport of container up to the urban Paris region with all the low bridges could be already done in Rouen by the PFB.
Especially the transhipment between bigger and smaller inland barges which nowadays takes place in Gennevilliers to facilitate river transport of container up to the urban Paris region with all the low bridges could be already done in Rouen by the PFB
3.3 Emergency Response
3.3 Emergency Response
a grounded 20,000
a grounded 20,000 TEU vessel
The PFB can also be used as a stand-by emergency response vessel for the quick lightering of grounded container vessels.
The PFB can also be used as a stand-by emergency response vessel for the quick lightering of grounded container vessels
The PFB can also be used as a stand-by emergency response vessel for the quick lightering of grounded container vessels
It has to be conceded that virtually no major container port is really prepared for such incidents. The bigger the vessel the less salvage equipment is available. To lighter a 20,000 TEU vessel a floating crane with a hook height of approx. 60 m is needed. For serving such mega vessels the PFB had to be slightly enlarged by extending the crane beam and heightening the crane column (Fig. 7).
It has to be conceded that virtually no major container port is really prepared for such incidents. The bigger the vessel the less salvage equipment is available. To lighter a 20,000 TEU vessel a floating crane with a hook height of approx. 60 m is needed. For serving such mega vessels the PFB had to be slightly enlarged by extending the crane beam and heightening the crane column (Fig. 7).
It has to be conceded that virtually no major container port is really prepared for such incidents. The bigger the vessel the less salvage equipment is available. To lighter a 20,000 TEU vessel a floating crane with a hook height of approx. 60 m is needed. For serving such mega vessels the PFB had to be slightly enlarged by extending the crane beam and heightening the crane column (Fig. 7).
With the exception of the ‘Ever Forward’ only very fortunate circumstances have prevented the need for lightering operations with some of the most spectacular groundings of mega container vessels in the recent past (Tab. 1). With makeshift equipment it took 35 long days to lighter the rather small ‘Ever Forward’ and get her afloat again. 7
Infrastructure Development for Multimodal Services
Ship Size Year
CSCL Indian Ocean 19,000 TEU 2016 River Elbe 6 days
CSCL Jupiter 13,300 TEU 2017 River Scheldt 1 day
Ever Given 20,400 TEU 2021 Suez Canal 6 days
Ever Forward 12,000 TEU 2022 Chesapeake Bay 35 days
Any major container port which claims to be ‘green’ has to make provisions for such scenarios as a stranded vessel can easily suffer from structural damage which could cause a serious oil spill. Furthermore, it could completely block important waterways (‘Ever Given’) or the access to important ports for weeks.
The introduction of the PFB concept could reduce the ecological footprint of container logistics within the HAROPA ports (and in other ports as well) while at the same time significant improvements for container logistics were achieved (win-win-situation).
Despite its innovative character (the concept is worldwide unique and protected by patents) it can be concluded that the introduction of the PFB is not a technical challenge. Apart from the deliberately innovative power generation, all other components represent proven shipbuilding technology.
However, the concept requires a new kind of cooperation among all the relevant stakeholders within the port. Hence, new paths of joint efforts have to be followed when introducing the PFB in order to get the full ecological and logistical return out of the concept.
A look into the latest investment initiatives supporting sustainability of ports.
DR. MARK VAN DER VEEN
Director of the Graduate School of Business, University of Amsterdam
Dr. Mark van der Veen is director of the Graduate School of Business at University of Amsterdam, responsible for the MSc programmes in Business Administration, Finance, Accountancy & Control and Entrepreneurship. His focus in teaching and research has always been on the interaction between business and sustainability. For his PhD research at Erasmus University Rotterdam, he studied the organization and success of green product development projects. Mark was involved in several national and international studies on port environmental management, including ECOPORTS in Europe, and auditing and training projects with seaports in Vietnam and Cambodia. His special interest is in the strategic, economic and organizational aspects of port environmental management.
LISA HUBERT
Investment Director: Sustainable Ocean Fund, Mirova
Lisa has more than 15 years of experience originating, structuring and managing investments in the natural capital and the sustainable commodity and blue economy space. After an initial focus on frontier markets as an economist with United Nation agencies and the World Bank, she pivoted towards private impact investing in the impact VC and private equity space. She has on-the-ground operational experience and strong networks in many countries in Latam, Africa, Asia and the Middle East.
She is currently an Investment Director at Mirova, an asset management company dedicated to sustainable investing and an affiliate of Natixis Investment Managers. She has sourced and structured late-stage VC and early growth deals in the are of sustainable marine ingredients, aquatech, sustainable aquaculture and ocean pollution mitigation. As part of Mirova’s ocean strategy, the team is focusing growingly on the green shipping and green port sectors.
Lisa is certified with the French Institute of Board Members and SciencePo Paris and has held several board seats in the blue economy space with companies ranging from start-ups to more mature companies in a growth stage. She is a board member of two marine ingredients companies, a green port infrastructure project and several other blue economy companies.
TIM VERHOEVEN Projects & Policy Manager
Sustainable
Shipping,
Port of Antwerp-Bruges
Tim Verhoeven is a Port Environment Expert at the Port of Antwerp – Bruges. His focus lies on climate impact and air emissions of shipping.
As an environmental expert with over 15 years of experience in his field, he has built up a wide range of expertise regarding port operations, port excellence and environmental impact of shipping.
In his current role, he is representing the view of the Port of Antwerp – Bruges on sustainable shipping and the port’s role as a worldwide frontrunner.
He is involved in projects on alternative fuels, onshore power supply and port incentives and active on international and European maritime policy.
Sharing knowledge and strong connections are essential to develop the Port as a home port for a sustainable future.
How the Port of Antwerp – Bruges Funding Desk applies funding opportunities to realise its decarbonization goals.
Over the past years EU policy and legislative initiatives combined with financial support have been key to kick-start and support important (decarbonization) projects from POAB. Within POAB we follow up closely on national, regional and European policy and regulatory initiatives as well as subsequent funding opportunities. The policy department of POAB looks closely at these initiatives to set the right framework in terms of level playing field, funding, sustainable targets, trade environment, industrial climate, connectivity policy, …
The quest to match relevant funding opportunities to our business strategy and strategic projects is managed by the funding desk. A dedicated team of 7 persons are working day in day out to screen funding opportunities, match them with our strategic projects, manage and monitor those projects, and do the financial and administrative follow up. We tend to be selective in terms of in which projects we participate and only submit when fully aligned with our business strategy and ambition.
It is a conscious choice to build up and keep this expertise in-house which pays off. POAB is seen as a trustworthy partner and has been building up a steady reputation both within funded projects as coordinator and/or as project partners, as well as in relation to the funding provider such as the EC.
This has resulted in success rate of 6 approved projects out of 10 submissions for the year 2023 and currently 19 funded projects are operational where POAB serves as a coordinator or partner. These projects account for 249 mio of funding of which 66 mio of funding is for projects delivered by POAB. Around 24 FTE’s working within POAB to realise these projects are financed through funding.
The POAB funding desk also serves its port community. We guide, support and lobby for partners in our port community based on their specific needs. For example we actively lobbied for a call for projects on onshore power supply with the regional government and POAB explicitly did not apply for funding itself but gave way for port companies to apply for funding. In other cases we do not participate ourselves as a beneficiary in the project but provide a test environment for a certain use case or product from a company to be tested.
We optimise the funding mix meaning we address a broad spectrum of funding sources and mechanisms and carefully screen what type of mechanism is best fit for a certain project. Obviously this depends on the theme a project relates to (e.g. renewable energy, transport,…), but also the phase a project is in (e.g. TRL level, feasibility study versus pilot testing,…)
Figure 4 Funding Mix
Finally we also look forward and keep up with new contexts that affect our Port platforms and operations and consider the future challenges ahead. Today’s outlook requires new answers to tackle impacts of climate change, geopolitical challenges and conflicts, economic instability and a EU industry under pressure. Also in terms of funding and financing mechanisms we follow these current trends and challenges. We look at different funding schemes and combinations of funding and financial mechanisms (e.g. loans, investment funds,…) to optimally address the challenges we face. To illustrate the investment needs of European ports: Espo (2022) estimated a need of €80 billion over next 10 years, in which sustainability and energy transition are the 2nd most important investment category.
