Advertisement

Developing and Applying a Ship Operation Energy Efficiency Evaluation Index Using SEEMP: a Case Study of South Korea

  • Nam-kyun IM
  • Bora ChoeEmail author
  • Chung-Hwan Park
Research Article
  • 20 Downloads

Abstract

The CO2 emission reduction policy of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) recommends that the operation of ships, managed by maritime transport companies, should be energy-efficient. An evaluation method that can determine how successfully a ship implements the energy efficiency plan is proposed in this study. To develop this method, the measures required for energy-efficient ship operations according to the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) operational guidelines were selected. The weights of the selected measures, which indicate how they contribute to the energy-efficient operation of a ship, were derived using a survey based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. Consequently, using these measures and their weights, a new evaluation method was proposed. This evaluation method was applied to shipping companies in South Korea, and their ship operation energy efficiency indices were derived and compared. This evaluation method will be useful to the government and shipping companies in assessing the energy efficiency of ship operations.

Keywords

Ship Greenhouse gas Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator Energy Efficiency Design Index 

Notes

Funding

The authors would like to acknowledge the support from the project titled “Development of Ship-handling and Passenger Evacuation Support System” funded by the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (South Korea-MOF).

References

  1. Adland R, Cariou P, Jia H, Wolff F-C (2018) The energy efficiency effects of periodic ship hull cleaning. J Clean Prod 178:1–13Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong VN, Banks C (2015) Integrated approach to vessel energy efficiency. Ocean Engineering 110:39–48Google Scholar
  3. Baldauf M, Baumler R, Olcer A, Nakaxawa (2013) Energy-efficient ship operation - training requirements and challenges. The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation 7(2):283–290 Google Scholar
  4. Barro RDC, Kim J-S, Lee D-C (2011) Real time monitoring of energy efficiency operation indicator on merchant ships. Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Engineering 35(3):301–308Google Scholar
  5. Bhushan N, Rai K (2004) Strategic decision making applying the analytic hierarchy process. Springer, London, pp 11–24Google Scholar
  6. Buhaug O, Corbett JJ, Endreson O, Eyring V, Faber J, Hanayama S, Lee DS, Lee D, Lindstad H, Mjelde A (2009) Second IMO Greenhouse Gas Study. International Maritime Organization, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Choi JS, Rho BS (2011) Study on the energy efficiency operational Indicator for CO2 reduction from ships. J Korean Soc Mar Eng 35(8):1035–1040. (in Korean.  https://doi.org/10.5916/jkosme.2011.35.8.1035
  8. Choi BR, Park CH, Im NK (2015) A study on the improvements of SEEMP of marine transport companies. J Korean Soc Mar Environ Saf 21(2):147–153 (in Korean).  https://doi.org/10.7837/kosmes.2015.21.2.147
  9. Devanney J (2010) Detailed studies of the impact of EEDI on VLCC design and CO2 emissions. Center for Tankship Excellence. Available from http://www.c4tx.org/ctx/pub/eedi_vlcc.pdf [Accessed on Jan. 18, 2015]
  10. Harilaos NP (2012) Market-based measures for greenhouse gas emissions from ships: a review. WMU J Marit Aff 11:211–232.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-012-00.0-5
  11. IMO (2009a) Guidance for the development of a ship energy efficiency management plan (SEEMP). MEPC.1/Circ.683. International Maritime Organization, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. IMO (2009b) Guidelines for voluntary use of the ship energy efficiency operational indicator (EEOI). MEPC.1/Circ.684. International Maritime Organization, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. IMO (2011) Amendment to the annex of the protocol of 1990 to amend the international convention for the prevention of pollution from ships 1973, as modified by the protocol of 1978 relating thereto. Resolution MEPC.203(62). International Maritime Organization, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. IMO (2014) Energy efficient operation of ships, 2014 Edition. International Maritime Organization, London, pp 189–2014Google Scholar
  15. IMO (2016) 2016 Guidelines for the development of a ship energy efficiency management plan (SEEMP). Resolution MEPC.282(70), International Maritime Organization, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. INDC (2014) Submission by the Republic of Korea: intended nationally determined contribution. Available from https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/submissions/INDC/Published%20Documents/Republic%20of%20Korea/1/INDC%20Submission%20by%20the%20Republic%20of%20Korea%20on%20June%2030.pdf [Accessed on Jun. 13, 2015]
  17. INDC (2015b) Switzerland’s intended nationally determined contribution (INDC) and clarifying information. Available from https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/submissions/INDC/Published%20Documents/Switzerland/1/15%2002%2027_INDC%20Contribution%20of%20Switzerland.pdf [Accessed on Apr. 10, 2015]
  18. Jovanović B, Filipović J, Bakić V (2015) Prioritization of manufacturing sectors in Serbia for energy management improvement-AHP method. Energy Convers Manag 98:225–235.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.03.107
  19. Jung RT (2011) Recent international development on the technical and international measures of IMO’s CO2 emission control from ships. J Korean Soc Mar Eng 14(1):65–713 (in Korean)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim Y (2010) Trends of IMO regulation on greenhouse gas emission. Ocean Policy Research of Korea Maritime Institute 6:105–120 (In Korean)Google Scholar
  21. Lee SD (2014) A study on the proposal of the modified EEOI formula and the reduction in CO2 emission from ships. PhD thesis, Pukyong National University, Busan (in Korean)Google Scholar
  22. Lee DC, Millar MM, Nam JG (2011) Recent international development on the technical and international measures of IMO’s CO2 emission control from ships. J Korean Soc Mar Eng 14(1):65–713 (in Korean)Google Scholar
  23. Lokukaluge PP, Brage M, Leifur A (2015) Identification optimal trim configuration to improve energy efficiency in ships. Int Fed Autom Control 48:267–672.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.10.291 Google Scholar
  24. Lokukaluge P, Perera C, Guedes S (2017) Weather routing and safe ship handling in the future of shipping. Ocean Engineering 130:684–695.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.09.007
  25. Saaty TL, Wind Y (1980) Marketing application of the analytic hierarcy process. Manag Sci 26(7):641–658.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.247 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tran TA (2017) A research on the energy efficiency operational indicator EEOI calculation tool on M/V NSU JUSTICE of VINIC transportation company, Vietnam. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science 2(1):55–60Google Scholar
  27. UNFCCC (2012) CMP8: Framework Convention on Climate Change, report of the conference of the parties serving as the meeting of the parties to the Kyoto protocol on its eighth session. Doha, OatarGoogle Scholar
  28. UNFCCC Process and Meeting (2014) Conference of the Parities (COP) Decision 1/CP.20: Lima Call for Climate. Available from https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/cop20/eng/10a01.pdf#page=2%22 [Accessed on Apr. 23, 2015]
  29. Yoo YJ, Choi HR, Lee JY (2015) Comparative results of weather routing simulation. J Soc Naval Architects of Korea 52(2):110–118. (in Korean).  https://doi.org/10.3744/snak.2015.52.2.110

Copyright information

© Harbin Engineering University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Navigation ScienceMokpo National Maritime UniversityMokpoSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Maritime EngineeringKyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan
  3. 3.Research Institute of Medium and Small ShipbuildingBusanSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations