Sea News Magazine Issue 1 2018

Sea News Issue 1 2018

Green Issue

Cover Story Global Warming and the Maritime Industry

Also in this issue • CO2 Emissions • Green Initiatives • Sustainability at APL • The Sulphur Setback • Wartsila - Making

Waves with Green Shipping

The world’s oceans are big enough for a smarter flag Find us in Booth 1.515, Hall 1

PALAU INTERNATIONAL SHIP REGISTRY THE NEXT GENERATION FLAG

EUROPE I GREECE I 5 SACHTOURI STR, PIRAEUS - Tel: + 30 210 4293500 USA I TEXAS I THE WOODLANDS I 9595 SIX PINES DRIVE - Tel: + 1 832 631 6061 Akashi City Alexandria Algeciras Beirut Bremen Busan Cadiz Cape Town City of Port of Spain Constanta Dubai Fuzhou Genoa Guangzhou Hong Kong Houston Istanbul Kerala Kuala Lumpur Lagos Limassol London Los Barrios Miami Moscow Nakhodka Norrköping North Vancouver Odessa Panama City Piraeus Qingdao Riga Sakhalin Santo Domingo Shanghai Singapore St. Petersburg Taiwan Tangier Tartu Thailand Valletta Varna Vladivostok

EDITOR’S COLUMN

GREEN ISSUE

Editor’s Column The global maritime industry has always been known as a traditional industry, slow to change and not necessarily open to advancements in technology. However, in the recent past, the industry seems to have undergone a paradigm shift - a mindset that has become more accepting of changes.

The most important and notable changes have come about with regard to green and sustainable shipping. There is a move towards carbon-free shipping, an inclination to switch to LNG as a marine fuel and steps to prepare for the 2020 Sulphur Cap. Changes have manifested in all areas of the industry, whether it is deploying blockchain, new Ballast Water Management Systems or curbing CO2, SOx and NOx emissions. Industry leaders such as Wärtsilä are making waves with their futuristic and efficient solutions in this direction and major shipping companies are being recognised for their efforts towards green shipping.

Ship owners, managers and operators are closely observing trends and taking decisions to make their organisations ‘future-ready’. They are undertaking studies on LNG, signing deals with technology giants and collaborating with companies that share their vision. Port authorities are on board with the move to a more environment-friendly shipping culture. They are undertaking infrastructure projects and employing tools to monitor and cut emissions.

As you turn through the pages of the Green Issue, enjoy learning about how the maritime industry is embracing all things green and ponder the future of a truly sustainable maritime industry.

Priyanka Ann Saini, Managing Editor

Sea News All rights reserved. Sea News reserves all copyright-related rights, typically including the right to publish the work, to make derivative works of it, to distribute it, to make profit from it, to license a number of these rights to other people, and to forbid these uses by any unauthorized people, thus being entitled to take legal action against infringement.

Online www.seanews.co.uk

ISSUE 1 2018

Shah Ahmed Publisher shah.ahmed@seanews.co.uk

Baibhav Mishra Deputy Editor baibhav.mishra@seanews.co.uk

Sue Terpilowski OBE Senior Managing Editor sue.terpilowski@seanews.co.uk

Ben Durston Designer studio@seanews.co.uk

Priyanka Ann Saini Managing Editor priyanka.saini@seanews.co.uk

Advertising advertising@seanews.co.uk

Facebook www.facebook.com/SeaNews1

Twitter www.twitter.com/SeaNews11

Subscriptions subscriptions@seanews.co.uk

Sea News

1

GREEN ISSUE

CONTENTS

Contents

ISSUE 1 2018

4 Global Warming & the Maritime Industry 7 Ballast Water: Shipping Industry, Marine Life 10 Green Shipping – The Shift to LNG 12 LNG Bunkering Gaining Momentum 14 Renewable Energy Sources Key to Green Shipping 16 Interview: F.D’Souza, Chief Engineer, Bahri 17 Green Shipping: Curbing pollution from the maritime industry 21 Sustainability at APL 25 Palau International Ship Registry 29 CO Emissions 2

33 Slow Steaming to Reduce CO2 Emissions: Key for 2018 35 Sulphur 2020

51

2

Sea News

Arctic Shipping: An Overview

43 Gujarat Maritime Board 45 Galileo Maritime Academy 47 Wärtsilä: Making Waves with Green Shipping 55 The Danger Heavy Fuel Oil Poses to the Arctic Region 57 The Hazards of Arctic Shipping

59 Emission from Commercial Ships – How Feasible is the Transition from Heavy 61 Fuel to Low Sulphur Fuel?

40 Breakthrough Portable Sulphur Test by Parker Kittiwake 37

Pollution Affecting Flora and Fauna Surrounding Major Ports Friend of the Sea Sustainable Shipping Certification

The Felt 63 Benefits

of Clean Shipping

ISSUE 1 2018

Considered Amsterdam?

The greatest port you never thought of.

Yes, that’s us, down there. Yes, you know us as a prime tourist destination and a business service hub.

But did you know that in the port of Amsterdam we have one of Europe’s largest biorefinery clusters?

The port also has reliable infrastructure, logistics providers and terminals, utilities, feedstock and markets literally at spitting distance. Schiphol Airport is, as you know, just around the corner. We reserved space for your business to grow: Biopark Amsterdam. So consider Amsterdam, you are more than welcome to join us! Discover our success stories on portofamsterdam.com

SHIPPING

GLOBAL WARMING & THE MARITIME INDUSTRY

GLOBAL WARMING

Global Warming & the Maritime Industry Climate change, once thought to be a phenomenon that will affect the distant future, is now a serious reality

T

he world has begun to feel its damaging results and understand the urgent need to reverse this deadly and life threatening change. Global warming is not only increasing temperatures around the world but also wiping out whole biospheres and species. Already, it has escalated to a critical problem, one that needs imminent action and immediate attention.

There are various definitions of global warming – “Global warming is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans in recent decades.” - Wikipedia “A gradual increase in the overall temperature of

4

Sea News

the earth’s atmosphere generally attributed to the greenhouse effect caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide, CFCs, and other pollutants.” – Dictionary.com “Gases created through human industrial and agricultural practices (primarily carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels and wood, as well as methane, nitrous oxide, and chlorofluorocarbons) increase the heat-reflecting potential of the atmosphere, thereby raising the planet’s average temperature.” – Encyclopedia of American History The definitions do not instil in us a sense of fear or urgency - that is, until we understand the (now) felt effects of this dangerous phenomenon.

ISSUE 1 2018

GLOBAL WARMING & THE MARITIME INDUSTRY

SHIPPING GLOBAL WARMING

The Union of Concerned Scientists enlists the many dangerous effects that global warming brings: RISING SEAS AND INCREASED COASTAL FLOODING Average global sea level has increased eight inches since 1880, but is rising much faster. Global warming is now accelerating the rate of sea level rise, increasing flooding risks to low-lying communities and high-risk coastal properties.

DISRUPTIONS TO FOOD SUPPLIES Rising temperatures and the accompanying impacts of global warming — including more frequent heat waves, heavier precipitation in some regions, and more severe droughts in others — has significant implications for crop and meat production. Global warming has the potential to seriously disrupt our food supply, drive costs upward, and affect everything from coffee to cattle, from staple food crops to the garden in your backyard.

PLANT AND ANIMAL RANGE SHIFTS A changing climate affects the range of plants and animals, changing their behaviour and causing disruptions up and down the food chain. The range of some warm-weather species will expand, while those that depend on cooler environments will face shrinking habitats and potential extinction.

COSTLY AND GROWING HEALTH IMPACTS Climate change has significant implications for our health. Rising temperatures will likely lead to increased air pollution, a longer and more intense allergy season, the spread of insect-borne diseases, more frequent and dangerous heat waves, and heavier rainstorms and flooding. All of these changes pose serious, and costly, risks to public health.

AN INCREASE IN EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS Strong scientific evidence shows that global warming is increasing certain types of extreme weather events, including heat waves, coastal flooding, extreme precipitation events, and more severe droughts. Global warming also creates conditions that can lead to more powerful hurricanes.

HEAVIER PRECIPITATION AND FLOODING As temperatures increase, more rain falls during the heaviest downpours, increasing the risk of flooding events.

INCREASE IN SEVERITY OF DROUGHTS Climate change affects a variety of factors associated with drought and is likely to increase drought risk in certain regions. As temperatures have warmed, the prevalence and duration of drought has increased.

DESTRUCTION OF CORAL REEFS As global temperatures rise, so too do average sea surface temperatures. These elevated temperatures cause long-term damage to coral reefs. Scientists have documented that sustained water temperatures of as little as one degree Celsius above normal summer maxima can cause irreversible damage.

CHANGING SEASONS Spring arrives much earlier than it used to — 10 days earlier on average in the northern hemisphere. Snow melts earlier. Reservoirs fill too early and water needs to be released for flood control. Vegetation and soils dry out earlier, setting the stage for longer and more damaging wildfire seasons.

MORE DESTRUCTIVE HURRICANES While hurricanes are a natural part of our climate system, recent research indicates that their destructive power, or intensity, has been growing since the 1970s, particularly in the North Atlantic region.

LONGER AND MORE DAMAGING WILDFIRE SEASONS Wildfires are increasing and wildfire season is getting longer in the Western U.S. as temperatures rise. Higher spring and summer temperatures and earlier spring snow-melt result in forests that are hotter and drier for longer periods of time, priming conditions for wildfires to ignite and spread.

MORE FREQUENT AND INTENSE HEAT WAVES Dangerously hot weather is already occurring more frequently than it did 60 years ago—and scientists expect heat waves to become more frequent and severe as global warming intensifies. This increase in heat waves creates serious health risks, and can lead to heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and aggravate existing medical conditions.

WIDESPREAD FOREST DEATH Tens of millions of trees have died in the Rocky Mountains over the past 15 years, victims of a climate-driven triple assault of tree-killing insects, wildfires, and stress from heat and drought.

ISSUE 1 2018

ICE MELTING Temperatures are rising in the planet’s polar regions, especially in the Arctic, and the vast majority of the world’s glaciers are melting faster than new snow and ice can replenish them. Scientists expect the rate of melting to accelerate, with serious implications for future sea level rise.

THE POTENTIAL FOR ABRUPT CLIMATE CHANGE Scientists know that Earth’s climate has changed abruptly in the past. Even though it is unlikely to occur in the near future, global warming may increase the risk

Sea News

5

SHIPPING

GLOBAL WARMING & THE MARITIME INDUSTRY

GLOBAL WARMING

of such events. One of the most significant potential mechanisms is a shift in an ocean circulation pattern known as thermohaline circulation, which would have widespread consequences for Europe and the U.S. East Coast.

Now that we have understood the dangerous and irreversible consequences of global warming, we must ask ourselves how has the shipping industry contributed to this and what measures can we take to prevent it from happening in the future?

The shipping industry is responsible for a significant proportion of the global climate change problem. More than three percent of global carbon dioxide emissions can be attributed to ocean-going ships. This is an amount comparable to major carbon-emitting countries—and the industry continues to grow rapidly. In fact, if global shipping were a country it would be the sixth largest producer of greenhouse gas emissions. Only the United States, China, Russia, India, and Japan emit more carbon dioxide than the world’s shipping fleet. Nevertheless, carbon dioxide emissions from ocean-going vessels are currently unregulated.

The EU emphasises, “Maritime transport emits around 1000 million tonnes of CO2 annually and is responsible for about 2.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Shipping emissions are predicted to increase between 50% and 250% by 2050 – depending on future economic and energy developments. This is not compatible with the internationally agreed goal of keeping global temperature increase to below 2°C compared to preindustrial levels, which requires worldwide emissions to be at least halved from 1990 levels by 2050.”

Impacts are already noted in ports and ship channels due to rising sea levels and changed erosion and sedimentation patterns. Completely new routings are being planned at sea as a result of the melting of the sea ice particularly in around the North Pole. The decreasing polar ice will also enable a number of other maritime activities such as mineral exploitation and fishing in polar areas.

More Than Shipping states, “A record-level low of sea ice has been seen in the Arctic over the past few months.

It worries scientists – and the general public should be worried, too, since arctic animals such as polar bears are estimated to decline by at least 30% by the year 2050.”

The European Commission has taken positive steps in the direction of sustainability by introducing the following measures:

cargo/ passengers from 1 January 2018 at EU maritime ports are to monitor and later report their related CO2 emissions and other relevant information in accordance with their monitoring plan.

•

From 1st January 2018, MRV companies shall monitor for each of their ship CO2 emisssions, fuel consumption and other parameters, such as distance travelled, time at sea and cargo carried on a per voyage basis, so as to gather annual data into a Emissions report submitted to an accredited MRV shipping verifier;

•

From 2019, by 30 April of each year MRV companies shall submit to the Commission through THETIS MRV (a dedicated European Union information system currently under development by the European Maritime Safety Agency) a satisfactorily verified Emissions report for each of the ships having performed EEA related maritime transport in the previous reporting period (calendar year);

• From 2019, by 30 June of each year MRV companies shall ensure that, all their ships having performed activities in the precedent reporting period and visiting EEA ports, carry on board a document of compliance issued by THETIS MRV. This obligation might be subject to inspections by Member States’ authorities.

In addition to these initiatives, the global 0.5% sulphur cap will be introduced in 2020. The decision to implement a global sulphur cap of 0.50% mass/mass (m/m) in 2020 represents a significant cut from the 3.5% m/m global limit currently in place and demonstrates a clear commitment by IMO to ensuring shipping meets its environmental obligations. Sulphur is the major cause of acidification and the cap is in place to create a healthier and safer maritime environment.

Another paradigm shift that is gripping the industry is the shift to LNG as a marine fuel. LNG fuelled ships are able to emit almost zero sulphur oxide emissions, which is appropriate when the regulatory 2015 ECA’s or Emission Control Areas come in action. Due to lesser carbon content in LNG, release of the harmful carbon dioxide gas is reduced by nearly 25 percent. With the present market value of LNG in commercially viable regions such as the US and Europe, LNG could be offered at a competitive price when compared to heavy fuel oil or HFO and even more attractive when compared to the low-sulphur gas oil, as fuel on ships.

Large ships over 5000 gross tonnes loading/ unloading

6

Sea News

ISSUE 1 2018

BALLAST WATER: SHIPPING INDUSTRY, MARINE LIFE

SHIPPING BALLAST WATER

Ballast Water: Shipping Industry, Marine Life ‘Ballast water’ is water carried in ships’ ballast tanks to improve stability, balance and trim

I

t is taken up or discharged when cargo is unloaded or loaded, or when a ship needs extra stability in foul weather. Using water in a tank allows for easier adjustment of weight than stone or iron ballast as was used in older vessels. When ships take on ballast water, plants and animals that live in the ocean are also picked up. Aquatic organisms, pathogens in ballast water, when introduced into the sea, including estuaries, or into fresh water courses, may create hazards to the environment, human health, resources, impair biological diversity or interfere with other legitimate uses of such areas.

REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES The member states of IMO, after more than 14 years of negotiations drafted the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, popularly known as the ‘BWM Convention’.

ISSUE 1 2018

While the BWM was adopted by the IMO in February 2004, it entered into force on September 8, 2017.

Under the Convention, all ships in international traffic are required to manage their ballast water and sediments to a certain standard, according to a ship-specific ballast water management plan. All ships have to carry a ballast water record book and an international ballast water management certificate.

The IMO executed the ‘GloBallast Partnerships Programme’, to sustain the global momentum in tackling the ballast water problem and to catalyse innovative global partnerships to develop solutions. It has been assisting developing countries to reduce the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens in ships’ ballast water and implement the BWM Convention.

The BWM regulation requires that each ship shall have on board and implement a ballast water management

Sea News

7

SHIPPING

BALLAST WATER: SHIPPING INDUSTRY, MARINE LIFE

BALLAST WATER

plan. Parties to the Convention are given the option to take additional measures which are subject to criteria set out in the Convention and to IMO guidelines.

water treatment standard. Eventually, all ships in the trade will need to install an on-board ballast water treatment system.

SHIPOWNERS TAKE Shipowners and managers have not been reticent in speaking out about the risks of installing Ballast Water Management Systems (BWMS) that may pass tests to gain the necessary approvals, but fail to do the job when installed on an actual ship. Drawing on his own experiences, Ioannis Stefanou, Group Technical Director of Wallem Shipmanagement, which has managed more than 40 BWMS-equipped, wonders if they actually work.

The IMO has issued guidelines which restrict use of substances that pose unreasonable risks to the environment, human health, property or resources.

“By work, I am not referring to if they treat the water to the desired level, I mean whether or not they are operational. The answer to this is that unfortunately many don’t, at least not in such a straightforward way as many manufacturers would like us to believe.”

Wallem has employed BWMS using five different treatment systems, from various manufacturers.

“Only two thirds of the systems installed were fully operational onboard within the first six months – on some vessels they were not fully operational even after a year.”

The problems weren’t inherent to a specific type of technology or manufacturer,” Stefanou remarked.

However, he did identify that in his experience one technology exhibited a 100% record in being problem-free. Stefanou believes his company’s experience is mirrored among other users.

REVISION AND CUSTOMISATION OF GUIDELINES With trade routes, technology and shipping volumes evolving, the BWM standards are being phased in over a period of time. The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, requires ships to manage ballast water to remove, render harmless, or avoid the discharge of aquatic organisms and pathogens within ballast water and sediments.

IMO’s ‘Guidelines (G8)’ were revised in 2016 and converted into a mandatory Code for approval of ballast water management systems (BWMS Code). Regulation D-3 of the BWM Convention requires that BWMS must be approved by the Administration taking into account the Guidelines for approval of BWMS (G8).

The latest guidelines make it mandatory for the newly built ships to adhere to the ballast water treatment standard. Existing ships should exchange ballast water mid-ocean but they will need to meet the ballast

8

Sea News

IDEAL BWM PLAN 1. International rules and regulations for different port state controls.

2. Location of ports providing shore discharge facility of sediments and ballast water.

3. Duties of the personnel on board for carrying out ballast operation.

4. Operational procedure along with the method to be used for ballasting.

5. Locations at different coastal water for ballast exchange are mentioned in the plan.

6. Sampling point, treatment method should be given in the BWM plan.

SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, CRUCIAL TO EFFECTIVE BWM Ship operators should adopt effective practices during ballast uptake to avoid sediment accumulation.

However, it is not possible to nullify depositions and carriage of sediment which settles on tank surfaces.

Therefore, when sediment has accumulated, consideration should be given to flushing tank bottoms and other surfaces when the vessel is present in economically viable territories.

Removal of sediment from ballast tanks should preferably be undertaken under controlled conditions in port, at a repair facility or in dry dock. The removed sediment should preferably be disposed of in a sediment reception facility if available, reasonable and practicable. The frequency and timing of removal of sediments may vary depending on factors such as sediment build up, ship’s trading pattern, availability of reception facilities, work load of the ship’s personnel and safety considerations.

Evoqua’s SeaCURE® electrochlorination system is geared to larger vessels, typically tankers and bulk carriers. The technology has evolved from the water treatment systems Evoqua has supplied to the municipal and industrial sectors, as well as the company’s 40-plus years’ experience with its Chloropac® marine growth prevention system (MGPS). Both the SeaCURE and Chloropac systems use electrochlorination technology to limit marine growth

ISSUE 1 2018

BALLAST WATER: SHIPPING INDUSTRY, MARINE LIFE

SHIPPING BALLAST WATER

in ballast water, seawater piping and heat transfer systems of ships and offshore installations.

Both Evoqua’s Chloropac and SeaCURE systems are installed on-board to produce sodium hypochlorite from seawater, and so there is no need to transport and store potentially hazardous disinfectant chemicals. Sodium hypochlorite is a powerful biocide that is capable of reliably destroying or incapacitating microbial contaminants and invasive species.

In addition to in-situ production of biocide from seawater via electrochlorination, Evoqua’s SeaCURE system also combines prefiltration in a unique way.

In ballast water treatment applications, the produced hypochlorite is combined with a filtration stage pretreatment, which first removes larger organisms and sediment. Evoqua’s SeaCURE system is designed to protect the filter from blockage and biofouling by use of a unique patented “trickle dosage” operating process, which maintains a chlorine residual at the filter.

According to Evoqua’s Global Vice-President, Electrocatalytic Business, Ian Stentiford, this new modular system is capable of reducing installation time and complexity while enhancing operation and service. The re-engineering has, in addition, significantly extended the life of the system, reducing maintenance costs.

EXAMPLES: LOW-BALLAST AND NO-BALLAST i) Hybrid Ship, a new design by Nobu Su, minimises the transfer of aquatic organisms by enabling a ship to sail with reduced ballast. It involves retractable duct propellers for low-speed ballast voyages and carries 1/10th of the ballast water typically required. ii) DNV GL developed the ballast-free Triality VLCC design as an alternative to installing BWMs on tankers of the future. According to the company, it is environmentally superior, technically feasible and cost-effective.

THE WAY AHEAD Shipping analyst Clarksons Research estimates a projected demand of around 30,000 ships, representing a retrofit market that could be worth around US$60 billion over the next five years. Evoqua says that it has not yet come across a ship where there is insufficient space for one of its SeaCURE systems, but the key to a successful retrofit will be to allow sufficient time for planning, with engineering provider, system supplier class and owner closely involved through the process from the earliest stage.

It is due to ballast water that ships become a vector for the transfer of organisms between ecosystems, from one part of the world to another. Preventing the transfer of invasive species and coordinating a timely and effective response to invasions requires cooperation and collaboration among governments, economic sectors, NGOs and international treaty organisations.

Ballast water, undoubtedly, controls trim, list, draught, stability and stress of the ship. It continues to be a ‘necessary evil’, transporting pathogens which may cause irreversible damage to environment, public health and the economy.

While future technology development and implementation remains for the foreseeable future to witness. For the current generation of shippers, it is high time that feasible methods such as handy filtration systems, chemical disinfection, ultra-violet treatment, de-oxygenation treatment, thermal treatment (heat), cavitation treatment (acoustic), electric pulse systems and magnetic field treatment are incorporated for the effective treatment of ballast water before discharge.

iii) The development of a Non-Ballast Water Ship (NOBS) design by the Shipbuilding Research Centre of Japan (SRC) demonstrated that it was possible to design a vessel that was ballast-free vessel, but the resulting ship’s breadth was far wider than conventional ships. iv) Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics has developed a car carrier design, Orcelle, that does not require ballast water and does not release any emissions into the atmosphere or into the ocean. The idea combines fuel cells, wind, solar and wave power to propel the vessel.

ISSUE 1 2018

Sea News

9

SHIPPING

GREEN SHIPPING – THE SHIFT TO LNG

LNG

Green Shipping – The Shift to LNG It was a century ago when shipping had transformed from “coal fuelled” to “oil fuelled”. Another hundred years later, the transformation to a newer fuel source is making waves, only this time, it is to “gas” The shift to LNG is related to international efforts for pollutant reduction. In 2012, the International Maritime Organisation designated certain sea areas like the Baltic Sea and the North Sea as emission control areas so that conventional fuels cannot be used there. Low-sulphur oil, marine diesel oil and gasoline can be used as alternative fuels, but these have their own limitations in terms of price and supply stability.

D

riven by tougher international and environmental standards, LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) is being termed as the fuel of the future. According to experts, large scale shipping is to be sourced by LNG in the near future.

According to DNV, being “LNG Ready” could be the best option for many ships.

Whether it is the first LNG cruise ship, the first LNG powered vessel for Woodside Energy, or the first LNG powered vessel for BC ferries, the news lately has been filled with “firsts” for LNG. Back in 2012, a report from DNV GL ambitiously predicted 1000 LNG powered vessels by 2020. And in 2014 Lloyd’s Register predicted LNG-fuelled ships would be 11% of the global fleet in 2030.

10 Sea News

Higher marine fuel oil prices have made way to development of newer technologies based on cost and environment efficient fuels such as natural gas.

Natural gas is a potential winner in terms of being environment friendly, safe, reliable and cost effective.

When compared to oil, natural gas has become an important commodity with a key global energy impact. Due to the influential properties possessed by natural gas, it is the only alternative fuel which is believed to drive the future. Studies have shown that usage of natural gas or LNG as fuel has cut down the poisonous sulphur emissions or SOx significantly with a substantial reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrox or NOx gases.

LNG is super chilled and in liquid state when transported. Since it is already seen as a supplement fuel for a variety of segments, it can create an even bigger impact when used as ship fuel. Climate changes, current and future international shipping regulations, etc. are anticipated as costly laws which need to be complied at various stages and LNG fuel is expected to lend support in the process.

Those in the shipping and shipbuilding industries are recommending LNG as the most environmentfriendly and economical marine fuel. North European countries, Japan, Singapore, China and the United States are already working on relevant infrastructures

ISSUE 1 2018

GREEN SHIPPING – THE SHIFT TO LNG

SHIPPING LNG

and regulations. For instance, Norway built the world’s first LNG-fuelled coastal liner in 2000 and is currently running 14 LNG-fuelled ships, second to none in the world. According to Lloyd’s Register, the size of the global market covering the building and renovation of LNG-powered vessels is expected to grow from six trillion won to no less than 148 trillion won between 2014 and 2025.

21 on climate change, many countries have pledged to do their part in lowering their greenhouse gas emission. Over the past two years, the fastest growth is seen in developing countries installing Floating Storage Regasification Units (FSRUs) for power generation as LNG meets their long term energy policies for cleanliness, plentiful and reliable supply and affordability.

Under the circumstances, the South Korean government is also improving its relevant systems and building an infrastructure so that more LNG-powered ships and LNG bunkering vessels can be in use. At present, South Korean shipbuilders are excellent at building LNG carriers, LNG-fuelled ships and LNG bunkering shuttles but still have a way to go when it comes to the remodelling of LNG-powered ships and LNG bunkering infrastructure. In this regard, the South Korean government came up with some industrial promotion plans in November last year. A series of pilot projects, infrastructure expansion and manpower training are scheduled to follow based on the plans. In addition, the Korea Research Institute of Ships & Ocean Engineering has worked since 2014 on LNG bunkering equipment and a floating LNG bunkering terminal allowing simultaneous natural gas supply and unloading by an LNG supply ship and a bunkering shuttle.

THE CONS: Gas if contained, can explode, so safe handling is very important. Some capital investment is necessary in order to use LNG as a marine fuel. Ship owners are going through tough market conditions today and on top of that they’ve to comply with new regulations like the ballast water treatment system implementation in effect from Sept 8, 2017. If not for cheaper oil and low Sulphur diesel fuels as a result, countless ship owners would be in financial trouble today.

However, before acceptance, it is important to consider the pros and cons of LNG as a marine fuel.

LNG expert Tony Teo explains the advantages and disadvantages.

THE PROS LNG fuel emission provides 20 to 25% reduction in greenhouse gas (CO2), about 80% reduction in NOx and 100% reduction in SOx and Particulate Matters (PM). It is the cleanest fossil fuel we have. With the advance of fracking technology in onshore drilling, the supply of natural gas became plentiful. In the US, gas storage became hugely insufficient at the ongoing production rate. For decades, gas has been safely used in households for cooking and heating. In many countries such as Pakistan, Argentina, India and Brazil, LPG and CNG are widely used in automobiles.

Prior to her wide usage of LNG for power generation Japan was a heavily polluted country like China today.

LNG is an excellent source of energy to store or transport. By itself, it will not burn or explode. It is light (less than half the density of water), odourless, non-toxic, colourless and expands 600 times into clean natural gas when heated. Subsequent to GOP

ISSUE 1 2018

The percentage of ships with LNG fuel is small today.

Of the 50,000 or so international merchant ships trading today, about 80 are on LNG fuel and another 100 are on order. The ships that use these are generally of the type that trade to regular routes such as ferries, offshore supply vessels, harbour tugs and container ships where bunkering infrastructure can be developed. As more bunkering infrastructure gets developed like what’s happening now in northern Europe as a result of governmental support, the popularity and number of LNG fuel vessels will grow. Ship owners with long term prospective, know that oil prices cannot remain low forever over the lifespan of their ships. Come 2020 when the sulphur limit requirement worldwide drops to 0.5%, prices of clean diesel will rise as the 50,000 ships rush to use it. LNG fuel will become more attractive, bearing in mind that there is limited growth in the number of new refineries worldwide. In 2020 EU will also be imposing the NOx IMO Tier III limit which is an 80% reduction from Tier I limits, and as LNG satisfies this requirement its popularity will rise. Companies based in Norway, EU and USA with ships trading locally are the first adopters of LNG fuel. More and more Asian based companies are preparing themselves with their new fleet being fitted with dual fuel engines in order to stay sustainable. Today there are about 60 new buildings on order and built with “LNG Ready” capability with the flexibility to easily switch later to be powered by LNG when needed.

Sea News 11

SHIPPING

LNG BUNKERING GAINING MOMENTUM

LNG

LNG Bunkering Gaining Momentum With the industry’s shift to green shipping – LNG gaining recognition as a clean fuel and in most cases – fuel of choice for the maritime industry, LNG bunkering is now gaining popularity globally and is being undertaken by various players in the field

K

LAW LNG said, “LNG Bunkering is the practice of providing liquefied natural gas fuel to a ship for its own consumption. The key advantage of LNG as a fuel is the vast reduction in pollutant caused by the more traditional method of fuelling ships such as heavy fuel oil, marine diesel fuel (MDO) and marine gas oil (MGO).

Environmental regulatory pressure is building to cut

12 Sea News

emissions caused through ship transportation. It is this imposition of stricter sulphur content limits to marine bunker fuel that is driving LNG Bunkering system design as well as the construction of a LNG fuelling infrastructure.”

The Society for Gas as a Marine Fuel predicts that 2018 will be the “tipping year” for the adoption of LNG bunkering. “We have witnessed such significant

ISSUE 1 2018

LNG BUNKERING GAINING MOMENTUM

SHIPPING LNG

increase in the number of projects and infrastructure recently and this is undoubtedly something we can all further look forward to as the greater maritime industry begins to . . . realise the tremendous benefits of gas-fuelled shipping,” said SGMF general manager Mark Bell in a statement. “I have been asked many times recently: ‘when will be the tipping point for gas-fuelled shipping?’ I believe that there won’t have been any specific moment we can point to. What I do think there will have been is an entire year and that ‘tipping year’ is surely going to be 2018.”

The LNG Bunkering Summit 2019 adds, “It is clear that the industry must focus on partnerships and collaboration at a global level to drive LNG forward as the fuel of the future. In its 6th year, the Annual LNG Bunkering Summit will unite global players from leading ports, LNG terminal operators, ship operators, ship owners, LNG suppliers, and LNG technology providers to develop strategic partnerships and common strategy to drive the LNG Bunkering market forward.”

In August last year, the UK witnessed its first LNG bunkering. The project saw saw a 110-meter cement carrier named Ireland – operated by Norwegian shipping firm KGJ Cement AS – refueled with LNG at the Port of Immingham. At this time, Lee Gannon, Managing Director at Flogas, said, “There is great

ISSUE 1 2018

potential for LNG in the maritime industry as a more environmentally-friendly alternative to traditional oil-based bunker fuels, but until now this potential has remained untapped here in the UK.” The first LNG bunkering of a ship, whilst it was loading, took place in the port of Gothenburg, in October last year. On the occasion, Dan-Erik Andersson, Gothenburg Port Authority Operations Manager at the Energy Port, said, “Even 5-10 years ago the idea of ships running on liquefied natural gas would have almost been regarded as science fiction. Now we have had seven LNG-bunkerings here in less than a month. It would be no exaggeration to describe this as a major breakthrough.”

Andrew Tan, Chief Executive of MPA, said, “as the world’s largest bunkering hub, MPA will support future demand by promoting the development of ship-to-ship LNG bunkering. This will provide the industry greater confidence in the availability of LNG supply across key shipping routes.”

The Global LNG Bunkering Market is expected to cross USD 12 billion by 2024, according to a research report

by Global Market Insights, Inc. With many milestones in the LNG bunkering domain being accomplished last year, the future is limitless for this clean fuel.

Sea News 13

SHIPPING

RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES – KEY TO GREEN SHIPPING

RENEWABLE ENERGY

Renewable Energy Sources Key to Green Shipping We live in an era where global forums are raising serious concerns about environmental pollution due to the increased use of fossil fuels

W

hile rapid industrialisation has amplified pollution levels in the past five decades, the shipping industry remains a key contributor to the menace.

In a bid to curb emissions, the maritime industry is adopting measures to minimise the use of fossil fuels. A major step in this direction is a shift towards utilisation of an alternative energy source – wind power, which is abundantly available on a majority of routes, which vessels traverse.

WINDMILL SHIPS A wind energy conversion system ship or wind energy harvester ship, propels itself by the use of a windmill to drive a propeller. They use wind power through a mechanical or electrical transmission for the propeller.

Where transmission is electric, storage batteries may also be used to allow power generated at one time to be used for propulsion later on. As the mill can rotate 360 degrees, the ship can sail in all directions.

14 Sea News

ROTOR SAIL The rotor sail was invented by German engineer, Anton Flettner. This is a spinning metal cylinder, which harnesses wind power to propel a ship. When wind passes through the spinning rotor sail, the air flow accelerates on one side and decelerates on the opposite side. The thrust created by the rotor is perpendicular to the direction of wind.

Though the system derives energy in the form of electricity to spin the sail, the thrust it produces means the engines can be amply throttled. This also means an overall reduction of fuel consumption and emissions. ‘Enercon’ launched a rotor ship in 2008, while Norsepower added its first rotor sail to a cargo ship in 2014.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Currently, a number of companies are working on the development of an integrated renewable energy system for ships. The research includes incorporating technology along with marine wind power, energy

ISSUE 1 2018

RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES – KEY TO GREEN SHIPPING

SHIPPING RENEWABLE ENERGY

CHALLENGES IN INSTALLATION The modern attempt to harness wind for ocean travel failed to compete with diesel power. Rotor sails were too heavy and the costs too high for them to yield the expected fuel savings and become successful with shipping operators.

storage and a computer system to monitor ship performance. Technology firms are also working on the use of fuel cells.

1) Japanese company Eco Marine Power (EMP) has started research on the practical applications and engineering aspects of installing a renewable energy solution on a variety of ships. EMP’s ‘EnergySail’ is a device that can be fitted with a range of renewable energy technologies.

2) Maersk is planning to install ‘rotor sails’ to an oil tanker, for cutting fuel costs and carbon emissions.

According to Norsepower, this will be the maiden retrofit installation of a wind-powered energy system on a tanker.

3) Finnish cargo vessel Estraden travels through the North Sea frequently and it uses wind power in addition to burning oil. The ship does this by harnessing the wind with rotor sails and spinning cylinders atop the ship.

When wind conditions are favourable, every sail is capable of producing around 3MW power using only 50kW of electricity. Norsepower expects to reduce average fuel consumption on global shipping routes by 7 per cent to 10 per cent, equivalent to about 1,000 tonnes of fuel a year.

ISSUE 1 2018

Each rotor sail is made using the latest intelligent lightweight composite sandwich materials, and offers a simple yet robust hi-tech solution, although they could still cost more than USD 2.02 million to install.

That is the equivalent of around 5.5 per cent of the cost of a typical used ship of that size, but a significantly lower percentage for a new tanker.

FUTURE OF WIND-POWERED SHIPS Over 200 years after steamships first began crossing the ocean, wind power is finding its way back into seafaring. Shipping companies have expressed renewed interests in rotor sails and related innovations because of improvement in technology and stringent environmental regulations.

As per the latest regulations, 2020 onwards, shipping companies will be required to reduce the sulphur content of the fuel their vessels use. This is a potential factor which can augment investment in technologies such as rotor sails. Wind propulsion has already acquired support from all corners of the shipping industry and well placed to be more popular in the near future.

With the development of lightweight and cheaper materials and designs, combined with higher oil prices and the need to reduce emissions, rotor sails could now take off. Shipping firms will be inclined to adopt these measures, as the new pollution rules that will come into effect at the end of the decade become mandatory.

Sea News 15

SHIPPING

INTERVIEW: F. D’SOUZA, CHIEF ENGINEER, BAHRI

INTERVIEW

Interview: F. D’Souza, Chief Engineer, Bahri The industry is seeing a paradigm drift towards green shipping (BWTS, Sox, NOx, CO2, Sulphur Cap). Can you, as a mariner elaborate on changes that are taking place in operations

W

hat are the changes you have observed in the past year?

Changes certainly have been taking place and the outcome has been ‘Green’. Clean burning and very efficient engines are being manufactured. Up to 30% reduction in fuel consumption due to these new designs have been recorded. Along with better engines, industry has come up with super coatings for the hull (below water line) which reduce friction and also prevent marine growth. These coatings have reduced fuel consumption by another 5% or so. Naval architects and Engineers are changing hull and propeller design, have introduced ducts/guides/ vanes to direct the flow of water efficiently and thus reduce fuel consumption which directly relates to less pollutants in the environment. BWTS technologies are nascent and few types are in use at the moment.

Efficient designs have as yet a long way to go. Present systems, some of which are rather complex use Chlorination, UV and even Nitrogen in their processes.

LNG is gaining momentum as the preferred marine fuel choice. Can you comment on the advantages/ disadvantages/future?