WILLEM SLENDEBROEK
Senior Expert Ports and Shipping, MTBS
Mr. Slendebroek has over 30 years’ experience in shipping and port related consultancy business. He started his career in 1993 in the port of Rotterdam as project leader in integrated transport EDI automation projects on container terminals and inland water transport projects. He worked for Nedlloyd and CoeClerici, major shipping companies in The Netherlands and Monaco where he built extensive experiences in the shipping, chartering bulk trades and global markets. In 1998 he started Dynamar and joined the management team in 2000. He became senior consultant and project leader on several shipping and port development projects with subjects covering shipping analysis and developments, terminal operations and port efficiency, port marketing, port privatization (PPP’s), port policy and tariffs, portfolio analysis, traffic flow analysis & forecasting, logistics, and port master planning.
He also worked as international teacher and trainer at the Shipping and Transport College. Since 2015 he is senior port and shipping expert, project leader and coordinator of port projects with MTBS. During his career port projects were executed in several countries like South Africa, Ghana, Angola, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, India, Cyprus, Egypt, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Azerbaijan, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Panama and within the EU. He has performed master planning projects at major ports in Sri Lanka, Romania and Croatia. He has experience with EU, World Bank, EBRD, ADB and other financed projects in countries worldwide. At MTBS he is a green port specialist dealing with decarbonization of the port and shipping industry. He participated at several international conferences as speaker and organized training workshops on hydrogen and green ports during port projects and capacity building programs like for Port Finance International and the Dutch Nuffic programs.
DAWN RASMUSSEN Managing Director, Problems Solved Ltd
Logistics Consulting on a new level
Founder of Problems Solved Ltd, highly successful and strategic business leader. Provides pragmatic operational insights within the board environment to contribute to organisational growth. Efficiencies and development. Supports executive leadership teams in turning around business performance, identifying areas of opportunity within the wider market and subsequently increases profitability. Advises businesses on the path towards operational excellence, cost reduction, maximising the potential of key talent and technology within the business and ensuring scalable market leadership.
“I believe AI represents the fourth industrial revolution. Its accessibility to businesses of all sizes is remarkable. When harnessed correctly and applied appropriately, AI can be a powerful force for good, enhancing efficiency, service levels, and profitability.”
(EU Regulation 2024/1679, Adopted on June 13, 2024) and EU Funding on the green transition of the maritime sector.
CHRIS WOOLDRIDGE
Science Coordinator EcoPorts EcoSLC, and Visiting Research Fellow, Cardiff University, UK
Chris has worked on Research & Development and Training with the port sector since 1982 specializing in the environmental management of port and shipping operations. He contributed to the development of the EcoPorts tools and methodologies, and is active in their implementation internationally supported by the cooperation between ECOSLC (www.ecoslc. eu), the European Sea ports Organization (ESPO, www.espo.be) and the American Association of Port Authorities (www.aapa-ports.org). He acts as Reviewer of the EcoPorts’ Self-Diagnosis Methodology (SDM).
His training qualifications include qualified certification through the Course Developers Workshop under the UN Train-Sea-Coast Programme, and the LRQA Environmental Management Systems Auditor Training Course, Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance training Services, which are certified by the International Register of Certificated Auditors (IRCA).
Chris has delivered training courses on a range of environmental issues throughout Europe and in India, Ivory Coast of Africa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos, Taiwan, Malaysia and Colombia. He was Director of Studies, Marine Geography in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, UK until 2011.
EU TEN-T Coordinator for the North Sea Rhine Mediterranean, European Transport Corridor
Prof. Paweł Wojciechowski is a highly experienced economist, diplomat and lecturer currently serving as the European Coordinator for the North Sea – Rhine – Mediterranean Transport Corridor since September 2024. He has a rich background in finance, public policy, and international relations, with significant leadership experience in both public and private sectors. Prof. Wojciechowski has held several significant positions throughout his career.
In the years 2006-2020, he held the positions of Minister of Finance, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, CEO of the Polish Information and Foreign Investment Agency, Ambassador to the OECD and Chief Economist of the Social Insurance Institution. Between 1995 and 2005, he was a CEO of PTE Allianz Polska, CEO and Investment Director of TFI Atut, as well as Director of the Fund Management Branch of the Polish Development Bank. He served as an independent member of supervisory boards of financial market and infrastructure companies in Poland.
He is currently a member of the board of directors of the British global advisory company Whiteshield, as well as a member of the supervisory boards of Rockbridge TFI S.A and Centralny Port Komunikacyjny (CPK). At various times in his career, he has lectured at universities, including Harvard Kennedy School, John Carroll University and Leon Kozminski Academy, and most recently as a professor at Wszechnica Polska University in Warsaw.
EU TEN-T Coordinator for the European Maritime Space
Gesine Meissner is a renowned expert on European maritime policy and a former Member of the European Parliament (MEP). As an MEP from 2009 to 2019, she was a key figure in shaping policies on transport, fisheries and environmental sustainability, particularly in the maritime context. She chaired the European Parliament Intergroup on Seas, Rivers, Islands, and Coastal Areas (SEARICA), a platform that brought together policy makers, industry representatives and NGOs to promote sustainable maritime development.
Ms. Meissner has played a key role in numerous legislative efforts, including the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive and the Port Reception Facilities Directive, which aim to improve maritime safety and environmental protection in European ports. Her expertise also led to her appointment as Special Envoy of the President of the European Parliament on maritime policy in 2018.
Following her time in the European Parliament, Ms Meissner remained deeply involved in maritime policy, serving on the EU Mission Board on Healthy Oceans, Seas, Coastal and Inland Waters and chairing of German National Committee for the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development.
Since September 2024, Ms. Meissner has been the European Coordinator for the European Maritime Space under the revised Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) Regulation. In this role, she draws on her extensive maritime policy experience to improve the integration of maritime transport infrastructure into the wider EU transport network, with a focus on decarbonisation, sustainable development of European ports and promotion of short sea shipping.
EU TEN-T Coordinator for the North Sea Rhine Mediterranean, European Transport Corridor
Professor Carlo Secchi was born in Italy on February 4 1944. He was appointed European Coordinator for the TEN-T Atlantic Corridor on 12 March 2014. In addition to his European Coordinator role, Professor Secchi provides consultancy services to various national and foreign research institutes and universities, to Italian public institutions (including CNR – the Italian National Research Council) and the European Union. Mr. Secchi has previously undertaken a TEN-T Coordinator role between July 2009 and December 2013, overseeing the implementation of Priority Project 3 and Priority Project 19 (railways) between France, Spain and Portugal. Mr. Secchi also chaired the Expert Group on TEN-T financing that contributed to the revision of TEN-T and the launch of the Connecting Europe Facility in 2013.
Experienced
International
Strong
Massive
Excellent
Competitive
CHRIS WOOLDRIDGE
Science Coordinator EcoPorts EcoSLC, and Visiting Research Fellow, Cardiff University, UK
Chris has worked on Research & Development and Training with the port sector since 1982 specializing in the environmental management of port and shipping operations. He contributed to the development of the EcoPorts tools and methodologies, and is active in their implementation internationally supported by the cooperation between ECOSLC (www.ecoslc. eu), the European Sea ports Organization (ESPO, www.espo.be) and the American Association of Port Authorities (www.aapa-ports.org). He acts as Reviewer of the EcoPorts’ Self-Diagnosis Methodology (SDM).
His training qualifications include qualified certification through the Course Developers Workshop under the UN Train-Sea-Coast Programme, and the LRQA Environmental Management Systems Auditor Training Course, Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance training Services, which are certified by the International Register of Certificated Auditors (IRCA).
Chris has delivered training courses on a range of environmental issues throughout Europe and in India, Ivory Coast of Africa, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos, Taiwan, Malaysia and Colombia. He was Director of Studies, Marine Geography in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, UK until 2011.
Successful Port Integration for Meeting Net-Zero
MALTE SIEGERT Chairman, NABU Hamburg
Malte Siegert studied politics in Hamburg and joined NABU (Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union), Germany’s largest environmental organization, in 2003. For many years he has been head of environmental policy at the federal NABU office in Hamburg, where he mainly dealt with national and international port related issues as well as infrastructural projects and spatial planning. Since September 2020 Malte Siegert is Chairman of the federal NABU office in Hamburg.
Biodiversity is fundamental to sustaining life and supporting human prosperity, health and wellbeing1. Nature provides essential ecosystem services that can be categorized into four key functions: provisioning, regulatatory, cultural and supporting services. Provisioning services involve nature’s production of vital resources such as food, water, and oxygen and provides the basis for innovation and medicine. These services are integral to the economy, with over half of the world’s GDP – approximately $44 trillion – directly or indirectly reliant on natural resources2. Regulatory services include climate regulation through storing of carbon and control of local rainfall, the removal of pollutants by filtering the air and water, and protection from disasters such as landslides and coastal storms. Regulatory services moderate weather extremes and their impact (e. g. drought and floods). Cultural services encompass the inspiration, recreation, and spiritual value derived from nature, enriching human culture and well-being. Supporting services are fundamental processes such as photosynthesis and soil fertility, essential to the functioning of ecosystems and responsible for all other service categories.
