Gas fuelled growth
Air pollution control projects at ports so far only impact a fraction of the total environmental footprint
Many container ports around the world are using or evaluating the use of alternative power – but James Cannon and Jeffrey Seisler ask if are they are getting to grips with the biggest polluters...
There are numerous initiatives, large and small. For example, the Clean Truck Programs operating at California’s ports has replaced more than 800 heavily polluting old diesel trucks with low-emission vehicles powered by liquefied natural gas (LNG), while other alternate fuels and modified engines are being tested in places like Los Angeles and New York. Rotterdam is beginning to supply much of the port’s power from wind turbines while Shanghai has a grid-powered overhead container movement system. So you’d have to say the market’s responding to the clean up.
But even the most progressive air pollution control projects at ports are only impacting a fraction of the environmental footprint created by international goods movement. The worst polluters are the container ships themselves, which present a much larger problem than all the ground-based port vehicles combined. Today most container ships burn bunkerfuel, one of the dirtiest fuels burned anywhere on the planet. Bunkerfuel contains up to 45,000 parts per million (ppm) of sulphur, a key fuel contaminant and air pollutant. This is thousands of times more polluting than the 15 ppm maximum sulphur diesel allowed in on-road trucks in, for example, the US.
However, bunkerfuel is beginning to be subject to new regulations that could greatly restrict its use and also raise its cost. New International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulations require a 90% reduction in the sulphur cap on marine fuel burned on the open seas to 5,000 ppm (0.5%).
In addition to this, the IMO also has created a program whereby individual coastal regions (including ports’ waters) can be declared Emission Control Areas (ECAs). Shipping fuel presently is at a 1% sulphur limit in these regions and they will be subject to 1,000 ppm sulphur limits (0.1%) from 2015. ECAs already established include the Baltic, the English Channel and the North Sea, with certain waters off North America, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands yet to come.
There is provision in the regulations for ships to use other clean-up procedures, like fitting scrubbers. But, realistically there is no easy or economical way for the shipping industry to comply with the new IMO provisions while using petroleum fuels.
Eliminating bunkerfuel and replacing it with higher grade middle distillate fuels is expensive as these fuels historically have cost between two and three times as much. The distillate fuel market already is the most competitive in the sector, and increased demand from marine purchasers will further strain supplies and likely cause prices to escalate. Alternative fuels and advanced propulsion technologies clearly are needed.
Among the options now competing for a new role in goods movement, liquefied natural gas (LNG) is one of the most attractive. Nearly 400 LNG carriers cruise the oceans and about 20 LNG ferries and patrol vessels operate in the Baltic Sea or along the coast of Norway.
So, where does this leave ports?
Although some of this traffic is obviously outside ports’ jurisdiction, a proportion does fall inside port areas. Further, the port authorities could find that it benefits them to have a long term interest in the integrity of the supply chain.
Part of the answer to this is that ports can encourage use of this fuel by reduced port fees for shipping companies that burn LNG in their ships. Similar ‘creative’ preferential terms could be added to container terminal leases by port authorities, which can affect ship operations while at berth.
Another part is that the ECAs are coming – and the ports themselves may find themselves running to catch up with a shipping industry that needs to “start cooking with gas”.
Images for this article - click to enlarge
Unless otherwise stated, all images copyright © Mercator Media 2012. This does not exclude the owner's assertion of copyright over the material.