Advantages of using LNG would be reduction in machinery and weight of the vessel and of course clean burning of fuel with almost no toxic emissions.

Disadvantage would be the storage and volatility of LNG. Safety during operations would be very critical due to its highly flammable properties. Given ever improving technology, LNG should be fueling the future.

16 Sea News

There is a lot of talk about autonomous shipping industry giants like Rolls Royce seem to be making headway in this direction. Do you see this dominating the industry in the near future?

Autonomous shipping sounds great and would function well in closed circuit, highly regulated and secure water ways. In the open seas, there are a lot of challenges that a “large” autonomous vessel would encounter. For example: pirates, fishing boats, floating debris, drifting wrecks, oil slicks, rogue waves, nasty weather, named hurricanes, errant islands, nouveau reefs, ghost ships, sirens, ocean going vandals, etc.

Not to mention common failure of satellite navigation and communication, machinery failure, confrontation with Navies, Coast Guards, Port State Control, Customs officials, vetting inspectors, bribe seekers and kleptomaniacs. Liability and litigation in case of a collision, running aground, territorial disputes … there is an entire ocean of possibilities for autonomous shipping to cross over!

What do you perceive the future of green shipping will look like. What kind of trends do you anticipate?

Shipping would be truly “GREEN” when we stop burning fossil fuels for propulsion. Anticipate future trends such as harnessing wind, solar and perhaps wave energy itself to propel a vessel. Lighter batteries with dense storage capabilities would perhaps lead to fully electric propulsion. Nuclear power is an option that cannot be overlooked .

Any additional thoughts/comments on the subject of green shipping that you would like to share?

Going printer/paperless would be the easiest start to going green and saving the trees.

ISSUE 1 2018

GREEN SHIPPING: CURBING POLLUTION FROM THE MARITIME INDUSTRY

SHIPPING POLLUTION

Green Shipping: Curbing pollution from the maritime industry Around 90 per cent of world trade is carried out by international shipping, which is therefore an essential part of the modern world economy

H

owever, ships are also responsible for the release of a range of noxious gases and carbon dioxide. Therefore, the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is working with the shipping industry to reduce these emissions and make shipping more environmentally friendly.

Shipping is the most energy-efficient way to move large volumes of cargo. Yet ships emit nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulphur oxides (SOx), carbon dioxide and particulate matter (PM) into the atmosphere. Between

ISSUE 1 2018

2007 and 2012, shipping accounted for 15 per cent of annual NOx emissions from anthropogenic sources, 13 percent of SOx and 3 percent of CO2.

In Europe in 2013, ships contributed 18 percent of NOx emissions, 18 percent of SOx and 11 percent of particles less than 2.5 micrometres in size. For road transport, the figures were 33 percent, 0 percent and 12 percent, respectively. Aviation, by contrast, accounted for only 6 percent, 1 percent and 1 percent, respectively, and rail just 1 percent, 0 percent and 0 percent.

Sea News 17

SHIPPING

GREEN SHIPPING: CURBING POLLUTION FROM THE MARITIME INDUSTRY

POLLUTION

HEALTH IMPACT It is alarming that particulates emitted from ships cause 60,000 cardiopulmonary and lung-cancer deaths every year worldwide. The expansion of harbours to accommodate huge vessels destroys coastal ecosystems. On the other hand, scrapping of fleets of obsolete smaller ships, adds to marine pollution, and damages workers’ health, especially in the developing world.

IMO’S ENGAGEMENT TO PUSH GREEN SHIPPING The IMO has aggressively decided to encourage Green Shipping. The organisation has restricted the release of oils, noxious liquids, harmful substances, sewage and garbage into the oceans through the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). Air-pollution limits for shipping were adopted in 1997, which came into force in 2005.

The IMO has set up four ‘emission-control areas’ — the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, the US Caribbean and the coastal waters of Canada and the United States — where ships are required to minimise emissions mainly of SOx and NOx. These regions exclude the world’s ten largest container ports, such as the Chinese ports of Shanghai, Shenzhen, Hong Kong and the South Korean port of Busan. These ten sites alone contribute 20 per cent of port emissions worldwide.

A few developed countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom and Norway, limit the sulphur content of marine fuel in their national waters to within 1,000 parts per million (ppm). Most developing countries, including India and China, permit dirtier fuels with 35,000 ppm of sulphur.

IMPACT OF RISE IN TRADE VOLUME The seaborne container trade has grown from 100 million tonnes in 1980 to about 1.6 billion tonnes in 2014. Standardised 20-foot (6-metre) containers are moved using automated systems that connect seaports, airports and train stations. While the larger vessels carry more cargo, they consume less oil and release lesser pollutants per unit of cargo.

The Panama Canal, which connects the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, can currently handle vessels carrying only up to about 5,000 standard containers.

Heavy traffic at Panama, complicated navigation and constant maintenance has led to a ten-day delay in voyage times, giving rise to atmospheric pollution.

Nonetheless, the human and environmental costs of shipping are vast. Low-grade marine fuel oil contains 3,500 times more sulphur than road diesel. Large ships

18 Sea News

pollute the air in hub ports, accounting for one-third to half of airborne pollutants.

The need of the hour is to have stricter emissions regulations such as a standard for sulphur released by combustion of marine fuel. A 97 per cent cut in SOx can be achieved by reducing the sulphur content from 35,000 ppm to 1,000 ppm fuel oil. Currently, the low oil price provides a great opportunity for this transition to happen.

The current cost of 1,000 ppm-grade fuel oil is less than half of that of the cheapest dirty fuel four years ago.

GREEN SHIPPING – NEED OF THE HOUR In the current scenario, efficient marine transport with minimal health and ecological damage is the need of the hour. The adoption of clean practices in ship scrapping, emission control and port management can lead the industry to advanced practices through technology and innovations. Achieving this will require substantial efforts by the industry and its engineers in collaboration with regulators, port authorities and communities. Environmental impacts should be considered in determining optimal routes and modes for delivery of goods.

Marine fuel is as good as an ancillary business for oil refineries, contributing only 2 to 4 per cent of the total fuel market. Stricter emissions standards will stimulate demand for high-quality fuel. Incentive programmes (tax rebate and subsidies for producers) will be needed to ensure a reasonable profit margin to recover the initial high investment in developing countries, where there is little current capacity. Government interventions will be needed in countries with state-run oil companies, such as in China and India.

GREEN SHIPPING ALTERNATIVES With many regulations pertaining to emissions control, the protection of the environment and marine life in place, ship designing has become a cumbersome affair. With specific norms and design mandates governing ship designing, shipping companies have resorted to tried and tested procedures to achieve ‘Green ships.’ These steps not only fulfil the latest environmental rules but also leave minimum possible carbon foot-prints.

To single out few among the tested methods was not an easy task, given the acceptability and financial feasibility attached to many of these. One of the approved technologies for a green ship can be the ‘No Ballast System’. a) While the Ballast Water Convention by the IMO focuses on reducing the transit of sediments

ISSUE 1 2018

GREEN SHIPPING: CURBING POLLUTION FROM THE MARITIME INDUSTRY

SHIPPING POLLUTION

and micro-organisms of one territory to another, to prevent this condition, plans of making ‘No Ballast Ships’ is under progress. A no ballast ship is a perfect solution to root out the marine ingress of micro-organisms. b) The usage of LNG fuel for propulsion is the future of the shipping industry. LNG fuel helps in the reduction of air pollution from ships, and a combination of LNG fuel with diesel oil will lead to efficient engine performance, resulting in fuel savings. c) An aptly designed propeller accompanied with a smooth rudder system will affect fuel consumption reduction by 4 percent leading to less emissions.

Advanced designs of propeller and rudder systems have been developed to not only reduce the fuel consumption but also improve the speed of the vessel. d) An essential factor that can impact the fuel consumption and emission from vessels is the hull design. Application of good quality and correct paint coatings in correct hull areas can reduce the frictional resistance of the ship, resulting in 3 to 8 per cent of fuel savings. e) Exhaust gas recirculation is a major aspect, which can reduce NOx emissions from the engine. This is achieved with scavenge air which lowers the temperature of the combustion chamber. Some part of the exhaust air is re-circulated and added to scavenge air of the engine, which reduces the oxygen content of the scavenge air along with the temperature of the combustion cylinder. With this method, NOx reduction of up to 80 percent can be achieved.

on their future development plans to demonstrate the responsible management of public assets. They should coordinate with transport-planning bureaus to seek the economical and environmentally friendly strategy to dispatch goods, the optimal capacities of terminals, and how to assist ships to load and unload quickly.

Making port-business statistics and the results of environmental-impact studies accessible will allow the research community to be involved in the decisionmaking process. Environmental NGOs should campaign to increase public awareness of port development.

THE WAY AHEAD Due to the imperative role of shipping in facilitating global cargo flow, the sustainable development of shipping operations has become a concern to different groups of stakeholders. While international trade has grown significantly following rapid increases in global sourcing activities and dispersed production sites, shipping firms are looking for ways to enhance the environmental sustainability of their operations. Green operations in the shipping industry are environmentally sustainable ways to perform shipping activities.

It may be interesting to note that around 200 years ago, ocean going sailing ships reached speeds of 16 knots or more, carrying trade across the globe.

Most importantly, these vessels released no harmful emissions and could cross the globe without using a drop of oil. But since then, world shipping has strayed off the green path, and the benefit of using wind power on board large ships was forgotten. Therefore, the area to explore wind energy for sailing ships in a greener way remains to be explored extensively to curb marine pollution.

f) The waste heat recovery mechanism is already in use and efforts are on to make it more efficient.

This can reduce the fuel consumption of the ship up to 14 percent of the total consumption. The waste heat from the exhaust gases can be utilised to generate steam, which in turn can be used for heating the cargo area, accommodation, fuel oil etc. g) Adding water to fuel right before its injection into the combustion chamber can reduce the temperature inside the cylinder liner. An efficient system for this can result in NOx reduction of up to 35 per cent.

ROLE OF PORT AUTHORITIES Port authorities should review the environmental impact of their existing construction and disclose information

ISSUE 1 2018

Sea News 19

n o .

e n li

r o f

he t n i 0 o 2 to j % 0 5 .

2 e r d h . u t n s a f h l o e s p l t u u view pac me f s t i i m d t i i n s Vi ws a n the r mar o o f ne e p t a a c b e r d u h lp u s

SUSTAINABLITY AT APL

SHIPPING SUSTAINABLITY

Sustainability at APL Mr. Dennis Yee, Global Head of Safety, Security & Environment at APL, tells us about APL’s aims to minimize the environmental impact of its growth and prove that rising global trade and a healthy planet can be compatible aims

d) Setting the highest standard in terms of ethics and compliance.

• APL CEO, Nicolas Sartini champions APL’s sustainability course with the support of an APL Sustainability Steering Committee.

•

The committee reviews APL’s sustainability policies and practices, formulates strategies, identifies and recommends solutions, as well as engages stakeholders internally and externally.

The industry is shifting towards environmentfriendly shipping measures, how does APL feel about this paradigm shift?

• We live in an age in which sustainable development has become an integral part of conducting business.

• APL is resolved on taking a proactive stance in driving corporate sustainability, for the good of people, environment and business.

S

ustainability is a strong part of APL’s culture and vision, how does the company practise this on a daily basis?

•As a responsible carrier, APL is committed to ensuring sound environmental standards in all our activities, empowering talents and communities as well as upholding ethical business practices.

APL has won the Green Shipping Line award three consecutive times, what makes APL stand out amongst others?

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY • APL adheres to the Quality, Health, Safety and Environmental Policy of the CMA CGM Group. The policy seeks to mitigate the environmental impact of our operations, promote workplace safety and safeguard the assets and goods that we carry across the ocean.

• As part of the CMA CGM Group, APL has aligned our course with that of the Group which focuses on:

• Aligned with the Group, our environmental protection initiatives include:

a) Excellence in terms of safety and the environment;

a) Reducing container carbon emission level by 30% between 2015 and 2025, a target set by the CMA CGM Group. (CMA CGM Group had already reduced its carbon emissions by container transported by kilometre by 50% between 2005 and 2015);

b) Commitment towards employees; c) Economic and social development locally and internationally; and

ISSUE 1 2018

Sea News 21

SHIPPING

SUSTAINABLITY AT APL

SUSTAINABLITY

b) Promote use of clean energy such as the development of shore power/cold-ironing and the use of LNG fuel. CMA CGM Group will be, in 2020, the first shipping company in the world to use 22,000-TEU containerships with an LNG propulsion c) Conserve marine biodiversity with the use of a ballast water treatment system; d) Green disposal and dismantling; e) Deploying biodegradable lube oil and fuel with low sulphur content f) Protecting endangered species by prohibiting shipment such as sharkfin; and g) Offering environmentally-friendly solutions to customers.

• Committed in being an environmental steward, APL has continually advanced in lowering our fleet emission levels across the trades where our vessels ply.

• Reducing carbon emissions a) In 2016, APL successfully reduced our vessel fleet carbon dioxide emissions by 48%, compared to emissions level in 2009. b) APL’s vessel performance management and

22 Sea News

maintenance strategy have been pivotal in ensuring that its operations stay efficient and thus green.

Through continual improvements in operational efficiencies, fleet and voyage optimisation, as well as the deployment of a fuel-efficient and environmentally-friendly fleet of vessels, APL has successfully lowered our fleet carbon dioxide emission levels annually.

• Reducing sulphur oxide emissions a) As our vessels have been using fuel with a much lower sulphur content than that which is mandated by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) regulations, sulphur oxide emission levels from our vessel fleet have consistently stayed low. b) Since 1 January 2017, 70% of our container fleet calling in California is cold-iron capable. We fulfill the more stringent requirement with vessels switching off their auxiliary engines and plugging into on-shore power when at berth in Californian ports. The efforts add up in reducing emissions of nitrogen oxide, sulphur oxide and particulate matter into the environment. c) Moving forward, APL will make further inroads in environmental protection as the CMA CGM Group powers on with nine 22,000-TEU LNG vessels to be delivered in 2020.

ISSUE 1 2018

SUSTAINABLITY AT APL

SHIPPING SUSTAINABLITY

d) As the 2020 sulphur cap draws near, the Group will continue to identify the best solutions to further reducing sulphur emissions.

• Protecting ocean biodiversity a) Pioneering ocean biodiversity protection, APL progressively implemented ballast water management plans across our vessel fleet in accordance with the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM Convention). The Convention entered into force on 8 September 2017. b) Under the Convention, all ships in international traffic are required to manage their ballast water and sediments to a certain standard, according to a ship-specific ballast water management plan.

All ships will also have to carry a ballast water record book and an international ballast water management certificate. The ballast water management standards will be phased in over a period of time. Eventually most ships will need to install an on-board ballast water treatment system. c) As at 31 December 2016, 32 APL-owned vessels are fitted with IMO-compliant ballast water treatment systems while the remaining fleet deploys the intermediate solution of mid-ocean ballast water exchange. Consistent with the Convention’s terms, we ensure our ships manage their ballast water to remove, render harmless, or avoid the uptake or discharge of aquatic organisms and pathogens within ballast water and sediments.

ISSUE 1 2018

• No carriage of endangered species products a) Abiding by all laws and regulations, APL ensures that we stay aligned with global environmental sustainability initiatives. We refer to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) as we continually review our list of no-carriage products including shark fin, dolphins, whales, elephant tusks as well as rhinoceros and antelope horns. b) Through engagement with industry peers, partners and stakeholders, we continue to facilitate global trade in a sustainable and responsible manner.

The ICS recently predicted a future of zero carbon shipping - what is APL’s stance on this?

•

•

As a responsible corporate citizen, APL will ensure compliance with all applicable environmental regulations and legal requirements.

APL, as part of CMA CGM Group, will continue to work with stakeholders and organisations such as the clean Cargo Working Group to develop and optimise technical and operational solutions to further reduce carbon emissions.

What is APL’s take on green shipping (measures and vision) and what does APL predict for the future of Green Shipping?

• APL believes that every stakeholder plays a role in protecting the environment. We will continually engage in open dialogue with stakeholders and encourage a shared responsibility for environmental excellence.

Sea News 23

Galileo Maritime Academy “The home of MCA seafarer training in Asia Pacific" Based in Phuket, Thailand, we are providing 20 STCW courses each month and are approved to issue Certificates of Competence on behalf of MCA. Courses include basic and advanced STCW, Approved Engineering, Vessel Stability, Efficient Deckhand, Medical Care, Security and Crowd Management, Disaster Prevention, Survival Craft and Fast Rescue, Incident Management, Hospitality, Culinary and Housekeeping. Our new purpose built crew residence is in the centre of our campus of training facilities at Yacht Haven Marina.

Contact: Anthony Gould AFNI FRGS anthony@galileomaritimeacademy.com www.GalileoMaritimeAcademy.com

Maritime & Coastguard Agency MCA accredited course provider

PALAU INTERNATIONAL SHIP REGISTRY

SHIPPING SHIP REGISTRIES

Palau International Ship Registry The registry sailing into greener and calmer waters

A

t the end of October 2017 the highly respected ‘Fairplay’ reported on the growth of global shipping registries and placed Palau International Ship Registry (PISR) as one of the fastest growing flags in the shipping world with an impressive 43.2% growth in the number of vessels joining the registry since 2013.

This is despite not having an easy last 12 months for the registry with issues surrounding the Paris MoU ranking and its continuing fight which it is starting to win to be recognised as a credible and innovative flag.

But during this past 12 months this has not deterred them from designing new innovations making Palau

ISSUE 1 2018

well on its way to being a smart, green and respected registry. The Government of the Republic of Palau has been involved in environmental issues since 1981 when it enacted its Environmental Quality Protection Act. With the support and personal backing of the current President, Tommy Remengesau, the administration has become something of a beacon and leading protagonist for environmental matters in the region.

Earlier this year (2017) the President addressed the Pacific Island Conference of Leaders saying “It is simply time. Time for each Pacific leader to make conservation a priority.” This is part of the ongoing

Sea News 25

SHIPPING

PALAU INTERNATIONAL SHIP REGISTRY

SHIP REGISTRIES

process of environmental concern and action being taken by the Palau government and also the Palau registry. To this end the registry became a member of the Hellenic Marine Environment Protection Association (HELMEPA), the pioneering voluntary organisation representing Greek seafarers and ship owners looking to safeguard the seas from shipgenerated pollution. With the support of the Palau government and President Remengesau in driving environmental issues and with the Palau International Registry committing to being a strong voice in HELMEPA, the far-sighted drive to make the seas safer and more environmentally cleaner is part of the registry’s DNA. Creating and launching a registry is not an easy task but it does give you a unique advantage of being able to learn the existing gaps in other registries and create a dynamic new registry for today’s and tomorrow’s shipping needs. Green shipping has been a key issue for PISR during this period and that is why they have introduced a Green certification and discount scheme, more of which we will feature later on.