The loss of biodiversity and the resulting degradation of ecosystem services have drastic consequences, leading to crop failures, natural disasters, and pandemics, resulting in immense, unpayable economic damages. The natural crisis presents consequences as severe as the climate crisis, threatening our collective future. Under a ‘business as usual’ scenario, the projected cost of compensating for lost ecosystem services over the next 50 years could reach $2.0 to $4.5 trillion annually2. This reality highlights the urgent need for biodiversity conservation and sustainable management of natural resources to protect both, our environment and economic stability for future generations. Agriculture, forestry, infrastructure development, resource extraction, and the industrial sector collectively account for about 60 percent of global biodiversity loss3. However, they also play a crucial role in its protection and restoration.
Businesses are key players in the fight for biodiversity. While it is the responsibility of policymakers to establish the right framework conditions, it is ultimately the private sector that must implement a biodiversity-friendly economy. Moreover, companies often have the ability to act more swiftly and purposefully than governments. To reverse the trend, we need ports playing an essential role in this effort, actively contributing to the preservation and enhancement of biodiversity3
Port and port businesses have undisputed ecological (land use) and social (air quality, climate) impacts. Due to port development land use is one of the mayor issues and a big challenge for nature. It is crucial that also ports take responsibility in terms of strategies to minimize their additional demand and adapt their spatial planning (e. g. ports as hubs for energy transition). But ports are- besides a high degree of sealing- often hotspots for biodiversity. On one hand nature can develop undisturbed as certain areas (river banks, fallow land) within the port are neither accessable for public nor of strategic economic value due to shape or location.
These opportunities for greening ports should be taken by port authorities to enhance the potential of nature there, where it might not be expected. In addition best practices could be made tangible for public to underline the attitude of ports that economic growth and ecologic systainability are two sides of the same coin.
Sources
1: NABU. Was ist Biodiversität? https://www.nabu.de/natur-und-landschaft/naturschutz/13654.html
2: United Nations Decade on Biodiversity. Living in harmony with nature. Ecosystem services. https://www.cbd.int/undb/ media/factsheets/undb-factsheet-ecoserv-en.pdf
3: NABU. Wirtschaft und Biodiversität in Einklang bringen. NABU und Boston Consulting Group stellen Studie zu Biodiversität und Wirtschaft vor. https://www.nabu.de/news/2020/09/28696.html
In the following are some exemplary green practices that ports can adopt to support this cause. The North Sea Port was awarded the ESPO Award 2023 for its project “Connecting nature in Ports and residential areas – Ghent Canal Zone and Moervaart Valley,” which focuses on developing the space between the industrial port and residential areas. The initiative, covering approximately 730 hectares across 16 sub-areas, goes beyond serving as a mere buffer zone by prioritizing nature development and restoration, thus promoting biodiversity and public support for commercial activities. The project also integrates recreational, agricultural, water management, cultural, and archaeological elements, reflecting North Sea Port’s commitment to corporate social responsibility and fostering a high-quality integration of port and residential environments4.
The Port Authority of Cartagena initiated the “Underwater forest of the port of Cartagena“ project with the goal of restoring the Posidonia oceanica meadows, also known as the “blue lung” of the Mediterranean. The recovery of Posidonia oceanica meadows brings significant benefits to ecosystems and society that lives in coastal areas. The project has successfully reintroduced Posidonia within the port’s marine space, achieving a high recovery success rate of 77%, while maintaining the commercial activity of the port. The initiative not only contributes to carbon capture but also improves water quality, supports biodiversity, and benefits the local ecosystem and the community by protecting the coastline. This pioneering effort represents a significant environmental achievement in the context of Spanish ports and the broader Mediterranean region, emphasizing the importance of protecting and expanding these vital underwater habitats in the fight against the natural and climate crisis. The Posidonia meadows structure the seabed and are the home to more than 400 plant and 1000 animal species. This has a positive impact both for traditional fishing in the area and for recreational activities that can enjoy a richer and more diverse ecosystem5.
In collaboration with conservation organizations such as Natuurpunt and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), targeted measures have been implemented to promote species diversity in the Port of Antwerp. The Kuifeend-Binnenweilanden nature reserve and the Opstal valley, both located in close proximity to the port, have seen substantial increases in flora and fauna populations, particularly breeding and migratory birds, due to restoration efforts and sustainable water management. These areas, characterized by a mosaic of ponds, marshes, and polders, provide ideal conditions for many bird species as overwintering, resting, and breeding grounds. The establishment of buffer zones and the use of solar-powered pumps for water regulation are examples of innovative approaches that can enhance biodiversity in port areas6
Sources
4: ESPO Award. 2023. North Sea Port wins the ESPO Award 2023 and ESPO celebrates its 30 years. https://www.espo.be/ news/north-sea-port-wins-the-espo-award-2023
5: ESPO Award. 2023. ESPO Award 2023: let us present the shortlisted projects: Port Authority of Cartagena. https://www. espo.be/news/espo-award-2023-let-us-present-the-shortlisted-pro
6: Focus on Belgium. 2022. Large Bird Population in the Port of Antwerp. https://focusonbelgium.be/en/lifestyle/largebird-population-port-antwerp Successful Port Integration for Meeting Net-Zero
2: Large bird population in the port of Antwerp.
Similarly, the Port of Rotterdam, situated in the Rhine-Meuse delta, plays an important role in enhancing biodiversity through its unique location and conditions, such as sandy soils that provide an ideal habitat for various plant and animal species. The port’s expansive nature areas support an essential ecosystem, home to diverse species including coastal birds, natterjack toads, and rare orchids. The port’s Nature Vision, aligned with the 2030 Port Vision, integrates nature into development plans, ensuring that economic progress does not come at the expense of the environment. By implementing nature-inclusive principles, such as green roofs and ecological stepping stones, the port creates corridors that facilitate species migration and increase biodiversity. The open connection between the North Sea and the hinterland supports fish migration and fosters rich marine ecosystems. The Port of Rotterdam’s proactive ecological management and commitment to sustainability make it a leading example of how industrial areas can coexist with and even promote biodiversity. This approach not only preserves nature but also enhances the port’s attractiveness as a place to live and work, highlighting the critical role that ports can play in global biodiversity conservation efforts7 .
Sources 7: Port of Rotterdam. Discover nature in the port. https://www.portofrotterdam.com/en/to-do-port/nature-in-the-port
Port Integration for Meeting Net-Zero
Among all the excellent examples, it is crucial that limiting land use for port development is the key to balancing economic growth with environmental sustainability. This approach ensures that valuable natural habitats are protected, allowing ports to operate in harmony with their surrounding ecosystems.
Figure 1: ESPO Award. 2023. ESPO Award 2023: let us present the shortlisted projects: Port Authority of Cartagena. https://www.espo.be/news/espo-award-2023-let-us-present-the-shortlisted-pro
Figure 2: Focus on Belgium. 2022. Large Bird Population in the Port of Antwerp. https:// focusonbelgium.be/en/lifestyle/large-bird-population-port-antwerp
Figure 3: Port of Rotterdam. Discover nature in the port. https://www.portofrotterdam.com/en/ to-do-port/nature-in-the-port
ANDREA WIHOLM
Director & Industrial PhD researcher, APM Terminals Decarbonisation Office
Andrea has worked in the shipping and terminal industry since 2015 with a focus on asset-based transformation at container terminals since 2020. She is currently pursuing an industrial PhD, supporting, and investigating the green transition of APM Terminals, with an emphasis on the strategic and organizational aspects of the transformation. The research is partly funded by the Innovation Fund Denmark and is a collaboration between APM Terminals, Aalborg University and Stockholm Resilience Centre.
Green and Smart Ports Consultant, RoyalHaskonningDHV
Deanna Cornell is Green Port consultant and expert in sustainable port operations, climate resilience and adaptation and has a rich background in decarbonisation strategies and hydrography. She has led pivotal projects funded by the World Bank and Asian Development Bank, for ports of all sizes around the world, and strives to reduce the environmental impact of the maritime industry.
The world is on a collective journey to reach Net Zero while responding to a changing climate. Along that journey, every country, organisation and site finds its own path – shaped by the unique opportunities available to them and the challenges that stand in their way. However, with a port estate with multiple users, operation types, and corporate structures, there is often a disconnect between the organisations’ ability to respond. Working together and understanding the differences, makes the port estate cluster a strong approach to a just transition for small and large organisations alike. However, the differences in ability to respond to the replacement of expensive assets, and the regulations affecting them, can create a complex landscape in which to develop a coherent plan and targets that all can have confidence in.
The Port of Poole Maritime Industrial Cluster is one of the maritime clusters funded by the UK government in 2024 to investigate and test this approach. Concluding at the end of 2024, the project will have a greenhouse gas inventory for the group of participating organisations, targets, and a roadmap of actions to meet these and align with regional, national and international commitments.
The Port of Poole Maritime Industrial Cluster is led by Poole Harbour Commissioners (PHC) and brings together all the tenants on the port estate. These tenants predominantly have port and vessel operations, however these operations vary from cargo handling, passenger & ro-ro ferry operators, marine/civil operation, regulatory operations and building and testing of new build superyachts. The cluster is also supported by the local council, BCP Council, and Bournemouth University.
Successful Port Integration for Meeting Net-Zero
Royal HaskoningDHV has been tasked with working with the project cluster as their technical contributor, to develop an inventory for an agreed scope, targets and the technical actions within the roadmap. A separate study on shore power is also underway led by PHC, and a stakeholder and knowledge sharing workstream is led by Bournemouth University’s Centre for Sustainable Business Transformations.. The Port of Poole Cluster includes PHC and ten other Cluster partners detailed below.
Table 1 Breakdown of organisations within the Port of Poole Cluster
Organisation
Name
Poole Harbour Commissioners (PHC)
Description
A trust port managing the Port of Poole and Poole Harbour and the project lead.
BAI UK Ltd (Brittany Ferries) A French-based shipping company operating passenger and freight ferries between France and the UK, Ireland and Spain.
Condor Ferries
Jenkins Marine Ltd.
SMS Group
Sunseeker International Limited
A Guernsey-based shipping company operating passenger and freight ferries between the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands and France.
A UK-based company providing vessel charter, towage and dredging services.
A UK-based company providing ship repair, welding and fabrication services.
A UK-based luxury performance motor yacht manufacturer.
Cemex UK
A multinational cement, readymix concrete and aggregates manufacturer and distributer.
Channel Seaways A Guernsey-based shipping company operating freight vessels between the UK and the Channel Islands.
Perenco UK – Wytch Farm A multinational oil and gas producer.
UK Border Force
WQI Marine Ltd.
A law enforcement command within the Home Office responsible for frontline border control operations at air, sea and rail ports in the UK.
A UK-based company providing boat fitout and refit services.
The inventory data and the initial starting points for the cluster organisation were collected by two questionnaires, to limit the effort for the organisation representatives, to allow the technical team to understand the landscape for the plan and targets better.
Following submission of the questionnaire, a series of workshops were held to move the thinking for the cluster organisation’s from their own corporate approach, to one of collaboration and cluster-based decision making. The move away from thinking about only what they can do individually is key to making the clusters targets and plan achievable.
The purpose of the Baseline Emission Inventory (BEI) was to establish a robust and representative GHG emission baseline, which would inform the identification of emission hotspots and the development of targeted measures to be included in the Decarbonisation Plan.
Within the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, there are two levels at which the inventory boundary is defined. Setting the organisational boundary involves identifying which parts of the business should be included in the inventory, while the operational boundary involves identifying which emission sources should be accounted for.
The first challenge was to identify the boundary of the inventory. For the organisational boundary, a geographical approach was adopted whereby only operations directly linked to the Port of Poole by organisations within the Cluster were included in the BEI. Operations that have no direct links to the Port of Poole or fall out with the scope of decarbonisation were excluded, as they have no bearing to the Decarbonisation Plan being developed. With respect to the operational boundary, it was agreed at the first Stakeholder Workshop that an activity-based approach would be used to accommodate for differences between organisations within the Cluster.
Defining the boundary for marine vessels was the most difficult aspect when defining the boundary of the BEI, due to the varying nature of activities associated with the organisations across the Cluster. The key aspects considered when defining the boundary for marine vessels was to ensure that the organisations retained a level of ‘control’ over the emission sources, and to ensure that the boundary could also be easily be defined for future iterations of the BEI to ensure that progress against targets could be measured. Therefore, the boundary for the marine vessels included:
• Emissions whilst at the berth from vessels owned or controlled by organisations within the cluster, and third party vessels visiting the port;
• Emissions whilst in transit to the harbour limits from vessels owned or controlled by organisations within the cluster, and third party vessels visiting the port;
• Fuel consumption by vessels outside of the harbour limits for ‘locally focused’ vessels using Port of Poole solely as a base, for example harbour launches, marine operations and trials.
It is important to note that the BEI does not form a carbon footprint of the Cluster or any of the organisations, as its primary purpose was to gain an understanding of the current level of emissions and hotspots within a defined boundary at the Port of Poole.
At the data processing stage, activity data supplied by organisations within the Cluster were collated and processed into a single spreadsheet for emission calculations to ensure data anonymity, with processed data grouped and summed into ‘emission source categories’. These were selected to generalise the GHG emissions and avoid tracing assets or activities to specific organisations within the Cluster, and to categories the emission hotspots for the Decarbonisation Plan.
The three source groups were: Buildings, Vessels and Landside (Port Operations).
Table 2 Emission Source Groups
Emission
Buildings Fuel consumption
Electricity consumption
Landside Port operations
Road traffic (owned or controlled vehicles)
Road traffic (third party vehicles)
Fuel consumption within buildings, such as diesel, gas and kerosene within generators, on-site boilers and other static plant and equipment.
Electricity consumption across the port estate
Mobile plant and equipment operating across the port estate, including forklifts, ship to shore cranes and reach stackers. In addition, other port related activities such as waste disposal were included within this source.
Road vehicles owned or controlled by organisations within the cluster. The boundary for this source group included all fuel consumption within these vehicles, even if the vehicles travelled outside of the port estate.
Road vehicles owned by third parties, such as ferry passengers, third party hauliers and employee commuting.
Emission Source Category
Emission Source Description
Marine Vessels Poole based or owned or controlled vessels
Third party vessels
Emissions from fuel consumption in vessels owned or controlled by organisations within the cluster, or are based within Poole. Emissions within this source group were sub-divided into the following categories:
• Emissions whilst at berth;
• Emissions whilst in transit to the harbour limits;
• Total fuel consumption outside of the harbour limits for ‘locally focused’ vessels, such as harbour launches, marine operations and trials.
Emissions from fuel consumption in third party vessels:
• Emissions whilst at berth;
• Emissions whilst in transit to the harbour limits
Emission totals in the BEI were reported in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (T CO2e), to account for differences in Global Warming Potential between different GHGs. The figure below displays the proportion that each defined source category contributed to the total BEI, with the buildings, landside and vessel categories.
The largest emission source was associated with marine vessel emissions, which contributed to approximately 70 % of total emissions, followed by a relatively even proportion between buildings (16.4 %) and landside emissions (13.4 %).
In developing the plan of all the interventions1 types and different applications2, the team worked with the cluster to develop a shortlisting process. This was split between the three areas of the clusters inventory (buildings, vessels and landside), due to numerous opportunities identified, as each organisation is at a different stage in their decarbonisation journey.
A multicriteria analysis (MCA) was undertaken for each source category to reduce the long-list of interventions, which covered the effort to deliver for the cluster and the impact the application would have on the clusters emissions and targets. Criteria such as technology readiness, greenhouse gas emission reduction, number of policy/regulatory parties (i.e. control) and financial implications allowed the prioritisation of the applications.
1 Intervention = a summary action that could be implemented in several ways. i.e. implement low carbon fuels.
2 Application = a specific action for the intervention i.e. implement hydrogen powered vehicles.
The initial approach to targets was to forecast the cluster’s likely delivery based on technology availability, policies, budget and cluster capability. Targets proposed (pending finalisation of the plan) are a 40% reduction in carbon emissions by 2035 and Net Zero by 2050. These goals help shape the prioritisation of actions and planning.
The Decarbonisation Plan for the Port of Poole Cluster is currently in development as we progress through the shortlisting process. The plan will include several key components:
• An overview of completed work: A detailed summary of the work conducted so far within the cluster, highlighting efforts made and the progress achieved.