With any new registry there are a hundred and one things to remember; a score of new ideas that need to be integrated into operational plans and all that while the registry is fully functioning. Despite the pressures and the weight of industry regulations, the desire to establish a new registry can often overcome the reluctance to take on such challenges. The registry first saw the light of day in 2010 when Palau International Ship Registry (PISR) was appointed by the Government of The Republic of Palau as the Ship Registry Administrator. From the outset it was a task that current CEO, Panos Kirnidis, knew would provide an interesting challenge.

“The majority of flags have been around for a long time.

Our world class ship registry provides administrative, legal and technical support; documenting the ship and registering it under the Flag of the Republic of Palau.

This was probably the easy part: using our knowledge and experience to establish PISR in those terms and then devoting our time to creating new systems, new operational parameters and reaching out to ship owners and managers across the world. Right from the outset we studied the mistakes other registries had made and we learned from those issues. This meant we were able to ‘fast track’ our growing operations and show we had the skills and the personnel in place to provide owners with the services they needed.”

The expansion of the PISR network to Piraeus, Greece

26 Sea News

and the establishment of the European Head Office is part of a comprehensive plan to develop the registry. Panos Kirnidis was appointed late in 2016 as the new CEO and he has worked on improving the management team and recruiting experienced and very well qualified staff to be a part of PISR in Europe.

This is a significant investment in terms of location and staff with a whole series of marketing initiatives pushing PISR forward while retaining its credibility and operational efficiency.

Panos Kirnidis is adamant in this respect: “In many ways, this is a new start for PISR in Europe but comes with the same attention to detail we have become recognized for worldwide. We have no doubts about our abilities in providing services to our clients across the globe. PISR has the right professional maritime personnel, auditors, surveyors and inspectors on call and ready to answer the calls from our clients. When we talk about professional services it is not only about knowledge but also the enthusiasm and diligence and we can stand with anyone in the industry on these lines. Our registration services are proving to be smoother, faster and even more efficient as we face the demands of the new shipping industry. But it is not good enough to simply be ‘another new registry’ when you can absorb the new technologies the shipping world will come to rely on over the next decade. The environment is shaping futures and regulatory bodies are not slow to use the future of the planet and our oceans to drive agendas that have greater concern for these matters. This is laudable and at PISR we are embracing the calls for more attention to be paid to green issues in shipping.”

Even the simplest of discussions about green shipping issues focuses on efficient marine transport, avoiding any health and ecological damage. Yet the drive for a green industry also covers more than just the vessels and the routes they use. Registries such as PISR are now more than ever mindful of the issues of final voyage scrapping, emission controls and port management. Achieving this to any extent that makes a significant difference to the industry and the environment requires collaboration with regulators, port authorities, local communities, owners, ship managers and the registries themselves. The talk from the environmental warriors is often couched in terms of making people pay for their industrial practices and asking the maritime industry to further consider optimal routes and modes for delivery of goods that reduce environmental impacts.

ISSUE 1 2018

PALAU INTERNATIONAL SHIP REGISTRY

SHIPPING SHIP REGISTRIES

Panos Kirnidis sees the industry as agile enough to understand these concerns and do something about them. “Look, the shipping industry is leaving no stone unturned in a real effort to contribute towards a greener marine environment and much safer seas.

You only have to look at how comprehensive the forthcoming Sulphur 2020 cap regulations are to see this. This is a giant step forward to reduce pollution and the impact of shipping on the environment. At all levels in manufacturing, managing ships, the administration and maintenance and the interactions with the logistics industry, the maritime sector is taking advantage of the latest technologies to ensure significant reductions in the global pollution caused by ships is paramount. The Sulphur 2020 cap and the recent ballast water regulations – adopted in 2004 and brought into force in September 2017 – are signs that the shipping world understands the need for control and protection of the environment. Our aim is to be a part of the change that will benefit the industry over the next decade.”

Established industries have always found change something of a curate’s egg: good in some parts, bad in others. It is no different with the shipping world and all registries have some concerns with certain regulations. Panos Kirnidis believes his registry and others need to embrace technology in all aspects of their operations.

“When I look at other registries I see size and reputation as two of the main driving forces. We are building on innovation, technology and modernized service delivery along with our experience and knowledge in order to maintain the higher possible standards. This takes time and we have no intention in plunging into a quantity over quality issue. We create our space and our position as a SMART Registry. Technology will

ISSUE 1 2018

not stop developing. There will be no rolling back of the operational parameters because it is cheaper or simpler to do things the old way. This is not the first time I’ve said that the shipping world needs to wake up and embrace the philosophy of smart shipping because in many ways it is already here. Along with green initiatives we have a duty to make our registry a smart operation that works for everyone. There is more than one hardened economist that will tell you that the downturn in the world economy is not going to last forever. Yet I’m staggered when I talk to some people or read in the media the thoughts and opinions of some in the maritime industry that seem reluctant to fully embrace technology. We need to be innovative and appreciate that smart shipping and technology in all forms will be the driving force behind much of the industry in the next decade. There are no longer short-term solutions when it comes to green shipping. No matter what part you play in this industry you had better be prepared for when the world economy turns and the shipping world recovers. Make no mistake that the time to embrace this technology is now. Technology and the environment can work hand in hand for greener operations and we need to realise that we are heading towards a zero-emission world. The days of fossil fuels are on the wane; new power units, LNG, hydrogen engines, solar and sail are still going to be in that mix. Autonomous vessels will be here within a decade and yet we are still fighting battles with technologies that have been with us for a century. Recent forecasts have suggested the first full electric ship will be with us in 2018 although the Chinese have already launched an all-electric vessel carrying coal along the Pearl River. “ The drive to achieve greener operations is not going to be easy when so much of the shipping industry is concerned with operational viability and faced with

Sea News 27

SHIPPING

PALAU INTERNATIONAL SHIP REGISTRY

SHIP REGISTRIES

more and more expensive regulations. This has an impact on all registries and yet Palau has managed to record strong growth that puts it well ahead of other expanding registries.

PISR understands it has to invest in the future and it is already attracting significant numbers of tankers into its fleet along with Ro-Ro vessels, bulk carriers and offshore ships. Tankers currently comprise just under half of the PISR fleet and they see this as a growth area according to Fairplay. “This news is not surprising to Palau as we have been steadily growing and we are attracting not only tankers but also passenger, container and general cargo ships who all want to sail under our flag. We will be working with our owners and operators to ensure green credentials mean more than certificates on the wall. Growth is always associated with strength and we have that with our latest software and recruitment. Our goal is to become one of the world’s leading registries and ship owners and operators are recognising Palau has the infrastructure to support them.”

Palau International Ship Registry introduced a new Deficiency Prevention System (DPS) towards the end of 2016 as part of its drive to a leading technological registry. This consists of a dedicated department monitoring all ships under the Palau flag to reduce deficiency and casualty rates. PISR Flag State Inspectors (FSI) network works with the DPS to ensure vessels are safe and sound, ready to undergo any PSC inspection.

The people and the system work smoothly to maintain operations that often require support at difficult times anywhere across the globe. It is all about having information to hand with owners wanting to see how their vessels are operating from a desktop and even suggesting we can help them carry on sailing. It may be just a small step towards greener operations but it is a big step forward for Panos Kirnidis.

“The Institute of Chartered Shipbrokers recently forecasted a zero carbon future for the global shipping industry and this is a real sign that the industry is coming to terms with the pressures to achieve this.

The industry is currently undergoing changes to both regulation and economic conditions. To remain a key player in this sector we, along with other registries, will have to be flexible, adaptable and attuned to the concise needs of our clients. Technology will be a key driver here but without losing the human touch. At Palau we have already demonstrated to the industry that we have the skills, knowledge and experience to be regarded as a world class registry and that is reflected

28 Sea News

in the recent dramatic increase in our business. “ PISR believes in green shipping because it is the way forward; in an industry that relies on the environment for its core services it makes sense to protect those who are connected to it in so many ways. Kirnidis recognises that his registry is new but this has not prevented PISR from making a firm commitment to green and smart technological developments. “We have introduced the PISR Green Certification which rewards ships that are extra clean and safe with financial and non-financial benefits. We understand that in order to kick-start a greater and greener awareness in the shipping world there needs to something given back in return. By rewarding high safety and environmental standards in shipping we see our Green Discount makes above standard ship operations economically more attractive. We are currently driving this hard and the PISR Green Discount scheme is open to oil tankers, chemical tankers and dry bulk carriers, LNG, LPG and container carriers and inland navigation vessels. To this end along with the Annual Safety Inspection (ASI) we will be certifying any of the ships subscribing to this scheme as green providing they meet the requirements that demonstrate they have the operational procedures that comply with green shipping. The initiative for Green Certificate is always with the ship owner or manager. The attractive aspect of this is that an application to PISR can be made without any costs. The certificate is subject to renewal every year along with the Annual Safety Inspection (ASI).

“We are all involved in one or another way in this quest for greener shipping and protection for our environment. We are currently a part of the problem, and therefore we shall be part of the solution and it has been said by many and yet still rings true. We shall increase our competitive edge in a decade where customer demands for environmentally friendly operations are increasing. Environmental regulations tighten and put more pressure on a registry like ours, energy cost increases, new technologies are coming into play and the maritime cluster is expecting greater environmental awareness and action but we are on top of all this and pushing on with our expansion.

The challenges ship-owners and managers face we can help them with. This is the role of a registry and when every ship has to be fully compliant with new environmental rules and regulations; PISR will be there for them and help them achieve these.”

ISSUE 1 2018

CO2 EMISSIONS

SHIPPING CARBON DIOXIDE

CO2 Emissions Carbon dioxide (CO2) makes up the largest share of ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHGs) which disturbs the earth’s radiative balance

T

his is leading to an increase in the earth's surface temperature and to related effects on climate, sea level rise and world agriculture.

First and foremost, the sea level rise – caused by melting glaciers and the expansion of ocean water as it increases in temperature threatens port infrastructure, which is by necessity situated at sea level. It’s worth noting that the rate of sea level rise is slow and varies a great deal from location to location.

CO2 EMISSIONS ON THE RISE Global emissions of carbon dioxide have risen by 99%, or on average 2.0% per year, since 1971, and are projected to rise by another 45% by 2030, or by 1.6%

ISSUE 1 2018

per year. Shipping currently accounts for nearly 3% of global CO2 emissions.

A latest study suggests that shipping could be responsible for 17% of global CO2 emissions in 2050 if left unregulated. Even the International Maritime Organisation’s (IMO) own research found that shipping GHG emissions are up 70% since 1990 and projected to grow by up to 250% by 2050.

IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT, SHIPPING The global maritime industry revolves around ports and shipping companies which face the direct impact of CO2 emissions. The industry is in a spot of bother dealing with the adverse effects of climate change that

Sea News 29

SHIPPING

CO2 EMISSIONS

CARBON DIOXIDE

will be a challenge for the aforementioned sectors from several aspects.

As the sea level rises, it will take increasingly weak storms and their resulting storm surges to impact infrastructure on land. This is not just an issue for port infrastructure. Inundation from storm surge can impact the operations of port facilities by preventing labourers from getting to work.

Observations in 2012 suggest that the Arctic ice is melting rapidly, leading to new opportunities for use of the Arctic Ocean. However, it has an adverse impact on other regions involving the maritime industry.

Higher temperatures increase refrigeration costs and increased storminess could force longer and more expensive shipping routes. Intensified rainfall leads to delay in loading and unloading of cargo at ports.

REMEDIAL ACTIONS BY GLOBAL BODIES The alarming findings have increased pressure on policymakers to take action on climate change. The IMO, in October 2017, conducted a study combining the global ship operations (AIS) data with detailed vessel characteristics for more than half a million ships to estimate GHG emissions and air pollution from shipping between 2013 and 2015.

According to UNCTAD, since 2005, the dry bulk fleet has almost doubled, and the containership fleet has nearly tripled. It was estimated that the world’s fleet presently generates no less than 3% of global carbon emissions. The present market position, particularly the high cost of fossil, encourages the development of operational efficiency which in turn has a positive impact on the reduction of GHG emissions.

Ships are predominantly powered by fossil fuels.

Foreseeing an increase in demand for ships, which will create an increase in green-house gas (GHG) emissions, the IMO added Chapter 4 ‘Energy Efficiency for Ships’ to Marine Pollution Prevention Convention (MARPOL) which came into force on January 1st 2013.

The IMO agreed in October 2016 to develop a comprehensive strategy for addressing GHG emissions from international shipping. The strategy will consider different actions that can be pursued to reduce GHG emissions from shipping over the short, medium, and long term.

The liner shipping industry through World Shipping Council (WSC) expedited implementation of regulations by working with governments to develop effective international regulations that will result in reduced carbon emissions from shipping.

30 Sea News

REGION-WISE EFFORTS TO CHECK CO2 EMISSIONS The United Kingdom’s 2008 Climate Change Act has provided the legal framework to ensure that the UK Government meets its commitments to tackle climate change.

The Act mandates that GHG emissions should be reduced by at least 80 per cent by 2050 when compared to 1990 levels. Ship designs and primary power plant continue to be developed to reduce carbon emissions. A fossil fuel free cargo ship design and model was tested in 2012 and found economically viable for specific routes.

Asian countries like China have made a significant move towards adoption of ‘Green Ships and Ports.’

Greening ships and ports is a plank of the country’s Ministry of Transport’s 13th-Five-Year Plan.

The ministry has issued action plans for pollution control of ships and emissions control for major ports.

These include - introduce domestic emission control areas (DECAs), draw cleaner power from the shore, switch ships to cleaner fuels and connect seaports with railways.

The Panama Canal Authority is now providing shippers transiting the canal with a tool to assess their carbon emissions and calculate their cost savings for taking that route between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans against the Suez Canal or around Africa. The emissions calculator is an initiative to reduce the carbon footprint and impact on the environment, from transition of vessels.

CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTATION The shipping industry is unique as vessels traverse the globe, with hundreds of countries, regions, seas, oceans and islands, each region having specific emission control norms. Global shipping forums are trying to enforce international norms so that the stakeholders do not lend to inclusion in national or regional emission targets. If different rules are applied to ships at the different ends of a voyage, there would be chaos, inefficiency and market disruption.

Despite intra-industry awareness on the impact of CO2 emissions, and steps taken to minimise GHG emissions, the pan-world implementation remains a concern. The question is whether the regulation should be undertaken by the Flag State of the ship alone, or through the use of the international regulatory body, the IMO. The IMO came up with a formally established body to set international standards, with its membership

ISSUE 1 2018

CO2 EMISSIONS

SHIPPING CARBON DIOXIDE

providing enforcement through Port State and Flag State control.

In 2011, the IMO adopted mandatory technical and operational energy efficiency measures, which will significantly reduce the amount of GHG emissions from ships. This led to the formulation of the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI).

The EEDI, formulated for new ships, is an index that estimates grams of CO2 per transport work (gram of CO2 per tonne-mile). The philosophy behind EEDI is that its computation be simple and capable of broad application, and promote efforts by all stakeholders to reduce CO2 emissions by reflecting a ship’s energy efficiency in actual use.

It stimulates continued technical development of all the components influencing the fuel efficiency of a ship. It also separates the technical and design-based measures from the operational and commercial ones.

EMISSION IN PORT CITIES Shipping and harbour activities constitute a major share of total emissions in port cities. Shipping activities constitute a major share of total emissions.

Some of the badly affected regions are port cities in Hong Kong, Los Angeles and Shenzhen.

While ports provide a strategic role within the global

ISSUE 1 2018

trading system, unlike ships, ports are regulated by the laws of the nation in which they are sited. Ports which are set within the national transport framework are expected to conform to national demands for GHG emission reduction, which were agreed at the Kyoto Climate Change Summit in 1997.

IMPACT ON INFRASTRUCTURE Sea-level rise could increase the risk of flooding and overtopping. Ingress of water into sensitive Vessel Traffic System (VTS) equipment systems with consequent power loss has been identified as an event that could reduce navigation safety. Loss of navigation support could lead to port closure, which would have a consequent effect on a port’s reputation. The reliance of the supply chain could be questioned with possible loss of future business. Ports and terminals can adapt to temperature change. Higher temperatures could create difficulties for plant and equipment designed for more temperate regions.

IMPACT ON HEALTH These emissions pose a risk to the all-round development of the city. Increased illness and premature death caused by air pollution reduce quality of life, as well as labour productivity. Pollution also proves to be a deterrent for the cities in terms of drawing skilled labour, which affects productivity.

Sea News 31

SHIPPING

CO2 EMISSIONS

CARBON DIOXIDE

There is a strong link between air pollution exposure and cardiovascular diseases, such as ischemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer. Children, the elderly and the poor are the most vulnerable groups. Air pollution caused 5.5 million premature deaths worldwide in 2013, costing USD 5.11 trillion in welfare losses around the world.

Ship pollution has taken a toll on global coasts. In 2013, emissions from vessels, was the cause of as many as 25,000 premature deaths in East Asia, apart from 18,000 fatalities in China alone.

CLASS AND FLAG-WISE COMPARISON A survey reveals that three ship classes and six flag states (country of registration) are responsible for the majority of emissions. Container ships (23%), bulk carriers (19%) and oil tankers (13%) accounted for more than half of CO2 emissions. In terms of flag states, ships registered to Panama (15%), China (11%), Liberia (9%), Marshall Islands (7%), Singapore (6%), and Malta (5%) were the largest emitters. These flags account for 66% of the global shipping fleet’s deadweight tonnage.

Maritime fuel consumption increased from 291 to 298 million tonnes (+2.4%) from 2013 to 2015, compared to a 7 per cent increase in shipping transport work.

Accordingly, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from global shipping (oceangoing vessels, domestic ships, and fishing vessels) increased from 910 to 932 million tonnes over the same period.

HOW TO REDUCE EMISSIONS a) By opting for higher quality fuel (low sulphur Marine Gas Oil) or Heavy Fuel Oil with on board capability to clean the exhaust gases. b) Slow steaming could reduce shipping’s GHG emissions by as much as 30%. A report, ‘Regulated Slow Steaming in Maritime Transport’, outlines the basic link among speed, fuel consumption and emissions. c) Conceptual design and use of fossil fuels as a primary power source for ships. d) Supplementary wind power such as new fuels and new routes.

The IMO has adopted statutes to address shipemissions and mandated energy-efficiency index ratings to cut CO2 emissions. The organisation is also taking up global capacity-building projects and encourages innovation. Voluntary participation of shipping companies in cutting CO2 emissions can

32 Sea News

amplify the efforts initiated by the international bodies.