• An outline of the prioritised interventions for each source category, specifying the action owners and a high-level explanation of implementation strategy.
• A detailed roadmap for each source category, which will include timelines, targets, intervention and application process.
• Potential risks associated with the plan, including mitigating any challenges.
• Recommendations for progress monitoring and governance structure.
• A set of guiding policy principles.
• Clear emission reduction targets across the cluster, including both an interim target and Net Zero target. This will include how these targets will be monitored and measured, providing a framework for assessing the success of the plan. It will also indicate when carbon savings from specific actions are expected to be realised.
SJOERD DE JAGER CEO & Co-Founder, PortXchange
Sjoerd de Jager leads PortXchange, a Rotterdam-based company focusing on digital solutions for maritime logistics. Before starting PortXchange in 2018, he worked on the PRONTO project at the Port of Rotterdam, where he helped develop and spin off the business into what PortXchange is today. This effort was part of the port’s mission to globalize the Pronto Port Call Optimization solution.
Before stepping into the maritime industry, Sjoerd founded several social enterprises and startups. He also worked in new business development for big companies like Phillips and DSM. He’s passionate about innovation, making industries more eco-friendly, and bringing startup energy to traditional sectors. Sjoerd is skilled at tackling complex problems and rallying people to collaborate. Now, he’s not just running his company; he’s also investing in new ideas.
Sjoerd has emerged as a key thought leader in maritime sustainability efforts. He’s a soughtafter speaker, known for his insights into making the shipping industry more sustainable. His contributions are shaping the future of maritime logistics, emphasizing the importance of actionable decarbonization strategies.
His academic background was highlighted by a cum laude graduation in Industrial Engineering from the Eindhoven University of Technology. Beyond the boardroom, Sjoerd is a devoted father to three sons. Though his free time is a rare treasure, he finds joy in kitesurfing and immerses himself in the pages of a good book whenever possible.
Successful Port Integration for Meeting Net-Zero
The maritime industry plays a vital role in combating climate change, with tough targets set by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) for reducing carbon intensity and achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. With deadlines looming, ports and terminal operators are coming under increasing pressure to step up and address their environmental impact.
This urgency means the focus is rapidly shifting beyond reducing direct emissions from operations (Scope 1) and those associated with purchased energy (Scope 2) and moving towards the often-overlooked Scope 3. These emissions encompass the indirect impacts generated by the value chain, including everything from the extraction of raw materials, employee behaviour to product disposal.
Navigating Scope 3 emissions presents a new area in the sustainability landscape, not only for ports and terminals but the whole maritime industry.
Scope 3 emissions, as defined by the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, are indirect emissions that are a consequence of the Port’s value chain but outside its direct control.
These emissions, as defined, originate from numerous stakeholders, including all warehousing activities, transportation of goods to and from the port, ocean-going vessels, cargo-handling equipment and even employees commuting and travelling on business. To help identify them, the GHG Protocol defines 15 categories for assessment, from purchased goods and services to fuel and energy-related activities to waste.
The complexity of gathering data from these multiple sources across the value chain poses a significant challenge for most ports. Why? Because the data is scattered across different parties in the value chain, it is siloed and hard to retrieve, especially when monitoring vessels without advanced vessel emission models and AIS vessel routing networks.
According to the UN Global Compact, Scope 3 emissions contribute 70% of the average corporate value chain’s total emissions. At ports, this figure is usually higher, as reported by the Port of New York and New Jersey Authority in its Net Zero Road Map Report:
“The challenge that we are confronting is one that many large, complex organizations face: most emissions that result from Port Authority operations are from sources that are not owned or controlled by the Port Authority itself. In our case, approximately 96% of total emissions are outside of our direct control (Scope 3).”
Despite the significance of Scope 3 emissions, most port and terminal operators do not currently monitor them in full. Some may measure aspects of Scope 3 emissions, such as air and rail for business travel. Still, this data is typically not reported publicly and certainly doesn’t reflect the actual figure.
Addressing Scope 3 emissions is paramount for several reasons.
Firstly, they constitute the most significant portion of a port’s carbon footprint. Ignoring them risks an incomplete sustainability strategy and missed opportunities for improvement.
Secondly, it affects the ability of ports to reduce their impact on the local environment, including air and water pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and traffic congestion, as well as allowing them to positively engage with the local community.
Finally, acting on Scope 3 emissions can yield cost savings through increased efficiency and build resilience to regulatory changes and market shifts.
Another key aspect lies in addressing emissions when ships arrive and are at berth by leveraging advanced AIS technology to implement just-in-time port calls. This has the dual advantage of reducing a port’s Scope 3 emissions and a shipping line’s Scope 1 emissions by improving operational efficiency and operations, so ships arrive precisely when needed.
Idle time is reduced and unnecessary fuel consumption is avoided. The impact of this is not to be ignored, with shipping emissions in ports currently contributing to 5% of total shipping GHG emissions (ITF/OECD, 2018) and studies indicating that up to 15% of a ship’s emissions occur when it is stationary at a port’s anchorage or berth (Mjelde et al., 2019).
Another dual challenge is that ports are not investing in green infrastructure and fuel hubs, as there is a lack of assurance that shipping lines will utilize them. Equally, shipping lines are reluctant to invest in zero-emission ships without a proven global port infrastructure. Until this is resolved, it is sad to say that ports will continue to suffer from high Scope 3 emissions.
It is worth noting that even though current regulations may not mandate Scope 3 emission reporting in all regions, such requirements are expected to be enforced very soon as pressure increases on environmental accountability. Ports that recognize this now will benefit in the future by staying ahead of their competitors.
This will create a streamlined process with data-driven knowledge that provides a complete picture of emission monitoring and productivity, allowing ports to access business insights tailored to their specific needs. This approach empowers ports to implement targeted strategies and incentives to promote effective decarbonization practices.
Another benefit is data-driven benchmarking, which has historically been limited between ports, hindering their ability to learn from one another. The capability of data-driven AI analysis provides the necessary data sets to make this practical and allow for shared learning from successes and failures, fostering continuous improvement in sustainability practices across the sector.
Alongside these business benefits, ports can position themselves as leaders in maritime decarbonization and sustainability efforts, further enhancing their importance to the sector. If made public and transparent, as we believe it should be, benchmarking provides recognition for ports delivering tangible benefits to the maritime and local communities through reduced emissions. This fosters healthy competition and stimulates further improvements in sustainability practices.
“For a long time, ports have been working in isolation and have been unable to capitalize on their potential as a vital part of the maritime industry’s solution for achieving the illusive emissions goal. We fully advocate for a global benchmarking scheme to recognize ports monitoring Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, highlighting good practices and dramatically impacting a sustainable future for the maritime industry,” Sjoerd de Jager, Co-founder & Managing Director, PortXchange
The implementation of carbon pricing under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) is anticipated to yield significant revenue. However, to fast-track the maritime green transition, we believe some of this revenue should be earmarked to finance port infrastructure and data analysis. This financial support will enable ports to establish green infrastructure and fuel hubs, thereby facilitating the adoption of zero-emission ships by shipping lines.
Currently, the maritime industry predominantly focuses on reducing CO2 emissions, with less or no emphasis on other pollutants such as NOx or SOx emissions. But, as more information becomes available, this will change, for example, when calculating leakage from a source such as air conditioning equipment. Local communities are already considering having NOx and SOx monitoring brought into environmental plans and city ports will have to account for these in their reporting.
The European Union (EU) has established itself as a global leader in decarbonization regulation with a strong environmental commitment and ambitious goals. Having a cohesive framework of local, regional, national and international regulatory agencies, it is playing a pivotal role in shaping policies for air quality, carbon performance and emissions reduction not just in Europe but also globally.
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is a global UN authority that sets regulations that influence and guide the practices of maritime entities worldwide.
The intersection of EU and IMO regulations creates a comprehensive regulatory landscape for the maritime industry. As we delve deeper, we’ll explore the intricacies of these dual regulatory standards and their profound impact on advancing sustainable practices in the maritime sector. The IMO aims to achieve net-zero GHG emissions from international shipping by or around 2050, with indicative checkpoints for 2030 and 2040.
Both the EU and the IMO seem to have overly focused their regulations on the vessels, as they are the primary sources of emissions. However, emissions become a direct health factor for nearby communities during the port stay. Also, the EU and IMO are member-state-driven organizations, meaning the owners and charterers have no direct interaction with the IMO or EU. The table below demonstrates the unbalanced regulatory landscape, with very little regulation directly targeted at ports.
IMO, EEXI (Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index)
Since 1 January 2023, it has been mandatory for all ships to calculate their attained EEXI to measure their energy efficiency. This will then be compared against the required EEXI, determined by ship type, engine and capacity, and the maximum acceptable attained EEXI value. All vessels must have an EEXI Technical File on board. If non-compliance, the ship may be issued a Condition of Authority.
Compliant ships receive an International Energy Efficiency Certificate (IEEC).
The IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) intends to review the effectiveness of the EEXI measures by 1 January 2026 and possible amendments may be made accordingly.
The CII (Carbon Intensity Indicator) system aims to enhance a ship’s energy efficiency by setting stricter emission targets each year. This involves a yearly assessment of a ship’s actual carbon emission performance, with monitoring beginning on 1 January 2023.
To be eligible for the CII rating, ships must have a SEEMP Part III (a specific section of the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan supporting CII targets) prepared by 31 December 2022.
Starting 1 January 2024, a Statement of Compliance containing information about fuel consumption and CII-related data will be issued.
To ensure adherence to SEEMP Part III and CII requirements, the ship’s flag administration is responsible for conducting periodic audits. These audits may include annual reviews of the company, additional shipboard verifications, and company audits occurring at least every six months after the issuance of the Statement of Compliance.
The recently adopted FuelEU Maritime regulation sets reduction requirements at five-year increments until 2050 (against the 2020 reference value).
The yearly average GHG intensity of the energy used on-board a ship shall not exceed the following limits:
2% from 1 January 2025, 6% from 1 January 2030, 14.5% from 1 January 2035, 31% from 1 January 2040, 62% from 1 January 2045, 80% from 1 January 2050.
The EU MRV (Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification) regulation, a framework and process for monitoring, reporting and verifying greenhouse gas emissions from maritime transport activities, was amended on 10 May 2023, marking a significant development in the inclusion of maritime transport activities within the EU Emissions Trading System. This amendment also introduced protocols for the monitoring, reporting and verifying emissions related to additional greenhouse gases and newly encompassed ship types.
Monitoring: Shipping companies are required to monitor and collect data on their vessels’ emissions, including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). This is typically done using designated tools and systems, such as the THETIS MRV module.
Reporting: Companies must compile and report the collected emissions data to regulatory authorities. This includes submitting detailed reports on their ships’ CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions.
Verification: The accuracy and completeness of the reported data are subject to verification by accredited assessors who independently evaluate monitoring methodologies, data collection processes and overall adherence to regulatory requirements.
The MRV framework ensures transparency and accountability in tracking and reporting emissions, providing a basis for regulatory oversight and developing emission reduction strategies.
Emissions trading schemes work on the ‘cap and trade’ principle, where a cap is set on the total amount of certain greenhouse gases that sectors covered by the scheme can emit. This limits the total amount of carbon that can be emitted, and it decreases over time.
The EU ETS is a market-based approach to controlling pollution by allocating a limited number of emission permits to entities, such as companies or industries. In the EU MRV regulation context, the ETS is extended to cover maritime transport activities. The EU ETS has a phasedout implementation process starting 1 January 2024.
In 2024, stakeholders will be required to buy and surrender allowances for 40% of their verified emissions for intra-EU voyages and 20% of their emissions for voyages into or out of the EU. In 2025, this increases to 70% of emissions for intra-EU voyages. In 2026, the figure will reach 100% of emissions for intra-EU voyages and 50% for voyages into or out of the EU.
By 30 September each year, Shipping Companies will be required to surrender their allowances from the previous year under the EU ETS.
The inclusion of shipping markets in the EU ETS at the start of 2024 has added $10,000$100,000 in carbon emission offset costs to dirty and clean tanker round-trip voyages from the US Gulf Coast to EU and European Economic Area ports (source S&P Global).
11. How does the CSDDD differ from CSRD?
There are several similarities between the CSDDD and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). Both directives concern sustainability, but the CSDDD targets upscaling supply chain due diligence. The CSRD, on the other hand, is fully focused on sustainability reporting to increase transparency from companies operating in the EU. The two directives are not mutually exclusive and are intended to be applied in tandem by companies that fall under both scopes.
12. The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)
This will require firms to alleviate the negative impact of their activities on human rights and the environment by tackling forced labour and global warming. The Directive will have an immense reach, with the EU expecting it to impact about 13,000 countries within the EU and around 4,000 elsewhere when fully implemented.
But Member states have compromised and approved a significantly scaled-back version to the one intended, reducing the number of companies it will impact by raising the thresholds of those covered by the new legislation to 1,000 employees, up from 500, and those with revenue greater than €450 million, up from €150 million.
The new thresholds will cut back the number of companies in the scope of the CSDDD by roughly two-thirds. Lower thresholds that had been in place for high-risk sectors were also removed, with the possibility to be reconsidered later. It is fair to say companies should take heed of the original intentions as they are only stalled and have not been removed entirely from further updates to the directive. Non-compliance could lead to fines of up to 5% of a company’s net global turnover.
The Directive comes with seven key requirements companies must meet.
• Centering social and sustainability due diligence as a key element in policy development and implementation.
• Identifying the current and potential adverse impacts on the environment and human rights from operations and the operations of all subsidiaries and supply chain partners.
• Actively mitigating the identified risks within the company and its supply chain.
• Creating an action plan and accompanying timeline to address identified risks.
• Establishing formal grievance mechanisms for employees and stakeholders.
• Aligning business model and future strategy with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C target.
• Publicly publishing sustainability reports with a focus on due diligence.
As companies prepare for the CSDDD to come into effect, leaning on technology is one way to efficiently tackle the new reporting burden without relying on overly complex and inefficient manual processes.
The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is a groundbreaking example of mandatory reporting. While currently applicable to EU companies, this directive sets a precedent for global sustainability reporting standards. The CSRD requires companies to record and report greenhouse gas emissions under Scope 1, 2, and 3 to foster transparency and accountability.
While Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions are within the control of the port, Scope 3 involves indirect emissions from port users, emphasizing the collaborative effort required for comprehensive port emissions reduction.
EU lawmakers have approved a 2-year delay in implementing CSRD reporting for non-EU companies and specific sectors, extending the reporting timeline for companies headquartered outside of the European bloc until 2026 to begin complying with the CSRD. But, businesses should not be compliant as this will be fully implemented.
• Perform a thorough legal entity analysis to understand which entities are in each scope. It might be prudent to get a second opinion – this must be accurate. If you get this wrong, you will use a baseline for the entire program based on incorrect assumptions.
• Decide which reporting strategy will best meet your business needs – for example, do you report at a group level, EU consolidated, or individual in-scope legal entity level? This will depend on the outcome of your scoping analysis and the nature of your business.
• Map out your value chain, including all direct and indirect business relationships, upstream and downstream. Make sure this is extremely thorough, as it is vitally important to double-check and triple-check it.
• Develop a way of evaluating and analyzing the data points that must be reported.
• Assess the gaps in meeting the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) requirements. Use this as the basis for creating an implementation plan which establishes practical ways to align with the reporting requirements.
Beyond regulatory shifts, industry players, customers, and stakeholders are also influencing demand for decarbonization. The collaboration between cargo-owning companies, manufacturers, retailers, and investment banks that influence sustainable shipping practices is critical for promoting environmental responsibility for their business.
Port authorities can leverage regulatory power to drive change further. Incentives and disincentives, including discounted or increased port dues based on environmental standards and systematic measurement and reporting of emissions, contribute to green shipping compliance.
Technology and innovation are playing critical roles in decarbonization efforts, offering alternative fuels, green shore power and operational efficiencies. In addition, the electrification of port infrastructure and effective data utilization for enhanced emissions monitoring and calculation are vital for ports to comply with green shipping regulations and foster sustainability.
6.2
A review of the progress being made to meet the 2050 goals for decarbonisation and current projects in place.
DR. MARK VAN DER VEEN
Director of the Graduate School of Business, University of Amsterdam
Dr. Mark van der Veen is director of the Graduate School of Business at University of Amsterdam, responsible for the MSc programmes in Business Administration, Finance, Accountancy & Control and Entrepreneurship. His focus in teaching and research has always been on the interaction between business and sustainability. For his PhD research at Erasmus University Rotterdam, he studied the organization and success of green product development projects. Mark was involved in several national and international studies on port environmental management, including ECOPORTS in Europe, and auditing and training projects with seaports in Vietnam and Cambodia. His special interest is in the strategic, economic and organizational aspects of port environmental management.