POSITIVE IMPACT OF REGULATIONS The statistical analysis of GHG emissions, prompted the IMO to carry out another study which involved minute details and state-of-the-art technology. It was revealed that the total GHG emissions from international shipping actually decreased by 10% between 2007 and 2012 while cargo carried by the world fleet increased during that period.

Maritime shipping is the world's most carbon-efficient form of transporting goods - far more efficient than road or air transport. The industry seeks to further improve the fuel efficiency and carbon footprint of its vessels. The WSC and its member companies are engaged in numerous efforts to reduce CO2 and further improve efficiency across the fleet.

THE WAY AHEAD Evolution and technology have led to the development of conceptual designs which can eliminate the use of fossil fuels. Shipping companies need to envision more efficient vessels and technical modifications to existing ships. In the recent past, global bodies such as the IMO, WSC and European Commission have adopted exemplary regulations to control CO2 emissions.

The majority of new ships built by WSC Member companies since 2013, are approximately 30-40% more carbon efficient than those ships they replaced.

This is a welcome step forward in ship efficiency and demonstrates how carriers are devoting considerable effort to lowering emissions.

An initial GHG reduction strategy is expected to be agreed in 2018 with subsequent review and revision through 2023 using ship specific data generated by IMO’s recently adopted data collection system. The IMO data system will collect in-use fuel consumption data from ships with annual reporting that will allow governments and other stakeholders to accurately assess fuel consumption and emissions generated by international shipping.

It would not be an exaggeration if the maritime industry is referred to as the lifeline of global trade. However, the same industry is a major emitter of climate pollution. While trading sectors, environmentalists, social organisations and NGOs conceded the indispensability of shipping industry, the latter should also render maximum possible focus on reducing 'CO2 emissions'.

ISSUE 1 2018

SLOW STEAMING TO REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS, KEY FOR 2018

SHIPPING CO2 EMISSIONS

Slow Steaming to Reduce 2 CO Emissions, Key for 2018 With the IMO tightening up on environmental regulations in the maritime sector, many new technologies and techniques are being undertaken to reduce emissions and the environmental impact

O

ne such method is slow steaming. Slow steaming refers to the practice of operating transoceanic cargo ships, especially container ships, at significantly less than their maximum speed. An analyst at National Ports and Waterways Institute stated in 2010 that nearly all global shipping lines were using slow steaming to save money on fuel.

Slow steaming was adopted in 2007 in the face of rapidly rising fuel oil costs (July 2007 to July 2008: 350 to 700 USD/tonne). According to Maersk Line, who introduced the practice in 2009–2010, slow steaming is conducted at 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph). Speeds of 14 to 16 kn (26 to 30 km/h; 16 to 18 mph) were used on Asia-Europe backhaul routes in 2010. Speeds under 18 kn (33 km/h; 21 mph) are called super slow steaming.

ISSUE 1 2018

Wärtsilä calculates that fuel consumption can be reduced by 59% by reducing cargo ship speed from 27 knots to 18 kn (33 km/h; 21 mph), at the cost of an additional week’s sailing time on Asia-Europe routes. It adds a comparable 4-7 days to trans-Pacific voyages.

According to AirClim, in a study commissioned by Seas At Risk and T&E and undertaken by CE Delft, The ICCT & Mikis Tsimplis, the following were the highlights of slow steaming: •

Slow steaming has significant multiple environmental benefits. A 10% reduction in fleet average speed results in a 19% reduction of CO2 emissions even after accounting for the emissions of additional ships needed to deliver the same amount of cargo and the emissions associated with

Sea News 33

SHIPPING

SLOW STEAMING TO REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS, KEY FOR 2018

CO2 EMISSIONS

building the necessary additional ships. Emissions of SOx, NOx and probably black carbon will decrease in line with fuel use and CO2 emissions. A ship speed reduction of 25% leads to a reduction in main engine fuel consumption of approximately 58% on a ship year basis. Fuel savings at the fleet level will be somewhat less, as explained in the report. Lower ship speeds will also reduce whale strikes and other harmful wildlife interactions.

•

Slow steaming has significant economic benefits.

Taking into account both the direct costs (fuel use, crew, capital costs of ships), indirect costs (additional inventory costs, adjustment of logistical chains) and the external costs (impacts of emissions on human health and ecosystems, climate impacts), the benefits of slow steaming outweigh the costs.

This result is robust for a number of fuel price assumptions and discount rates. Implemented correctly, regulated slow steaming is cost-free to the shipping industry as a whole and entails marginal incremental logistic and supply chain costs to consumers.

• There are very few, if any, evident technical obstacles to slow steaming. Many shipping companies have experience with slow steaming in recent years. Even at very low engine loads, they have encountered only a few problems and these problems could be surmounted by small changes to operational procedures. Hence, it appears that there are very few technical constraints to slow steaming.

•

Regulated slow steaming is legally feasible.

Compulsory slow steaming can be imposed by a State on the ships flying its flag; on all ships in territorial waters (but can’t be enforced while the ship is in transit or innocent passage); and in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the high seas as a condition of port entry of the imposing States.

•

Regulated slow steaming is feasible to implement.

Regulated slow steaming is relatively easy to monitor and enforce, and may have a lower administrative burden than some of the recently proposed MBMs. Speed can be monitored, both by ships and by regulators, and reported to regulators with little additional effort. Enforcement can be based on existing port State control instruments.

• Regulated slow steaming delivers emission cuts in-sector. Regulated slow steaming ensures that

34 Sea News

emissions in the shipping sector will be reduced from business-as-usual levels, regardless of the fuel price and demand for shipping.

• Regulated slow steaming could avert a spike in ship emissions as the global economy picks up.

A cap on speed would reduce the possibility of an otherwise likely large and long-term spike in emissions if ships speed up in response to a recovery in demand. A cap set today around current average ship speeds will have little impact on industry.

•

Regulated slow steaming could apply at different levels. A global regime would potentially have the largest impact on emissions; a regional initiative, e.g. in the EU, would have a smaller impact. Regulated slow steaming in the Arctic could prevent an increase in black carbon (BC) emissions there as shipping activity increases when sea routes open; BC has a particularly strong climate effect when deposited on snow or ice.

CE Delft suggests that the implementation of global regulations on vessel speed would be legally and politically practical, at least when compared to carbon pricing or other mechanisms. “There are no legal impediments to speed regulation. Speed regulation can either be set globally, unilaterally as a condition of entry into a port or as a condition to navigate in coastal waters, or bilaterally between ports in two states,” wrote CE Delft.

The practice of deliberately slowing down the speed of a ship is in fact a common operating feature of today’s shipping market as a way to lower costs by reducing fuel consumption. And with shipping lines trying to stay profitable, slow steaming has proven a good way to trim operating expenditures so as to boost the bottomline.

For 2018, BIMCO’s top analyst, Peter Sand, said “The important challenge is to maintain slow steaming.

When ships go slow, they do fewer trips per year, lowering the available supply and helping to rebalance the freight market. In dry bulk, this strategy could lead to the first year since 2011 when the industry as a whole made a profit – if owners can keep fleet growth down to the low expected level of one percent.” He concluded, “Focus on your operations, focus on keeping slow steaming as a permanent part of your business going forward, because that is the most important part of the supply side in 2018.”

ISSUE 1 2018

COUNTING DOWN TO 2020

SHIPPING SULPHUR 2020

Counting down to 2020 For the start of 2020 the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has set out an enforceable global 0.5% sulphur cap for maritime shipping

T

o comply with the regulations the oil producers have been working on the development of a range of compliant blended fuels, yet there is still uncertainty as to the impact on operations.

The IMO 2020 cap will change the industry for the better and provide owners and operators with new guidelines for becoming part of a real environmental drive to clean up the air. We need to be ahead of the game and deciding how we will be fuelling and sailing our vessels by the middle of next year – 2019. If not, we could expect to be stuck in any port and it won’t be because of any storm but our own failure to act and act now.

The regulations are fairly clear - under this global cap ships will need to burn marine fuels with a sulphur content of no more than 0.5%. This will be a significant reduction from the current limit of 3.5%, with the current Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECAs) remaining at 0.1% set in 2015. But the issues of regulation become a little more complicated for both ship owners, bunker operators and the industry as a whole when confronted with the choices to be compliant: ship owners are faced with the choice of

ISSUE 1 2018

continuing to use high sulphur fuel oil or switching to low sulphur fuel. Yet to remain within the cap and still use high sulphur fuel oil (HSFO), they will need to fit scrubbers which currently are projected to cost between €3-6 million per unit. The alternative is to switch to low sulphur fuel, including distillates or in some cases, sulphur-free LNG fuel.

Figures are as fluid as the views on the cap but it is safe to assume that around 70,000 existing vessels will have to meet the requirements of IMO’s global sulphur limit of 0.50% m/m in 2020. The answers are not as simple as using a scrubber or alternative fuels: A report in 2017 by ExxonMobil said that 32% of the respondents predicted a combination of heavy fuel oil, marine gas oil and fuels and blends would need to be used, with 69% believing the cap will lead to the development of new low sulphur fuels. So what can ship owners and operators do to remain compliant come 2020?

The dilemma is in choosing which of the alternatives best suits the operations profile – and at what costs.

Whatever the choice, it is high time to plan and prepare for compliance.

Sea News 35

SHIPPING

COUNTING DOWN TO 2020

SULPHUR 2020

Scrubbers are exhaust gas cleaning systems but some of the bigger market players like Maersk and some others have questioned the use of scrubbers. One of the issues they raise is whether or not the cost of a scrubber (estimated at between $3-5 million) is worth the investment. Many owners and operators may well feel alternative fuel is the better solution to offset the high costs of maintenance in using scrubbers. A scrubber’s principal advantage is that it will enable ships to continue burning fuel oil while complying with the new regulations. But what about the tricky issues surrounding the costs of dealing with sludge retention and disposal – have they been adequately thought through? Scrubbers require high maintenance and specialised personnel. Although scrubber technology may be cost effective over time, will they be a long-term solution for the next level of environmental regulations?

Using 0.5% sulphur fuel will likely be the simplest option, initially, for most ship owners even though at present there is no standard accepted for refining in a fragmented fuel market. One big concern is the blended fuels issue: assuming they will be available, will they also be stable and compatible with other fuels? Fuel treatment solutions that effectively address these issues will no doubt play a key role.

It is not unreasonable to suppose that at the start of 2020 bunkering hubs will have a wide range of 0.05% sulphur fuels available but that is not going to be the case with all of the smaller ports. The current sulphur content cap of 0.1% set for marine fuel oil on vessels operating in ECAs will not change after it was lowered from the original 1.0% from January 2015. The ECAs established under MARPOL Annex VI for SOx are: the Baltic Sea area; the North Sea area; most of the United States coast, Canada coast, around Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. But the problem is that refineries currently do not have the capacity to produce enough desulphurised fuel to cope with the anticipated

36 Sea News

demands from the maritime sector. Some analysts suggest that between 60-75% additional capacity will be required along with new blending techniques that will also come into play.

With the shortage of compliant fuel a possibility, there is a real need to develop blending techniques to meet the demand for low sulphur fuel. The new fuels for this period will range from pure hybrid fuels to a number of different refinery streams mixed into a residual base.

The real issue will then be how ships will operate using a variety of available fuels, made with different recipes and blend components depending on the region.

There will doubtless be concerns over fuel instability and with it will come cost analysis questions. There is a lack of clarity in the regulations and this is only adding to pressure on owners and operators.

Compounding the problem of uncertainty on the fuel side, there is the certainty of enforcement on the regulatory side: vessels running on non-compliant fuel may be deemed unseaworthy and lose insurance coverage. Also, environmental organisations and the global shipping industry are calling for a ban on the carriage of non-compliant marine fuels when the global 0.5% sulphur cap takes effect in 2020.

But 2020 is still two years off, you hear people say.

We all remember how the 0.1% SECA limit caught the industry by surprise when it went into effect and the loss of propulsion incidents as a result of fuel switchover procedures gone awry. It is actually high time to plan and prepare.

The first step is to get in early with your compliance and decisions. Before we know it, we will be sailing into mid-2019 and by then it will be too late for many owners and shipmanagers to get their vessels ready on time. They will simply fail to operate under the 2020 IMO cap and with that will come regulatory, financial, legal and insurance problems.

ISSUE 1 2018

EMISSION FROM COMMERCIAL SHIPS

SHIPPING LOW SULPHUR FUEL

Emission from Commercial Ships – How Feasible is the Transition from Heavy Fuel to Low Sulphur Fuel Atmospheric pollution by commercial ships is a topic of global concern, which has prompted international organisations governing maritime laws to draft legislations for cutting emissions

I

t is often said that the 15 biggest ships produce more sulphur oxide pollutants than all the cars in the world, because they run on completely different fuels.

and nitrogen oxide compounds when it is burned.

Cars, on the other hand, burn a highly refined gasoline or the highway diesel fuel which produces almost no sulphur oxides or nitrogen oxides.

Large commercial vessels primarily burn ‘Heavy Fuel Oil’ when out at sea. This fuel is not refined, has high sulphur content and produces a lot of sulphur oxide

The car fuel is same as the Ultra Low Sulphur Marine Gas Oil. A ship produces more carbon dioxide emission per mile and per gallon of fuel than a car. However,

ISSUE 1 2018

Sea News 37

SHIPPING

EMISSION FROM COMMERCIAL SHIPS

LOW SULPHUR FUEL

The major ship types in the world today are – bulk carriers, crude oil tankers, container vessels, product/ chemical carriers, LNG carriers, LPG carriers, reefer vessels, Ro-Ro vessels and general cargo ships. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from commercial shipping are currently not duly regulated. Nevertheless, they are a subject of intense scrutiny by the world shipping community.

ships in general, have the lowest emission levels of any other method of cargo transport, producing fewer emissions per ton of freight per mile than barges, trains or trucks.

A PERSPECTIVE Container ships usually run 24 hours a day for weeks.

There are currently over 6000 massive container ships operating globally and 85,000 commercial cargo ships.

Marine heavy fuel or “bunker fuel” is essentially the lowest grade of liquid fuel in use. It contains 2,000 times, as much sulphur as standard automobile diesel.

Bunker fuel is literally the left-over when all of the cleaner types of fuel have been extracted from the crude oil. A study reveals that 760 million cars which are currently operating worldwide emit as much sulphur as 15 container ships running at full capacity.

HOW ARE EMISSIONS CALCULATED One main output statistic of the world fleet analysis is the ratio of emitted grams of CO2 per tonne-km of transported cargo. Another emissions statistic is an estimate of total CO2 emitted (in million tonnes per year) per size bracket for the above ship types. To measure ship emissions, these statistics are estimated for a variety of ship types under a variety of scenarios – sea-to-port time, ship speed and fuel consumption at sea and in port.

BREAK-UP OF GLOBAL FLEET As of January 2017, there were 52,183 ships in the world’s merchant fleets. General cargo ships are ranked as the most common type of ship in the global merchant fleet, accounting for about a third of the fleet: There were almost 17,000 such ships in the merchant fleet as of the beginning of 2017.

General cargo ships had a combined capacity of around 112.8 million tons deadweight in January 2017; this is about half the volume of container ships’ combined capacity, which came to around 245.6 million tons deadweight. The growing pressure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the industry asks for manufacturers’ response. With that in mind, new builds of general cargo ships are predicted to produce an average of 40 percent less carbon dioxide emissions by 2040.

Bulk carriers are ranked as the second most common type of ship in the world, accounting for over 20 percent of the global merchant fleet. As of January 2017, the number of bulk carriers stood at around 11,000. Crude oil tanks and container ships are the third and fourth most common types, with nearly 14 and about 10 percent of the share, respectively. The number of crude oil tankers rounded up to more than 7,000 units, while the number of cargo container ships in the world was at about 5,000 units in the beginning of 2017.

OVERVIEW Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) is very cheap compared to Ultra Low Sulphur Marine Gas Oil (ULSMGO) and many engines are not designed to handle the ULSMGO because it is so much thinner than HFO it does not have the lubrication properties of the HFO. Companies are using various workarounds to make it work, such as chilling the fuel to increase the viscosity or injecting extra lubricant into certain parts of the engine. Due to the extra costs and possible mechanical issues, these regulations are continuously re-evaluated and phased approaches are used for implementation.

Currently, sulphur content standards for fuel used in

38 Sea News

ISSUE 1 2018

EMISSION FROM COMMERCIAL SHIPS

SHIPPING LOW SULPHUR FUEL

international shipping are set at no more than 3.5%.

In 2020, that will drop to no more than 0.5%. All of these regulations are contained in the Convention on Marine Pollution (MARPOL), Annex VI, which sets the regulations for Air Pollution in the Maritime Industry.

THE WAY AHEAD To check the problem of emissions, all 90,000 ships would require a global emissions policy. And a stricter and swiftly-enacted policy would critically damage international trade.

As far as fuel goes, researchers are exploring several alternatives to bunker fuel – the best of which is LNG (Liquified Natural Gas). LNG has the capacity to replace bunker fuel, though it would require a new working infrastructure – something not exactly attractive for developing countries. Even a successful implementation of LNG wouldn’t reduce carbon dioxide levels enough to totally nullify the effect of marine transport on climate change.

Some companies are part of the push with Liquefied Natural Gas. These ships will produce fewer emissions,

ISSUE 1 2018

of any compound, than any other vessel currently in service. The entire shipping industry is looking at conversions to natural gas or other fuels, and engine manufacturers are designing engines that can handle a variety of fuels.

Sea News 39

SHIPPING

BREAKTHROUGH PORTABLE SULPHUR TEST BY PARKER KITTIWAKE

SULPHUR TEST KIT

Breakthrough Portable Sulphur Test by Parker Kittiwake Parker Kittiwake, a leading global manufacturer of condition monitoring technologies, has announced the launch of its ground-breaking X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analyser, a portable testing device which, among other parameters, measures the sulphur content in fuel

T

he XRF provides an accurate indication of sulphur content through the analysis of a small fuel sample in less than three minutes.

This gives both shipowners and Port State Control (PSC) the ability to conduct laboratorystandard testing onsite, before non-compliant fuel is bunkered and before a vessel carrying non-compliant fuel leaves port.

Traditional methods for confirming compliance with sulphur limits rely on paperwork requirements such as the Bunker Delivery Note (BDN). This not only significantly increases the risk of non-compliance

40 Sea News

and subsequent penalties for shipowners, but also heightens the environmental impact of burning fuel with a higher sulphur content. In addition, the delay incurred by laboratory analysis creates the risk that the vessel may have left port with non-compliant fuel onboard, or may require non-compliant fuel to be de-bunkered and compliant fuel re-bunkered, incurring significant delays and additional cost.