KRIS DANARADJOU
Deputy General Manager in Charge of Development, HAROPA Port
Engineer of Bridges, Waters and Forests, graduated from Sciences Po Grenoble, Kris Danaradjou is deputy CEO in charge of Development HAROPA PORT.
Kris Danaradjou began his career as a project manager in the public sector in various public institutions, including Radio France and the Louvre Museum.
He joined HAROPA PORT | Paris in 2014 as deputy director to the Planning Department Directorate. He was responsible for the maintenance and operation of the platforms, the monitoring of the strategic project and the deployment of new services. In 2018, he took over the management of the port of Gennevilliers, the largest river port in the Île-de-France region, which covers 400 hectares with 275 companies and nearly 8,000 jobs. He continued his career as Deputy CEO of the Grand Port Maritime du Havre (GPMH), which he joined in July 2020..
On 1 June 2021, the date of the merger of the ports of Le Havre, Rouen and Paris into a single establishment, Kris Danaradjou was appointed Deputy CEO in charge of Development of the new “Seine axis major river/seaport”; he joined the management board of the new port establishment. Drawing on his experience in the river and maritime fields, his missions concern the development of traffic and the implementation of new logistic and industrial units on the scale of the Seine axis, the steering of the tariff strategy and the development of the port offer based on economic intelligence and strategic marketing. In this capacity, he is appointed member of the HAROPA PORT management board
BOGDAN OŁDAKOWSKI Secretary General,
BPO
Since July 2006 Secretary General of the Baltic Ports Organization. The founder and co - owner of Actia Forum Ltd established in 2000. In years 2003 - 1996 he worked as at various positions in the Port of Gdańsk Authority Co. At the same time he was a chairman of the Environment Committee of the Baltic Ports Organization. Involved in work of several international transport related organizations: e.g. European Sea Ports Organization, International Maritime Organization. Organizer, chairman and speakers at many international conferences.
Graduated in 1993 from University of Gdansk, Faculty of Physical Oceanography. He is also graduated from Law and Management post-graduate studies at Gdańsk University of Technology. Participated in professional trainings on management, transport, environment, international relation affairs.
His hobby are sports (tennis, football, skiing), jazz, contemporary art.
Stationary Power EMEA, PlugPower
Anis Ayoub is the Business Development Manager for stationary power at Plug Power, a global hydrogen leader. He oversees megawatt-scale fuel cell power generation systems in the EMEA region. Previously, he held several roles in the energy industry. He holds a Master of Engineering from MINES PARISTECH. Anis is committed to advancing green hydrogen energy solutions.
Abstract
As ports strive for decarbonisation and sustainable practices, innovative solutions are essential for overcoming grid congestion or lack of grid infrastructure. This presentation explores the use of hydrogen fuel cells to provide onshore power supply, offering a sustainable alternative where traditional grid access is limited.
Hydrogen fuel cells generate electricity through hydrogen produced from renewable sources, delivering high efficiency and zero emissions. This technology can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pollutants, aligning with global sustainability goals and regulatory standards.
Keywords: Hydrogen Fuel Cells, Onshore Power Supply, Cold Ironing, Port Electrification, Decarbonisation, Grid Congestion, Renewable Energy, Green Ports
Table of contents
1 On-shore Power Supply (OPS)
2 Grid Congestion
3 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Power Generators
4 Plug’s MW Fuel Cell Power Generator
5 Cost comparison between Hydrogen Fuel Cells and Grid upgrade
1.1 Introduction
On-shore Power Supply (OPS) also know as shore-side electricity supply or cold ironing means the provision of shore-side electrical power to seagoing ships or inland waterway vessels when moored at the quayside.
On-shore Power Supply supports maritime transport decarbonization in providing a clean power supply to the ships at berth with a positive impact on air quality for urban areas surrounding ports.
In 2023, the European Union adopted two new regulations within the “Fit for 55” legislative package to reduce EU greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030: the FuelEU Maritime regulation and the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation (AFIR).
• The FuelEU Maritime Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2023/1805) promotes the use of renewable, low-carbon fuels and clean energy technologies for ships.
• AFIR Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2023/1804) is a revision of the previous 2014 Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive which makes it applicable to member states without national law transposition. AFIR sets mandatory targets for the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure in the EU, for road vehicles, vessels and stationary aircraft.
The FuelEU Maritime Regulation sets requirements for the use of onshore power supply for ships at berth to reduce greenhouse gas and air pollution emissions in ports. An adequate level of shore-side electricity supply is required to fulfill these obligations.
On the other side, AFIR regulation sets mandatory deployment targets for the trans-European transport network (TEN-T) maritime ports and inland waterway ports.
The regulations are applicable according to following main criteria :
• commercial ships exceeding 5,000 gross tonnes, that serve the purpose of transporting passengers or cargo, irrespective of their flag
• the number of annual calls at the port (100 for container ships, 40 for passenger ships and 25 for cruise).
• Only ships that remain two hours or more at berth
FuelEU Maritime and AFIR regulations are aligned for a required implementation on January 1, 2030.
In conclusion, these regulations represent a strategic push by the EU to accelerate the adoption of OPS, setting a firm deadline for ports and shipping companies to adapt to more sustainable practices by 2030.
The EAFO (European Alternative Fuels Observatory) listed, in 2023, 96 ports with installed OPS. The total number of connectors reaching 680. These numbers can vary from a source to another as Norway and UK are sometimes considered in the lists.
A recent study by ICCT (International Council on Clean Transportation), estimated the energy needs of ships that berthed in 489 EU ports in 2019 at around 5,886 GWh (ships ≥400 GT).This is equivalent to a yearly production of a nuclear reactor… ICCT study estimated that ports would need to install another 1,929 MW of shore power, in addition to the currently installed 309 MW, to cover the average annual energy demand of ships at-berth in 2019. To cover maximum annual energy demand would require installing an additional 3,342 MW!
Meeting these energy demands is not just a technical challenge; it also has significant implications for port operations and compliance with future regulations.
The rapid expansion of renewable energy production and the boom in electricity demand lead to challenge the distribution grid’s original design and capacity. In some countries, it has led to significant capacity constraints, and thus, to a higher demand for grid upgrades.
According to DSO Entity(the association for Distribution System Operators (DSOs) in Europe), addressing the lack of available grid capacity constitutes a challenge for DSOs in Europe. It makes it necessary to prioritise requests and proceed with phased integration, given that attempting to accommodate all demands simultaneously would strain the existing infrastructure.
According to the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER), the EU power grid is increasingly congested (remedial actions like redispatching rose by 14.5% in 2023). The cost of managing this congestion in 2023 was EUR 4 billion. Grid congestion in the EU curtailed over 12 TWh of renewable electricity in 2023.
The EU commissionestimates that electricity consumption in the EU is expected to increase by around 60% between now and 2030. With 40% of EU distribution grids more than 40 years old and cross-border transmission capacity due to double by 2030, €584 billion in investments are necessary.
The growing congestion in the EU power grid directly impacts the feasibility of expanding OPS in ports. Without significant upgrades, which are costly and time-consuming, ports may struggle to meet the increasing energy demands of shore power supply. Grid “delivery” could become a massive issue. In some instances, for example, when a substation upgrade is required, it can take several years before a port is “OPS ready.” If these upgrades are not done, transformers and transmission lines will overload and result in outages.
3.1 Distributed local power generation
To successfully manage the increasing demand on the electrical grid, there are several tools and actions that must work in tandem. The major elements include, but are not limited to: increased distributed generation, increased distributed storage, favorable government policies, sophisticated demand management tools, additional connection points and substantial grid improvement.
Plug’s high-power stationary fuel cell system supported by a green hydrogen infrastructure is a clean energy option that can alleviate grid constraints and get ships connected to OPS faster. By integrating hydrogen fuel cells with solar or wind energy, ports can further enhance their sustainability profile, creating a resilient and low-carbon power supply ecosystem.
In simple terms, a hydrogen fuel cell generates electricity by combining hydrogen and oxygen, with water and heat as the only by-products. This process is highly efficient and completely clean, making it an ideal solution for powering port operations without contributing to air pollution.
A fuel cell is composed of three main components: an anode, a cathode, and an electrolyte membrane. The magic of the PEM fuel cell is its proton exchange membrane, which looks like a piece of construction paper, and works by passing hydrogen through the anode side and oxygen through the cathode side. At the anode side, the hydrogen molecules are split into electrons and protons. The protons pass through the electrolyte membrane, while the electrons are forced through a circuit, generating an electric current and excess heat. At the cathode side, the protons, electrons, and oxygen combine to product water molecules.
Hydrogen fuel cell technology offers the advantages of a clean and reliable alternative energy source to customers in a growing number of applications.
Green hydrogen fuel is:
• Zero-emission fuel
• Made from renewable sources
• Clean energy vector
PEM (Proton Exchange Membrane) Fuel cell technology bring:
• Quick start and ramping capacity
• Robust Reliability
• Rapid deployment
• Scalability
Plug’s PEM fuel cell technology can be used to supplement the grid’s supply or completely replace the grid supply.
Designed specifically for critical power applications, the Plug MW fuel cell system is a complete fuel cell solution, with all required systems integrated in a modular, scalable package. The system is available in standard configurations of up to 1.5 MW that can be deployed in parallel to meet the varying power requirements of a project.
These units can be deployed rapidly and integrated into current port substations to provide shore power, as well as augmenting other current port activities. These units have tremendous flexibility to accommodate numerous operating profiles. Plug units can provide continuous shore power when necessary and can be turned off or placed in stand-by mode to reduce or eliminate costs, as appropriate. Additionally, the system can be incorporated as part of a larger microgrid solution at the port to leverage low-cost renewable energy (solar, wind, etc.) when available while providing on-demand reliable zero-emission power as required to support critical operations.
Our fuel cell systems provide zero-emission operation and are not subject to fuel spill containment and air quality reporting requirements. The only outputs are power and water. They are fueled by green hydrogen, which is created using renewable energy sources and brought to the site. This means that ships powered with Plug’s high-power stationary fuel cell will lead to even greater emission reduction.
Plug’s fuel cell systems perform in hot, cold, humid and maritime environments. With minimal moving parts and optional built-in fault-tolerance, these fuel cells are proven to perform reliably in real world conditions.
Our fuel cell systems provide zero-emission operation and are not subject to fuel spill containment and air quality reporting requirements. Heat and water are the only byproducts of this chemical process making it one of the cleanest power generation systems. The use of green hydrogen, produced through renewable energy sources, further enhances the sustainability of these fuel cell systems, ensuring that ports can meet stringent environmental standards.
1.1 Minimal
Fuel cell health and fuel levels may be remotely monitored. Simple maintenance and fewer site visits mean lower operational costs when compared to combustion generators.
1.2 Quiet Operation
Plug’s fuel cell systems have an acoustic signature similar to that of an industrial cooler, meaning that systems can be located anywhere power is needed, even in acoustically sensitive locations.
1.1 CapEx Vs OpEx
It is essential to evaluate the project total cost of ownership to compare the costs of hydrogen fuel cells to traditional grid upgrades. Hydrogen fuel cells often have a lower CapEx due to their modular and scalable nature, whereas grid upgrades require high and time-consuming infrastructure investments. When grid upgrade is needed, and under low-utilization scenarios, the LCOE of hydrogen fuel cells can be lower than that of grid-supplied electricity due to the reduced CapEx. However, in high-utilization scenarios, the cost-effectiveness shifts in favor of grid solutions. This analysis allows ports to make informed decisions based on their unique operational profiles.
1.2 Scalability and flexibility
With fuel cells systems, ports can start with a small installation and increase the capacity as demand grows, avoiding the need for large upfront investments. On the other hand, grid infrastructure upgrades require significant investment upfront for fixed capacity, often leading to under-utilization during initial phases.
1.3 Rapid Deployment
Another significant cost factor is the time required for implementation. Hydrogen fuel cell systems can be deployed within months, providing immediate access to shore power, whereas grid upgrades often take several years due to complex regulatory requirements and construction processes. These delays not only incur higher costs but could also prevent ports from meeting their regulatory deadlines.
1.4 Incentives and subsidies
Ports adopting hydrogen fuel cells can benefit from avoiding emissions-related penalties. Many governments offer incentives and subsidies for clean energy projects, reducing the CapEx for fuel cell installations and further improving the financial business case.
1.5 Long term benefits
Beyond immediate cost comparisons, hydrogen fuel cells offer strategic advantages in futureproofing port operations. As global markets shift towards renewable energy and decarbonization, ports with flexible, decentralized energy solutions will be better positioned to attract sustainable shipping lines, improve resilience against grid failures, and reduce reliance on fluctuating electricity markets.
SOPHIE DELANNOY
Program Manager – Sustainable Transport Fuels, North Sea Port
Sophie Delannoy is a seasoned logistics professional with a rich background in the transportation industry. Her career has been marked by a dedication to enhancing supply chain efficiency, fostering innovation, and driving sustainable logistics practices.
In 2010 Sophie embarked on her logistics journey, joining Lineas, a leading European rail freight operator. Her roles at Lineas spanned various areas of logistics management, from operations to strategic planning. The main focus in her work was on the implementation of new international transport projects & the establishment of international partner agreements. Her innovative approach led to increased efficiency, reduced environmental impact, and cost savings for the company.
Sophie’s passion for logistics excellence and sustainability caught the attention of the Flanders Institute for Logistics (Vlaams Instituut voor de Logistiek - VIL). In 2020 she joined VIL as a project lead, where she played a pivotal role in shaping the future of logistics in the Flanders region. In this capacity, Sophie collaborated with industry partners, government agencies, and academic institutions to develop cutting-edge logistics strategies. Her work focused on fostering collaboration across the value chain in order to facilitate the fuel shift, electrification and energy transition within the logistics sector.
Driven by a desire to further contribute to the logistic transition, Sophie joined the cross-border North Sea Port company in 2022. She is currently involved in national policy discussions in Flanders and the Netherlands. Sophie’s expertise lies in assessing port related opportunities where logistics & energy are intertwined.
Bringing project partners together and translating top-down EU policies to local reality and vice versa finding collaboration among local industries. Taking part in EU subsidiary programs, Sophie is involved in projects on electrification, sustainable fuels and clean energy hubs. Currently she manages the logistics Multi Fuel program at North Sea Port.
Ellie Minshull Conference Manager, Conferences
Tel: +44 1329 825335
Email: eminshull@mercatormedia.com
Simone Tai
Port Strategy Sales Executive
Tel: +44 1329 825335
Email: stai@portstrategy.com
Anne-Marie Causer News Editor
Tel +44 1329 825335
Email: ACauser@mercatormedia.com
Marianne Rasmussen-Coulling Events Director
Tel: +44 1329 825335
Email: mrasmussen@mercatormedia.com
Andrew Webster Chief Executive Officer
Mercator Media Limited
Spinnaker House, Waterside Gardens, Fareham, Hampshire, PO16 8SD, UK t: +44 1329 825335, f: +44 1329 550192 www.mercatormedia.com
The organisers and publishers accept no responsibility for the statements made neither in this publication nor for any errors or omissions which may have occurred.
©Mercator Media Limited 2024
19th Greenport Congress & Cruise
23-25 October 2024, Le Havre, France
The premier yearly congress providing environmental departments in Ports and Terminals with methods of greening their operations portstrategy.com/greenport-cruise-and-congress
45th Propulsion & Future Fuels
19-21 November 2024, Hamburg, Germany
Propulsion & Future Fuels provides the latest developments in efficient propulsion technology and low flashpoint, low carbon fuels. motorship.com/propulsion-and-future-fuels-conference
23rd Coastlink Conference
29-30 April 2025, Bilbao, Spain
Coastlink is a pan-European network dedicated to the promotion of short sea feeder shipping and the intermodal networks through the ports that support a competitive and sustainable supply chain coastlink.co.uk
26th Seawork
10-12 June 2025, Mayflower Park, Southampton, UK
The European commercial marine & workboats annual three day exhibition and conference Seawork is a proven platform to build business networks, with an international audience of visitors. It is the meeting place for the commercial marine and workboat sector and is supported by our trusted partners. seawork.com
15th Icelandic Fisheries Seafood & Aqua Exhibition & Awards
Smárinn, Fifan Halls Kópavogur, Iceland
Longest running Icelandic and International fishing exhibition in Iceland, covering every aspect of the commercial fishing, processing, seafood and by-product sector icefish.is
6th Fish Waste for Profit Conference
Reykjavik, Iceland
Fish Waste for Profit provides attendees with knowledge on how to maximise the return on investment (ROI) from potential discarded parts of the catch that can be turned into high value products. icefishconference.com
World Ports Conference - International Association of Ports and Harbors
7-9 October 2025, Kobe, Japan
The International Association of Ports & Harbors World Ports Conference will bring together stakeholders from the global maritime supply chain delivering an international platform for networking, innovation and debate. worldportsconference.com