The XRF Analyser provides a spot-check analysis of the sulphur content in fuel on site, allowing PSC to ascertain compliance almost instantly, and affording shipowners the opportunity to avoid fines, plus the

ISSUE 1 2018

BREAKTHROUGH PORTABLE SULPHUR TEST BY PARKER KITTIWAKE

SHIPPING SULPHUR TEST KIT

what’s stated on the BDN, eliminating the risk of accidental non-compliance.”

In addition to sulphur testing, the XRF Analyser can be used to measure a range of wear metals in lubricating oil, allowing operators to quickly identify potential damage in cylinder liners, bearings, piston rings, gears, stern tubes and hydraulic systems.

Integrated into a small, lightweight housing, the XRF is easily portable for ‘plug-and-play’ operation. Test results are displayed as a percentage on an LCD screen, avoiding ambiguity and mitigating the risk of human error through operators needing to interpret the test data.

time, expense and operational impact of bunkering non-compliant fuel.

Larry Rumbol, Marine Condition Monitoring Manager, commented, “Given the lack of environmental policing on the high seas, enforcement of the 2020 global sulphur cap is a daunting challenge for the industry.

Efforts to develop robust enforcement solutions tend to focus on paperwork checks at ports, but this must be reinforced by accurate, reliable testing data.

“Shipowners and operators are fighting an uphill battle to ensure they can effectively prove compliance. And Port State Control needs a way to ascertain compliance quickly and onsite, allowing them to take timely and appropriate action. With significant confusion over the stipulations in the way sulphur measurements are made – for example it is possible for fuel to pass ISO 4259 commercial tests but fail against MARPOL standards – it is clear that both parties require easy access to the data they need to accurately check and prove compliance.”

For more than two decades, Parker Kittiwake has designed, developed and manufactured condition monitoring and test equipment for lube oil, hydraulic oil and fuels. Engineers the world over use Parker Kittiwake equipment to gain vital insights into the health of their vessels’ engines or to measure fuel quality and compatibility. Sustained investment in R&D over the last 25 years has enabled Parker Kittiwake to develop innovative and fit-for-purpose equipment for the accurate of in-service lubricants, hydraulics, wear metals, fuels, gases and acoustic emissions.

In addition to ensuring compliance with global regulations, Parker Kittiwake’s condition monitoring systems are used to provide the earliest indication of failure, enabling operators to use predictive and proactive maintenance to minimise repair costs and extend the lifetime of vital equipment.

The XRF Analyser is factory calibrated according to the ISO 8754 standard, and is capable of conducting field measurements that correlate strongly with laboratory measurements. Fuel can be easily sampled at any stage of the bunkering process, and test results can be stored electronically, allowing operators to manage compliance audits more efficiently.

Rumbol continued, “Effective enforcement is at the heart of the sulphur cap, and onboard testing is the most efficient means of establishing compliance with sulphur regulations. The XRF Analyser can be used to test the fuel and verify the sulphur content against

ISSUE 1 2018

Sea News 41

Sea News Issue 1 2018

Green Issue

Cover Story Global Warming and the Maritime Industry

Also in this issue • CO2 Emissions • Green Initiatives • Sustainability at APL • The Sulphur Setback • Wartsila - Making Waves with Green Shipping

FREE SUBSCRIPTION SUBSCRIBE NOW • Digital magazine • Comprehensive online directory • Weekly eNewsletter

Email subscriptions@seanews.co.uk

Sea News www.seanews.co.uk

GREEN INITIATIVES TAKEN BY GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD

PORTS AND TERMINALS GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD

Green initiatives taken by Gujarat Maritime Board Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB) is the first maritime board of India which was established in the year 1982

I

t is responsible for regulating the non-major ports of Gujarat. GMB has established itself as a maritime leader in the fields of port development, privatization and specialized cargo handling in India. GMB has institutionalized the strategy of port led development for its non-major ports backed by the hinterland connectivity to these ports. By effective implementation of this strategy and by bringing in the right private players through several pioneering models of privatization, GMB has been responsible for the growth of the non-major ports of Gujarat over the past three decades. From a mere share of 3% in the year 1982-83, the non-major ports of Gujarat now handle 31% of the total national traffic.

Weighing in the environmental perspective for sustained growth, GMB has taken various initiatives over the years with the aim of making the non-major

ISSUE 1 2018

ports of Gujarat cleaner and greener. The initiatives taken by GMB are as follows: ALANG-SOSIYA SHIP RECYCLING YARD Alang-Sosiya Ship Recycling Yard, developed by GMB in 1982, is amongst the largest ship recycling yards in the world. Alang accounts for nearly 90% of the ships broken in India. The yard has 169 plots which are spread over a 10 km stretch along the coast of Alang and aligned from North East (NE) to South West (SW) direction. It serves the society by offering 15,000 direct and 1.5 lakh indirect employment opportunity. Almost 400 vessels are dismantled per year which generates about 3.5 million tonnes of steel which can be re-rolled without exploiting natural resources. Moreover, GMB has developed sanitary complexes and provided the community around the recycling yard with a clean water supply.

Sea News 43

PORTS AND TERMINALS

GREEN INITIATIVES TAKEN BY GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD

GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD

WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITY (TSDF) In 2005-2006 GMB provided a dedicated Treatment Storage and Disposal Facility (TSDF) at Alang for Alang-Sosiya Ship Recycling Yard. It is first of its kind exclusive TSDF facility developed in India which is especially dedicated for ship recycling. The TSDF was developed with three cells i.e. 43,000 m3 asbestos and glass wool waste disposal, 10,200 m3 industrial hazardous waste disposal and 8,700 m3 municipal solid waste disposal, to manage hazardous waste materials in such a way that it is disposed scientifically.

In 2013 GMB upgraded the dedicated Storage and Disposal Facility (TSDF) “Integrated Common Hazardous wastes Storage and Disposal Facility” (ICHWTSDF). components are

Treatment site with Treatment ICHWTSDF

• Landfill cell for Hazardous waste (70,000 m3) • Landfill cell for Municipal solid waste (35,000 m3) • Common hazardous waste incinerator (5 Mt/day) • Fire hydrant system (underground reservoir of 200 m3 capacity and 2 numbers of over ground reservoir of 5 m3 capacity) • Effluent treatment plant (30 KLPD) ICHWTSDF handles about 55,000 MT waste received from more than 80 Ship breaking and Ship recycling industries of region. The TSDF site developed by the GMB is managed and operated by Gujarat Enviro and Infrastructure Ltd., (GEPIL) for handling, disposing and managing hazardous waste at land fill site.

MECHANIZATION PROJECTS GMB is also under the process of mechanizing its ports. The bulk cargo handled at these ports is

44 Sea News

the cause for environmental issues at these ports.

Mechanization shall help reduce cargo contamination and suppression of dust and other pollutants at these ports. In this regard, the mechanization is currently underway and shall be done for the ports of Navlakhi, Bhavnagar, Magdalla, Okha, Porbandar, and Bedi. A dust suppression system shall also be installed at the ports of Bedi, Okha, Porbandar and Bhavnagar.

OTHER INITIATIVES GMB has a dedicated environment branch that is responsible for dealing with all environment related matters for ports. This branch carries out environmental studies, liaison with Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and Gujarat Pollution Control Board, and ensure compliance of the environmental laws at all ports of Gujarat. It has also developed an Environment Management Plan for Alang and is currently under the process of upgrading it.

Moreover, GMB is also coming out with the new port policy of Gujarat. Under this, various green initiatives are being considered which include • Development of a Green Port Plan for each non-major port of Gujarat • A port safety code covering all safety precautions and an oil spill contingency plan to be developed and monitored for the ports • Developing an environmental friendly regulatory framework for dredging and land reclamation activities • Exploring and capturing the potential of renewable sources of energy for powering the non-major ports

ISSUE 1 2018

GALILEO MARITIME ACADEMY

PORTS AND TERMINALS GALILEO MARITIME ACADEMY

Galileo Maritime Academy Anthony H Gould, CEO of Galileo Maritime Academy tells us why Galileo is the home of professional seafarer training in Asia Pacific

W

hy is Galileo the preferred choice for courses? What sets it apart?

Our focus is 100% on professional seafarer training and we are the only facility in the Asia Pacific region that is accredited

by MCA and approved to issue MCA certificates of competence for 20 STCW courses. We follow the Merchant Navy Training Board (MNTB) and IMO criteria as well as the particular requirements of the major flag states, which means that we are equipped to a standard that other training centres cannot match. Equally important is that we provide realistic practical experiences at sea and on land for all our safety and seamanship training, including making the whole experience fun and memorable. Trainees live and work in our new purpose designed academy and crew residence and all our facilities are laid out as a campus within the 200 acre grounds and shoreline of Yacht Haven Marina in Phuket.

ISSUE 1 2018

What was the vision when creating Galileo? Why Phuket?

Galileo started as a seafarer training centre six years ago and was the brain-child of a Royal Navy Chief Engineer who saw a need to lift the standards of professional seafarer training in this region. I took over the development of the company four years ago and decided to create the first and only flag-ship facility for MCA maritime training in Asia. Ship owners and their insurance underwriters have become increasingly disillusioned with training centres which cut corners or issue meaningless certifications. Some only pay lip-service to reality and when disaster strikes, as one day it will, where is the experience and training that will save the day? Galileo’s vision is to equip seafarers with realistic experience and competence to tackle an emergency situation, whether it be fire, injury, security, drowning, stability, collision, rescue etc. and to take all proper steps to avoid such emergencies

Sea News 45

PORTS AND TERMINALS

GALILEO MARITIME ACADEMY

GALILEO MARITIME ACADEMY

through planning, attention to detail, awareness of the wider picture and safe practices. Why Phuket? Well, in our early days it was important for us as the centre of the superyacht industry in Asia but it is a great location to invite seafarers to train and it is central to the whole Asia Pacific region with direct flights to Phuket International Airport from almost everywhere.

Now Thailand’s government, at the very highest level, is focussed on developing it’s maritime industry and it’s port facilities and also providing simpified access to cruise and commercial vessels and crew.

Does the IMO’s emphasis on Green Shipping (the 2020 Sulphur Cap, cutting emissions) reflect in the curriculum of Galileo?

Environmental issues are a central theme across all our training. Social responsibility is a particular training subject under STCW but in practice this is reflected in so many ways, including our choices of green compounds for cleaning and lubrication, ship care and management of waste, tank flushing and even in the fuels we use in our Advanced Fire Fighting School which are designed for the lowest possible environmental and human impact. Disaster prevention is one of my favourite teaching subjects because this is where we can protect the environment most directly, so we teach environmental awareness as a fundamental aspect of professional seamanship.

The challenge of achieving a realistic Global Sulphur Cap by 2020 and the Roadmap to Decarbonisation by 2023 places a particular emphasis on our training strategies to encourage a culture of creative thinking and awareness throughout the shipping industry that can contribute to a sustainable environment in that time-frame. That is certainly not going to be a simple matter and requires a significant change in human attitudes in every thing we do as seafarers.

Galileo Maritime Academy is determined to play a meaningful role in that change of attitude and we are now developing training content in all our courses that brings to the forefront those actions and technologies that will impact and protect our natural environment and encourage proactive steps towards a workforce in the shipping industry that cares and acts responsibly as a deliberate choice.

we include accommodation, food and drinks, laundry, uniform, course consumables and certificates, also airport transfers so that our course cost includes everything compared to others who provide tuition only for that same cost. I think it is a good indicator that we have never had negative feedback about our course cost from any graduate of Galileo, in fact “great value for money” is a regular comment from alumni.

The most important benefit Galileo can give is that captains and owners trust us to provide the highest MCA standard of training and certification and that impacts job opportunities and career advancement for our graduates.

What is on the cards for Galileo in 2018?

Our plan for 2018 is to develop further our commercial shipping and oil & gas courses. We are now offering in 2018 advanced ship stability and oil rig stability training as well as ship security management and human behaviour courses aimed at disaster and accident prevention through mindfulness training and technical awareness. The bedrock of Galileo’s training activities will remain safety, security, survival, medical, fire and rescue competence. We are all excited about the completion of our beautiful new HQ building and Crew Residence that overlooks the amazing seascape of Phang Nga Bay and Yacht Haven Marina, scheduled for opening in April 2018. The Galileo campus includes our Advanced Fire Fighting Facility, School of Marine Engineering, Medical Training Centre, Deep Water Survival Pool, Survival Craft and Rescue Boats Facility, Food Hygiene and Catering School, and a fleet of training vessels, tenders and rescue boats based in the marina.

How do the courses compare (cost-wise) to the other colleges? Why does a person benefit from a certification from Galileo?

We have established our course cost by looking at the mean average cost per training day of each of the main seafarer training facilities around the world, for tuition only. Then we set that course cost as ours but

46 Sea News

ISSUE 1 2018

WÄRTSILÄ: MAKING WAVES WITH GREEN SHIPPING

SHIPPING WÄRTSILÄ

Wärtsilä: Making Waves with Green Shipping Juha Kytölä, Vice President of Environmental Solutions at Wärtsilä Marine Solutions explains about green shipping at Wärtsilä

W

hat is Wärtsilä’s stance on Green Shipping and what is the Company’s vision when offering technology solutions to the Maritime Industry?

Well Wärtsilä is definitely focused on supporting all the sustainability in shipping in all respects. Wärtsilä has a very wide portfolio starting with engines, propulsion, the environmental products. We have electrical and automation, we even do ship design ourselves for those customers who need or want it. So all of those areas are focusing very much on the environmental optimizing that, their use and the resources.

ISSUE 1 2018

With the maritime industry’s move towards green shipping what does Wärtsilä have to offer to the Tanker, LNG, dry bulk and container shipping segments?

The Tanker market first. We have lot of products, we are very strong in the propulsion, we are in the cargo handling. We are in the environmental products there to clean exhaust gases, we are with ballast water systems. We are with electrical and automation systems, navigation systems. We have a lot of products to provide for the tanker business. And specially then moving further to the LNG and the gas tanker. We also do all the gas handling systems for what ships need, starting from the tanks for the bunker for the fuel if it is needed separately or if it is an LNG carrying ship then it is all the fuel handling systems from the gas tanks until the engine. And we also support with gas offshore related business, with regasification or liquefaction, storage systems and offloading systems.

For the dry bulk and container shipping segment it is very much like the tanker segment. So it’s having main propulsion cost of engines and all the machinery.

Otherwise it is the auxiliary engine machinery there all the propulsion systems, electrical, automation and environmental products for reducing emissions to air and to water. Well the major part of the products needed for such special tasks.

ICS recently forecasted zero carbon shipping.

What does Wärtsilä think about this move?

We think that it is absolutely necessary that in shipping we are focusing further towards longer environmental impact when it comes to sea and to annual carbon shipping. We already have improved a lot on the products and the shipping environmental performance in this respect. Starting from the main machinery engine side we currently have the most efficient engines in the market for lowest fuel consumption which means the lowest CO2 emissions

Sea News 47

SHIPPING

WÄRTSILÄ: MAKING WAVES WITH GREEN SHIPPING

WÄRTSILÄ

to the market when it comes to liquid fuel. Gas is something we are promoting very heavily to the market with LNG already and the CO2 emissions are reduced by 25 percent. Additionally, all the machinery and equipment we optimize our energy efficiency focused, which means that there is least energy consumption which is leading to lowest CO2 emissions as well. In addition, we are very active also with today with hybrid concepts, so we are combining diesel or gas engines together with batteries and electric drives so that there can be further optimization based on the varied profiles of the ships. We even have done smaller ships with fully battery provided power systems. We also do harbor electrical connections, we have the induction charging concepts, contactless charging of ships from harbours that provide electricity over to the ships batteries and systems which provide the ships with zero emissions at harbours. We also see that there is more and more trend and purpose towards the use of biofuel. Our products are compatible with liquid bio fuel and also with gaseous bio fuel.

What steps is Wärtsilä taking to aid the industry for the 2020 sulphur cap?

That is an important area for us, we actually have multiple technologies, multiple choices for the customers. First thing and most feasible for existing ships is to install exhaust gas cleaning technology on board. So the exhaust gas scrubbers are a solid part of Wärtsilä’s offering and those are already in use in very many ships. We have open loop scrubbers, we have closed loop scrubbers and hybrid scrubber types.

And that gives a very very feasible way to meet the 2020 sulphur emission regulations. The other choice for customers mainly considered for new buildings (ships) to have is to use the LNG gas as the fuel. Gas actually practically has zero Sulphur emissions and it’s a very good way to meet the Sulphur emission regulations. And then, of course the use of battery technology for smaller vessels is also a choice which has zero Sulphur emissions.

are a major major part of the emissions and impact on the environment can be reduced. Additionally, we strongly believe that there will further more optimization not only of the ships itself but also the full fleets. The full fleets will be used in a more optimized way and there is more connectivity also from the ships to harbours so that there is the data available on board of the ships is more connecting the operation of the ships to the harbor operations. As an example we strongly believe that we can further bring the whole shipping logistics into a direction where as an example, the data of the availability of the port, the harbor is better communicated to the ships, so that the ships don’t unnecessarily have high speed when having their voyages in order just to come to harbor and wait for a couple of hours before they are allowed to enter . We need more online coordination so that the ships operator and the ship crew knows what is the optimal speed and what is their necessary speed in order to be just on time in the harbor and by that reducing speed and optimizing it also taking weather into account they make much more optimum routing.

So its technologies on board, but also provide a bigger picture with connectivity and use of data.

What is Wärtsilä’s message to the maritime industry with respect to green, responsible sustainable shipping?

Well we are definitely focusing on the sustainability and the green shipping throughout the portfolio and we are looking for broader views, more use of data, more collaboration and partnerships for the players in the markets. Because we believe that there is a way in the future also to bring benefits.

We feel that the markets are developing fast and the needs in the market are also developing fast so we need much much more focus on the environment.

What is the future of green shipping from a global leader in technology solutions perspective and what does Wärtsilä predict for the maritime industry in the coming years up to 2020 and thereafter?

So, green shipping as earlier discussed already in the core of the purpose and whilst improving the technologies on board like improving the efficiency of the engines, using gas as the fuel instead of the liquid fossil fuels, being ready for the bio fuels, optimizing all the systems performance on board of the ship

48 Sea News

ISSUE 1 2018

Advertising in Sea News Facts And Figures Sea News engages an audience of ship owners, operators, presidents, upper management and decision-makers with matters of importance in the Global Maritime Industry.

With hard-hitting news and analysis of key issues in the Tanker, Dry Bulk and Container Shipping sectors and relevant coverage of significant events at Ports and Terminals, Sea News brings its readers wide coverage of all aspects affecting the industry.

In-depth conversations, interviews and Q&As with the industry’s top professionals ensure a well-informed perspective on the happenings of the dynamic shipping industry.

The magazine was developed for a niche market, based on the premise of exhaustive and quality journalism.

Maximum readership by shipowners in the industry is what sets Sea News apart.

An advertisement with Sea News will afford your product the global reach it deserves in crucial sectors of the industry.

This includes: Digital magazine subscription Comprehensive online directory Website eNewsletter

Organisation Type 90% Port and Terminal Operator

10%

Ship Owner/ Operator/ Manager

Job Type Managing Director

80% 15% 5%

C Level Management

Management

Summary Digital Circulation

Senior Management

Countries

4,941 95% 138

Geographical Distribution

Advertising enquiries and media pack: advertising@seanews.co.uk

Sea News 2018 Features List

2 3 4 Issue

Issue

Issue

All Issues

Technology, the Game Changer The Move to Big Data Organisation Type Innovations Discoveries Firsts The Maritime Future

For editorial ideas and stories: editorial@seanews.co.uk

Business/Markets/Trends Half Yearly Reports Big Winners Major Losses Trends Across Segments Predictions

The Year That Was & Future Forecast Goodbye 2018, Welcome 2019 Major Events in 2018 - Wins, Loses, New Entrants, Old Stalwarts Round Up What’s to come in 2019

Regular Features Apart from the main stories, the sections would include: IMO and Regulations Update Q&As/Interviews - Ship Owners/Operators/Superintendents/Directors Registry Mention The Seafarers Perspective

ARCTIC SHIPPING: AN OVERVIEW

SHIPPING ARCTIC SHIPPING

Arctic Shipping: An Overview

By Dr Dwayne Ryan Menezes – Director, Polar Research & Policy Initiative

along the northern coasts of Norway and Russia, the Northwest Passage along the northern coasts of Canada and the US (Alaska), and the Transpolar Sea Route (or Trans-Arctic Route) that runs along the centre of the Arctic Ocean.

These Northern sea routes open up considerable opportunities for commercial shipping. The Northeast Passage, for instance, greatly reduces the sailing distances between Europe and Asia, consequently proving most attractive for the Northeast Asian economic powerhouses of China (including Hong Kong), Korea and Japan. Whereas a cargo ship sailing from Shanghai to Rotterdam would journey approximately 13,796 nautical miles around the Cape of Good Hope, it would traverse only around 10,557 nautical miles if it sailed through the Suez Canal, representing a substantial reduction of roughly 23%. Yet, if the same ship sailed via the Northeast Passage, it would travel only around 8,046 nautical miles, representing a further reduction of 24%. For the ports of Yokohama in Japan and Busan in Korea, the difference in sailing distances along the Suez route and the Northeast Passage has been estimated to be as great as 37% and 29% respectively.

D

isappearing multi-year sea ice, declining summer sea ice extent and thickness, and longer ice-free periods in the Arctic Ocean in recent decades have made Arctic shipping routes more navigable. Combined with the wealth of natural resources contained in the region and their increasing accessibility as a result of changing ice conditions and technological advancements, three shipping routes in particular have emerged as the subject of particular interest: the Northeast Passage

ISSUE 1 2018

While Soviet and then Russian vessels have used the Northern Sea Route (NSR) since the 1930s to transport lumber, pelts, oil and ore, the route did not see any international maritime traffic until 2009. That year, two German multi-purpose heavy lift carriers belonging to Beluga Shipping GmbH and flying the flag of Antigua and Barbadua – MV Beluga Fraternity and MV Beluga Foresight – that sailed from Ulsan in South Korea to Vladivostok, carrying heavy modules destined for the Surgut power plant, and onward to Rotterdam, carrying steel pipes destined for Nigeria, became the first non-Russian commercial vessels to

Sea News 51

SHIPPING

ARCTIC SHIPPING: AN OVERVIEW

ARCTIC SHIPPING

52 Sea News

transit the Northeast Passage to deliver cargo from Asia to Europe. By opting for this route, the company reduced its sailing distance by 4,000 nautical miles; cut its costs by around $300,000 and saved fuel worth $100,000, both per vessel; and decreased its carbon dioxide emissions.

37% in 2012 and 21.1% in 2013. On the other hand, international transit (between foreign ports of origin and destination) accounted for only 4.9% in 2011, 21.7% in 2012 and 18.3% in 2013. Even in 2015, 2016 and 2017, international transits accounted for only a small percentage.

In November and December 2012, the Ob River LNG carrier, operated by the Greek shipping company Dynagas and chartered by the Russian energy giant Gazprom, successfully completed the world’s first ever delivery of liquefied natural gas cargo through the Northeast Passage when it conveyed LNG from the world’s northernmost gas plant operated by Statoil in Melkøya in Hammerfest (Norway) to the Port of Tobata in Japan. Just a month prior, it had completed a ballast voyage from Korea to France before picking up its cargo at Hammerfest and sailing through the Barents and Kara seas and between the Vilkitsky and Bering straits escorted by Atomflot-owned nuclear icebreakers. In 2013, the ice-class LNG carrier Arctic Aurora, built in South Korea and also owned by Dynagas, sailed along a similar route, first from Vladisvostok to Hammerfest in October and then, with 66,868 tons of LNG, from the Statoil-owned Arctic terminal of Melkøya to the port of Futtsu in Japan in September and October. More recently, in August 2017, the world’s first icebreaking LNG tanker Christophe de Margerie – designed to serve the Yamal LNG project and operated by the Russian maritime shipping company Sovcomflot – carried LNG from the Snøhvit LNG terminal in Norway to Boryeong in South Korea in just 19 days, completing the NSR transit in a record six days, 12 hours and 15 minutes, and becoming the first merchant vessel to travel the route unescorted.

The total volume of cargo on the NSR reflected a similar trajectory: while the volume of cargo conveyed between Russian ports increased from 2.8 million tons in 2013 to 3.7 million tons in 2014 and 5.15 million tons in 2015, the volume of cargo in transit along the NSR decreased from 1.356 million tons in 2013 to 274,103 tons in 2014 and 39,586 tons in 2015. Although the total cargo volume on the NSR rose further to 7.3 million tons in 2016 and 9.7 million tons in 2017, the volume of cargo in transit remained miniscule at just 214,513 tons and 194,364 tons respectively. Thus, despite the dramatic rise in the volume of transit cargo at the turn of the decade from 111,000 tons in 2010 to 820,789 tons in 2011 and 1,261,545 tons in 2012, transit traffic took a dip after 2013, largely due to reductions in fuel costs and commodity prices.

By contrast, destinational shipping has shown more solid growth. In 2016, for instance, while domestic shipping between Russian ports conveyed 3.1 million tons of cargo, destinational shipping to foreign ports accounted for approximately 4.15 million tons. The construction of Lukoil’s Varandey oil export terminal on the Pechora Sea coast and the Gazprom-operated Prirazlomnaya offshore platform in the Pechora Sea, the transportation of oil from Gazprom Neft’s Novy Port, the beginning of production at the Yamal LNG plant and the development of the Arctic LNG II project have all provided impetus for this growth.

According to the NSR Information Office and other sources, two ships transited through the Northeast Passage in 2009, with the number rising to four in 2010, 34 or 41 in 2011, 46 in 2012 and 71 in 2013 before falling to 53 in 2014, 18 in 2015 and 19 in 2016 and picking up again to 29 in 2017. Transit shipments, however, accounted for only a fraction of the total number of voyages on the Northern Sea Route. Take the period between 2011 and 2013, for instance. Domestic shipping between ports of origin and destination within Russia accounted for 22% of transits in 2011, 41.3% of transits in 2012 and 59.2% of transits in 2013. Likewise, destinational shipping between a port of origin or destination within Russia and a foreign port of origin or destination, linked to the transportation of natural resources from northern Russia, accounted for 36.6% of total transits in 2011,

Nevertheless, in 2017, while around three quarters of the 300-plus vessels operating along the NSR flew the Russian flag, foreign carriers accounted for three quarters of all transit traffic along the route. This was in no small part due to the importance that China and other Northeast Asian powers place on the NSR. In August 2012, a Chinese government-owned icebreaker R/V Xue Long (Snow Dragon) sailed to Iceland to become the first ever Chinese-flagged vessel to cross the Arctic Ocean, first through the NSR and then, on its way back, via the Central Arctic Route. A year later, a 19,000-ton freighter M/V Yong Sheng – owned by the Chinese shipping company, COSCO – emerged as the first Chinese commercial ship and the world’s first container-transporting vessel to transit the route after it carried 16,740 tons of steel and heavy equipment from Dalian to Rotterdam in just 33 days, reducing its

ISSUE 1 2018

ARCTIC SHIPPING: AN OVERVIEW

SHIPPING ARCTIC SHIPPING

journey by 12-15 days and 7,000 kilometers. In 2016, there were five Chinese-flagged vessels transiting through the NSR, while in 2017, there were over a dozen, comprising, as Malte Humpert pointed out, “the largest fleet of non-Russian flagged vessels to ever operate on the route�. COSCO was responsible for five transit voyages and three destination shipments in 2017, with Guangzhou Salvage, CNOOC and COSL being the other Chinese firms engaged with the NSR that year.

Following the first complete transit of the Northwest Passage in 1853, there have been at least 287 complete maritime transits made by 219 different vessels from 40 registries by the end of the 2017 navigation season. Around 135 of these had occurred prior to 2009, with the number of transits rising from four a year in the 1980s to between 20 and 30 a year in the period from 2009 to 2013. While only seven ships had cleared customs in Inuvik in the Northwest Territories in the summer navigational season of 2010, at least 18 ships cleared customs there in 2010. The number soared to 30 in 2012, but then fell to 17 in 2014 owing to a shorter, colder summer. While 56 of the 287-plus complete transits were made by passenger vessels, only 8 carried commercial cargo. The extreme Arctic conditions restricted shipping through the

ISSUE 1 2018

passage almost entirely to icebreakers, research and hydrographic vessels, tankers, yacht and sailing craft, buoy tenders and small cargo vessels carrying supplies to remote communities.

In September and October 2013, a 225-meter-long, 75,603 deadweight-ton Danish bulk carrier MS Nordic Orion, owned and operated by Nordic Bulk Carriers, sailed from Vancouver in western Canada to the Port of Pori in western Finland. It passed through the Northwest Passage along with an icebreaker escort from the Canadian Coast Guard, and delivered coal from Teck Resources, a Canadian metals and mining company, to Ruukki (Rautaruukki Corporation), a Finnish manufacturer and supplier of metals and metal products. It was the first time that a large sea freighter had traversed the Northwest Passage since SS Manhattan had done so to pick up oil from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, in 1969. By doing so, Nordic Orion was able to cut its sailing distance by 1,000 nautical miles and sailing time by a week, decrease its fuel costs by an estimated USD 80,000, pay less in freight costs, reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and carry its full capacity, shipping 15,000 additional tons of coal or 25 percent more cargo, than would have been the case if it had sailed via the Panama Canal.

Sea News 53

SHIPPING

ARCTIC SHIPPING: AN OVERVIEW

ARCTIC SHIPPING

Subsequent years saw a number of ice-strengthened cargo vessels complete the transit. In 2014, MV Nunavik – owned by the Canadian firm Fednav – emerged as the first cargo vessel to traverse the Northwest Passage without an icebreaker escort when it transported 23,000 tons of nickel ore mined in the Chinese-owned Nunavik Nickel Mine near Deception Bay in northern Quebec (Canada) to Dalian in China.

By doing so, it was able to reduce the sailing distance by 40 percent (as compared to the Panama Canal route) and its greenhouse gas emissions by around 1,300 metric tons. In 2016 and 2017 respectively, MV Africaborg and MV Atlanticborg – owned by the Dutch maritime and logistics services provider, Royal Wagenborg – carried cargo of carbon anodes from China to Quebec. The Northwest Passage has also generated interest in the cruise industry, with the number of ships and passengers undertaking voyages in Arctic Canada rising from 11 and 1,045 in 2005 to 40 and over 3,600 in 2015 respectively.

More recently, much-publicised cruises transiting the Northwest Passage, such as those of Crystal Serenity in 2016 and 2017, have sparked debates about the complicated relationship between cruise ships and the communities of the Arctic.

Despite these developments related to Arctic shipping routes, a number of significant challenges persist. One challenge is that multi-year ice may be considerably thicker than first-year ice and may, along with icebergs and pingos, obstruct the passage of vessels. Another challenge is the extreme weather, which can affect not just crew and passengers, but also the ship’s machinery, and cause delays, with accompanying fog, albedo or water vapour reducing visibility. A third challenge is the unpredictability, limitations on capacity, drafts, beam limitations, need for icebreaker escorts or specially designed vessels, insurance requirements, vulnerability to fluctuating fuel and commodity prices, and the implications of all of these on costs and profit margins. A fourth challenge is the lack of adequate infrastructure, from the sparseness of deepwater ports and the inadequacy of existing navigation charts to the need for greater search and rescue responses, more robust communications systems and more effective oil spill prevention and response measures. A fifth challenge is the implications both for the environment and for communities, from the risks inherent in the carriage and use of heavy fuel oils in the Arctic to the disturbance caused to marine mammals and the pressures placed on remote communities with limited amenities.

54 Sea News

In light of the recent developments in Arctic shipping, as well as in recognition of its considerable opportunities and inevitable challenges, perhaps the foundational questions for all discussion about the subject need to be reframed. More suitable questions might be the ones put forward by the Arctic Circle Mission Council on Shipping and Ports chaired by Mead Treadwell, the former Lt Governor of Alaska and former Chair of the US Arctic Research Commission, in its draft final report: •

“Is there a viable business plan for Arctic Seaways that brings together Arctic and partner nations to ensure Arctic shipping is safe, secure, reliable and environmentally and economically sustainable?

•

Is there a reason to launch a ‘League of Arctic Ports’, connecting ports in the Arctic Ocean and adjacent seas and ports shipping and receiving goods and people over Arctic Seaways that would help advocate for the sustainable use of these seaways?

•

What mechanisms, on a local and global scale, can help finance the necessary infrastructure – aids to navigation, icebreaker escorts, sea ice monitoring, transshipment ports and ports of refuge, oil spill prevention and response, search and rescue, salvage tugs, and more – necessary to ensure safe, secure and reliable Arctic shipping?”

Dr. Dwayne Ryan Menezes is the Founder and Director of Polar Research and Policy Initiative (PRPI), a London-based international think-tank dedicated to Arctic, Nordic and Antarctic affairs. He is also the Founder and Director of the Human Security Centre (HSC) and Think-Film Impact Production (TFIP), and the Head of the Secretariats of the All-Party Parliamentary Groups for Yemen and for Visas & Immigration in the UK Parliament. In his academic career, he is currently an Honorary Fellow at the UCL Institute of Risk and Disaster Reduction at University College London and an Associate Fellow at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London. Formerly, he served as Consultant to the Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Principal Consultant to a European Parliament Intergroup, and Research Associate to a UN Special Rapporteur. He read History at the LSE, graduated with a PhD in History from the University of Cambridge, and held visiting or postdoctoral fellowships since at the Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS), University of Oxford, and Heythrop College, University of London.

ISSUE 1 2018

THE DANGER HEAVY FUEL OIL POSES TO THE ARCTIC REGION

SHIPPING HEAVY FUEL OIL

The Danger Heavy Fuel Oil Poses to the Arctic Region A year ago, there was a campaign that pushed for the ban of heavy fuel oil (HFO) in the Arctic Region. Since its launch in Tromsø, the campaign was successful and gained the power and influence of 65 companies, organisations, politicians and explorers

H

eavy fuel oil (HFO) is the bottom of the barrel leftovers from the oil refining process. It is incredibly viscous; at room temperature, it can be the consistency of peanut butter.

When spilled, the thick fuel mixes with surface seawater to form slurry and is difficult to clean up using standard oil spill response techniques. The slurry is particularly dangerous to animals that use the surface of the water, such as whales and birds.

Few engines can burn HFO – its low quality and gumminess prevents its use in all transport modes, with the exception of marine. HFO is the preferred fuel for the marine shipping industry because it’s cheap, widely available, and large marine engines are built to

ISSUE 1 2018

handle it. From cruise ships to container vessels, HFO fuels the commercial marine industry.

HFO, or bunker oil, has been banned for use in Antarctic waters and is restricted in Norwegian water, because of its significant environmental impact on polar pollution. However, unlike Antarctica, the Arctic is home to commercial shipping ports that transport commodities to and from Arctic communities. These businesses are worried that banning HFO use in the Arctic would seriously harm their bottom lines and so, the fuel is still used widely by the shipping industry.

The reason why HFO fuel volume is so high is because the largest ships use it – resupply ships, vessels servicing mine sites and large passenger vessels.

Sea News 55

SHIPPING

THE DANGER HEAVY FUEL OIL POSES TO THE ARCTIC REGION

HEAVY FUEL OIL

But the IMO has yet to take a stand on use of HFO in the Arctic. The marine organisation’s relatively new Arctic shipping regulations the Polar Code, which came into force in Canada contains only a voluntary recommendation to avoid use of HFO. The Arctic Commitment aims to protect Arctic communities and ecosystems from the risks posed by the use of heavy fuel oil, and calls on the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to ban its use and carriage as fuel by Arctic shipping.

“Banning the use and carriage of HFO in Arctic waters is the simplest and most effective mechanism for mitigating the consequences of a spill and reducing harmful emissions. An HFO ban has already been in place in Antarctic waters since 2011”, said Dr Sian Prior, advisor to the Clean Arctic Alliance.

There are many reasons why HFO is not only hazardous but also deadly, when it comes to the environment and biospheres in the Arctic. The major issues that arise from the use of HFO in the Arctic Region are as follows:

56 Sea News

•

Toxic and Viscous – Heavy fuel oil (HFO) is an extremely toxic and viscous marine fuel that breaks down slowly in the marine environment, particularly in colder regions like the Arctic.

•

Unmanageable Spill – In the event of a heavy fuel oil spill, lack of infrastructure, uncharted waters, severe weather conditions and navigational hazards such as sea ice, make spill response efforts nearly impossible.

•

Risk to Indigenous Residents – HFO spills pose a severe risk to many indigenous residents of the Arctic region that depend on marine resources for their nutritional, cultural, and economic needs.

•

Harmful Pollutants – HFO produces higher emissions of harmful pollutants like sulphur oxide, nitrogen oxides, and black carbon, all of which have been linked to an increased risk of heart and lung disease and premature death. Switching from HFO to low-sulphur distillate fuel would reduce black carbon emissions by 30%-80%.

•

Accelerated Warming – Black carbon has a potent climate warming effect when emitted at high latitudes. The warming impact is increased by at least a factor of 3 in the Arctic region as compared to emissions over the open ocean. This is because in the atmosphere, the black carbon particles absorb incoming radiation from above, as well as reflected radiation from below – doubling the warming impact.

•

Self-Reinforcing Warming Cycle – When black carbon particles fall onto the Arctic snow and ice, radiation scattered from the snow and ice hits the deposited black carbon particles and causes further warming, plus the amount of sunlight reflected back into space is reduced. Snow and ice melt is accelerated increasing the surface area of exposed, dark ocean water, and promoting a self-reinforcing cycle of human-induced climate warming.

HFO is a dirty and polluting fossil fuel that powers ships around the world. Around 75% of marine fuel currently carried in the Arctic is HFO, over half by vessels flagged to non-Arctic states. Combined with an increase in Arctic state-flagged vessels targeting previously non-accessible resources, this will greatly increase the risk of an HFO spill.

If HFO is spilled in the colder waters of the Arctic, it breaks down even more slowly than in warmer waters, with long-term devastating effects on both livelihoods and ecosystems. HFO is a larger source of high emissions of harmful air pollutants such as sulphur oxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, including black carbon than alternative fuels such as distillate and liquid natural gas.

Thus, phasing out the use and carriage of HFO for marine fuel is the most effective mitigation strategy and is a priority at this time.

ISSUE 1 2018

THE HAZARDS OF ARCTIC SHIPPING

SHIPPING ARCTIC SHIPPING

The Hazards of Arctic Shipping As global warming reduces the extent of sea ice in the Arctic, more ships (cargo carriers as well as liners) are plying in the region’s far-northern waters.

E

xperts in maritime safety say that this raises concerns about what will happen when something goes wrong.

Companies, (both cargo and cruise) spend at least three years getting ready for Arctic voyages with priority on preparedness and safety. What keeps experts on edge is the possibility that a ship that is less prepared could have a problem that would require an extensive search-and-rescue operation.

GLOBAL WARMING AUGMENTS ARCTIC TRAFFIC Sea ice, which completely covers the Arctic Ocean in winter, gradually melts in the spring and reaches its minimum extent in September. That minimum has declined by about 13 percent per decade compared with the 1981 to 2010 average, according to NASA. Scientists say warming, which is occurring faster in the Arctic than any other region, is largely responsible.

As climate change continues, more of the Arctic will be open to ships, and for longer. Some scientists predict that the region could be completely ice-free in summers by the 2030s or 2040s.

ISSUE 1 2018

However, good news is that the amount of activity over all in the region is still small, and a huge rush to the Arctic is not expected anytime soon. Even as ice coverage continues to shrink, conditions will remain variable enough that no shipping company with tight deadlines will try regular Arctic service.

ASSISTANCE, SEARCH & RESCUE There are relatively few government icebreakers or cutters on the vulnerable circles, and a long-range airlift by helicopters would be extremely difficult. So an emergency operation would most likely rely heavily on other commercial ships that happen to be in the area. A rescue could take days.

Among the problems that might befall ships in the Arctic, much of which is still poorly charted, is a grounding that in the worst case could lead to the breaking up and sinking of a ship.

In addition to the obvious risk to lives, such an event could cause a spill of thousands of gallons of fuel — thick, heavy oil in the case of most cargo ships — that could be next to impossible to recover.

Sea News 57

SHIPPING

THE HAZARDS OF ARCTIC SHIPPING

ARCTIC SHIPPING

CURRENT TRAFFIC SCENARIO – MISHAPS Arctic ship traffic has increased in the past decade, and so has the number of accidents, an insurance company reports. The most recent Shipping and Safety Review, published annually by Allianz Global, reports 55 ship accidents in the waters of the Arctic Circle in 2014. That’s up from three in 2005. Mechanical failure, fire or a medical emergency are concerns as well.

The IMO Polar Code Advisory identifies four potential Arctic shipping routes: the Northern Sea Route, Northwest Passage, Transpolar Sea Route and Arctic Bridge. The rising number of vessels in the region is worrisome due to the increased potential for vessel incidents (such as groundings, mechanical failure, ice damage, fires) and lack of robust response capabilities in the region.

Although the Arctic has not been the site of a major disaster involving a cruise ship in recent years, a smaller liner, the Explorer, sank off the Antarctic Peninsula in 2007 after striking an iceberg. Fortunately, several other ships were within 100 miles of the stricken ship, and the 150 passengers and crew were rescued after five hours in lifeboats.

While the entry into force of the Polar Code on January 1, 2017 will hopefully improve standards, it will also require regular updates to keep pace with changes in ice conditions and risk. Safety of maritime traffic in the region demands improved governance, response capabilities and maritime domain awareness.

Commercial ships in northern waters have occasionally run into trouble, sometimes with deadly results. In December 2004, the Selendang Ayu, a 740-foot Malaysian ship carrying soybeans and more than 1,000 tons of fuel oil, suffered an engine failure, drifted and eventually ran aground and broke apart in the Aleutian Islands in Alaska. Six crew members died when a Coast Guard helicopter that had just picked them up was swamped by a wave.

According to the report, machinery damage or failure accounted for about half of the incidents. Only one ship accident, off the coast of northern Norway, was considered a total loss.

THE POLAR CODE While maritime traffic in the region will still be a fraction of overall global traffic, operating in the Arctic poses significant challenges. In 2016, there were 55 reported shipping incidents north of the Arctic Circle.

58 Sea News

THE WAY AHEAD Nations with Arctic lands have a lot to do towards assisting each other in the event of disaster. Even as many ships tread the Arctic throughout the year, there is very little emergency infrastructure in either American or Canadian Arctic waters, or in Russia along what is known as the Northern Sea Route.

Reports say 71 ships navigated some or all of the Northern Sea Routes across Russia in 2013, although increased ice coverage reduced that number in 2014.

The report notes the Polar Code, which aims to curb risks from increased traffic in the Arctic and Antarctica, has been welcomed by the shipping industry.

However, while the code addresses many safety issues, questions remain, particularly in the areas of crew training, vessel suitability and potential clean-up.

The code will need constant revision.

ISSUE 1 2018

POLLUTION AFFECTING FLORA AND FAUNA SURROUNDING MAJOR PORTS

PORTS AND TERMINALS PORT POLUTION

Pollution Affecting Flora and Fauna Surrounding Major Ports During cargo handling operations in ports and harbours, discharges and emissions have become commonplace

H

andling of dry bulk cargo including grain, coal, iron ore and china clay, are major contributors that cause the production of dust.

between industrial units, considering that the potential for a major fire is immense, given the large quantities of petroleum products stored in tank farms dotting the area.

Handling of liquid bulk may require discharge through pipelines, which provides the potential for leaks, emissions and spillages. Sources of atmospheric pollution can stem from cargo vapour emissions.

This may result in the suffocation of marine life in the vicinity.

AFTER EFFECTS OF CARGO HANDLING Release of cargoes into the marine environment may have direct environmental effects, as in the case of the loss of toxic substances, or indirect effects, such as the loss of non-toxic organic-rich substances, which may result in oxygen depletion on their breakdown.

Minor accidents in these regions can have a significant impact on the dense residential colonies sandwiched

There are vast amounts of dry bulk cargoes shipped around the world and the dust generation from the

ISSUE 1 2018

Sea News 59

PORTS AND TERMINALS

POLLUTION AFFECTING FLORA AND FAUNA SURROUNDING MAJOR PORTS

PORT POLUTION

the gastrointestinal system and one affects the cardio vascular system.

One of them, benzene, is a known human and animal carcinogen, which also causes the rare childhood cancer Leukemia or blood cancer.

CONTROL MEASURES 1) Pollution control measures, due to which the degree of air and water pollution in the core operational area of the port and its civil township in a sustained manner, is primordial.

physical handling of these cargoes is harmful to the environment.

Concern is often due to its highly visible nature. Some dry bulk cargoes have high concentrations of organic material and/or nutrients, such as fertilisers and animal feed, with high biological oxygen demands, large spillages of these may cause localised nutrient enrichment and oxygen depletion.

It was found in the recent past that the air quality both in and outside the ports deteriorated considerably.

Port authorities had been directed to formulate a comprehensive plan and implement it expeditiously to curb pollution.

CONSEQUENCES ON HUMAN, ANIMAL AND PLANT LIFE The environmental hazards of harmful substances include damage to living resources (toxicity), bioaccumulation, hazard to human health (oral intake, inhalation and skin contact) and reduction of amenities. The severity of the pollution of the marine environment, air, soil or groundwater will depend upon the nature of the substance and the amount and concentration released into the port environment.

In 2011, the Madras High Court in India, directed the Union Shipping Ministry not to dump and handle dusty cargo like coal and iron ore at the Chennai port.

A report by Community Environmental Monitoring revealed that the residents of North Chennai were living in a condition similar to that of the victims of the Bhopal disaster.

FACTS AND FIGURES The presence of over fourteen highly toxic chemicals in the air samples, all of which can adversely affect the eyes; eleven target the skin, central nervous system, and the respiratory system, four target the liver and kidneys, three target the blood, two target the peripheral nervous system, reproductive system, and

60 Sea News

2) Mobile mist canons for dust suppression should be procured by the port trust and a drive to plant saplings in the port area should be initiated.

3) Truck tyres washing systems should be installed inside the port as the trucks carrying ores often leave dust on the road.

4) To stop dust particles from spreading, the port authorities should take up projects to expand ultra-violet net-barricade cover within the restricted port area. The 2-km stretch of the port boundary can be brought under the net cover to stop air pollution caused by the handling of ores.

5) Installation of automatic fogging system in areas where mineral ores are being stockpiled and can curb pollution to a great extent.

6) Mechanical sweeping water sprinkling systems at the manual stockyard and building tanks at strategic places in the port to scientifically store polluted water.

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE Environmental hazards are an inevitable consequence of industrial advancement and economic development involving the trade of industrial produce. Increasing economic development, coupled with a rapidly growing population, is putting a strain on the environment, infrastructure, and the country’s natural resources.

Fine particles or microscopic dust from coal, iron ore, and unfiltered diesel engines are rated as some of the most lethal forms or air pollution caused by industry.

Shipping terminals and ports across the world should setup effective environment-monitoring cells with personnel having expertise on pollution control.

Environment scientists should also be recruited to strengthen these cells. Ambient air and water standards monitoring by the cell on a daily basis can reduce air pollution to a certain degree.

ISSUE 1 2018

FRIEND OF THE SEA SUSTAINABLE SHIPPING CERTIFICATION

SHIPPING SUSTAINABILITY

Friend of the Sea Sustainable Shipping Certification According to the UN’s State of Sustainability Initiatives Review, Friend of the Sea has become the single largest certification program of seafood from sustainable fisheries and aquaculture

F

riend of the Sea certified production has reached 9.3 million metric tons, covering an estimated 6.2% of total seafood production. 10 years after its foundation by environmentalist Paolo Bray (international director of the Dolphin-Safe

ISSUE 1 2018

tuna project), over 700 companies from 65 countries have products certified Friend of the Sea. Friend of the Sea is an international NGO whose mission, in line with the United Nations 2020

Sea News 61

SHIPPING

FRIEND OF THE SEA SUSTAINABLE SHIPPING CERTIFICATION

SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainable Development Goals, is to protect the ocean by means of promoting sustainable products and services. Fishing is only one of many causes of anthropic impact on the oceans. Around 80 per cent of the volume of international trade in goods is carried by sea, and the potential impact of shipping on the oceans has grown consequently.

IN 2017, Friend of the Sea has introduced a certification for Sustainable Shipping, to stimulate the implementation of sustainable practices in the industry. The certification requirements span from pollution prevention to fuel efficiency; from waste management to social accountability. Audited vessels must not use a Flag of Convenience; must not carry seafood fished by IUU/’Pirate’ vessels; cannot carry Dolphin-Unsafe tuna nor endangered species. Most updated pollution prevention systems must have been implemented to reduce NOX, PM, SOx and CO2, as well as chemicals. Water and waste management measures must be in place.

Compliance with Social Accountability is an important part of the Friend of the Sea sustainable shipping certification, focusing on minor labour, regular contracts and respect of minimum wage rules, health care, maximum number of hours, rest and vacations plan.

The new Friend of the Sea standard has been embraced voluntarily by two major European shipping companies, GreenSea and Seatrade, audited by the third party auditor BMT Survey.

Friend of the Sea is now recommending the seafood companies which have already proved the sustainable origin of their products, to rely on Friend of the Sea certified sustainable shipping operators for their global seafood trade.

This was the choice made by Compagnie Française du Thon Océanique (CFTO), the major French tuna ship-owner that in an effort to further reduce its environmental impact is now moving its Friend of the Sea certified tuna only by means of certified sustainable shipping operators, such as GreenSea. “CFTO is engaged to sustainability all through its production and distribution activities.” explains Mr Auke van de Kerk, Managing Director of CFTO “This is why we are requesting our shipping providers to undergo a Friend of the Sea sustainable shipping audit”.

“The Friend of the Sea sustainable shipping certification represents a recognition for those operators which

62 Sea News

have for years invested in pollution reduction and social accountability” comments Paolo Bray, director of Friend of the Sea “it also allows their customers to make their shipping choices based also on sustainable principles and not merely on economical and logistical factors” Since 2015, Friend of the Sea has campaigned internationally for the shipping industry to consider measures to reduce whales’ ship strikes. In Sri Lanka Friend of the Sea has proposed a shifting of the lanes 15 miles south to reduce whales’ mortality in the area due to ship strikes by an estimated 94%.

“While the World Shipping Council and other shipping organizations have shown some level of concern, the timing of their response is proving to be far too slow and the risk is that by the time some action is coordinated, whales’ populations will already be on the path to extinction” explains Bray. “In Sri Lanka alone 1.000 yearly whales’ strikes are estimated and several have resulted in whales’ deaths. Whales are killed by ship strikes globally, but from our records the industry seems to be largely not reporting on the official IWC whales ship strikes database.”

Friend of the Sea proposes simple and effective solutions to reduce whales’ mortality from ship strikes, such as on board thermal cameras reporting whales’ presence; strikes avoidance procedures and an online platform to share whales’ presence data.

“We sincerely hope that the shipping industry, in particular the environmentally sound companies, will understand the importance of an international environmental and social sustainability certification, such as Friend of the Sea “ concludes Bray “Third party certification and labelling is the only way for their customers to differentiate between sustainable shipping services providers and those which might have lower costs, but are not verified compliant with social and environmental requirements. Most producing companies globally are striving to reduce their impact on the environment. They would surely be interested to be able to select also their shipping company based on proved clean environmental and social records.”

Friend of the Sea is currently developing Sustainable Harbours and Ports requirements to expand the certification also to these very important players in the shipping and maritime trade arena. The new standard is already open to applications.

ISSUE 1 2018

THE FELT BENEFITS OF CLEAN SHIPPING

SHIPPING CLEAN SHIPPING

The Felt Benefits of Clean Shipping The present sulphur content in shipping fuel does not just raise environmental concerns, but also has negative implications on the health and well-being of human beings.

A

ccording to Oceans Deeply, 2 percent of the ocean’s total oxygen has been lost over the last half century and that the volume of oxygen-free water on the open ocean has quadrupled. Oxygen-minimum zones – waters with less than half the normal concentration of oxygen – have expanded by an area about the size of the European Union.

“If we lost 4.5 million square kilometers of productive area on land, everyone would be appalled,” said Denise Breitburg, a marine ecologist with the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center and lead author of the study. “But what happens beneath the surface of the ocean is out of sight, and easy to either not notice or ignore.”

ISSUE 1 2018

To stop large ocean oxygen losses, fossil fuel emissions will need to be cut sooner rather than later.

By 2020, the IMO has mandated that shipping fuel is to have 80-86 percent less sulphur and scientists believe that in addition to this resulting in the clean-up of global shipping, it will also lead to myriad health benefits for mankind.

Safety4Sea states that a study published in Nature Communications Journal assessed public health impacts of low-sulphur fuels in global shipping, revealing that clean fuels will significantly reduce ship-related premature mortality and morbidity, but they will still account for approximately 250k deaths annually. However, stringent regulations after the 2020 sulphur cap will better these statistics.

Sea News 63

SHIPPING

THE FELT BENEFITS OF CLEAN SHIPPING

CLEAN SHIPPING

Cleaner fuels reduce radiative cooling from ship aerosols by ~80% (71 mW m−2) due to lower direct aerosol cooling (−3.9 mW m−2) and lower cloud albedo (−67 mW m−2). Local intensities of these changes in health and climate directly relate to the major patterns of ship traffic along major trade routes and continental coastlines.

More than 97% of the adult mortality benefits from ship emissions reductions will be in Asia (80%), Africa (12%), and Latin America and the Caribbean (5%). More than 98% of the childhood morbidity benefits from ship emissions reductions also occur in Asia (54%), Africa (33%), and Latin America and the Caribbean (12%).

The different distributions are primarily due to the different distributions of adult and youth populations among nations.

Europe, North America, and Oceania combined will receive <3% and <2% of the mortality and morbidity benefits of the global sulphur standard, respectively.

This is primarily due to existing legislation (with or without the global standards) in North America, the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, the English Channel, and EU sea areas in general.

According to phys.org, roughly 14 million annual cases of childhood asthma are estimated to be related to global ship pollution using current fuels. The change

64 Sea News

to cleaner ship fuels will reduce the ship-related childhood asthma cases by half. Childhood asthma will reduce by 3.6 percent globally.

Additionally, shipping pollution is estimated to contribute to 400,000 premature deaths from lung cancer and cardiovascular disease annually. This is about 7-8 percent of the global health burden caused by air pollution. Reducing ship sulphur emissions cuts these other global health related impacts, too, avoiding about one-third of the annual cardiovascular disease and lung cancer deaths from shipping air pollution.

The study was led by University of Delaware’s James Corbett, and included an international team of researchers from the Finnish Meteorological Institute (FMI), Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) in New York and Energy and Environmental Research Associates.

The decision to shift emphasis to clean and ‘green shipping’ is the need of the hour. The maritime community must come together to understand the hazards of unclean fuel and their disastrous effects on communities and the environment and conscientiously practice clean shipping methods.

ISSUE 1 2018

Who are we?

Exhibitions Conferences, Sales Meetings

Your reliable partner in your team.

Over 30 years of knowledge and experience of your industry, you can trust us with your brand at diďŹ&#x20AC;erent events.

Our three decades of in-depth knowledge and experience developed and honed speciďŹ cally for exhibitions and events worldwide.

Knowledge?

What we do?

We understand the event industry dynamics and the impact it can make on events. Our technical + commercial knowledge unsurpassed.

We help tell and show your story to a greater audience, credibility. Giving you the ability to accelerate your growth and gain the right sales opportunities.

www.ilexhibitions.co.uk +44 (0)20 7689 9009 sales@imageline.co.uk