Advertisement

ICT for Sustainable Shipping

  • Kay FjørtoftEmail author
  • Svein Peder Berge
Chapter

Abstract

When Titanic hit an iceberg off the coast of Newfoundland in 1912, information about drifting icebergs had not reached the ship officers and navigators, and it took a long time before nearby vessels received a request for assistance. Maxim Gorkiy, which sailed into an ice belt southwest of Svalbard in 1989, experienced a similar lack of information. The hull was damaged, and passengers, crew, and ships were rescued due to extremely good weather conditions and courageous on-scene commanders. For both accidents, had the navigators on board received information in time, they would have been able to choose another and safer route, and the accidents could have been avoided.

From the Titanic days up to now, the ICT maturity has grown rapidly. We are also heading for digital transformation in shipping, that we do not know the consequences of, but we know that shipping sector will be changed, and the ICT will be one of the most important driving factors for sustainability. In parallel with the development, we must ensure that the human interactions will be taken care of. Therefore, the introduction of new technology should include the “human in the loop,” the user aspects, and must have focus on the integration between Man, Technology, and Organization (MTO).

In this chapter we will describe some of the central ICT solutions used for sustainable shipping and the way they are operated and give examples on existing and future trends that influence sustainability where the ICT’s role in the process is elaborated.

Abbreviations

4C

Commitment, competence, continuous learning, collaboration

AI

Artificial intelligence

AIS

Automatic identification systems

AR

Augmented reality

BP

British petroleum

CFD

Computational fluid dynamics

DNC

Digital Nautical Charts

DSC

Digital selective calling

ECDIS

Electronic Chart Display and Information System

ENC

Electronic Navigational Charts

FAL

The convention on facilitation of international maritime traffic

GMDSS

Global Maritime Distress and Safety System

GT

Gross tonnage

IAMS

Integrated alarm and monitoring systems

IAS

Integrated automation system

ICT

Information and communication technologies

IMO

International Maritime Organization

IO

Integrated operations

IOT

Internet of Things

IPL

Integrated planning and logistics

IT

Information technology

ITS

Intelligent transport systems

MIMS

Maritime Information Management System

MSW

Maritime Single Window

MTO

Man, Technology, and Organization

OT

Operational technology

PCS

Port community system

RPM

Revolution per minute

S-AIS

Satellite AIS

SW

Single window

TOS

Terminal Operating System

TSW

Trade Single Window

VR

Virtual reality

VTMIS

Vessel Traffic Management and Information Services

VTS

Vessel traffic services

References

  1. BP. (2009). David Latin, vice president E&P technology, British Petroleum, comments to the Digital Energy Journal, 2009.Google Scholar
  2. DNV. (2017). Consequences for NSA members from CO2 regulations, navigating a low-carbon future. Norwegian Shipowners’ Association, Report No.: 2017-0205, Rev. 0.Google Scholar
  3. EU. (2010). Directive 2010/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on reporting formalities for ships arriving in and/or departing from ports of the Member States and repealing Directive 2002/6/EC Text with EEA relevance.Google Scholar
  4. Fjørtoft, K. E., et al. (2011). Maritime transport single windows: Issues and prospects. International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. September 2011.Google Scholar
  5. Hoffmann and Kumar. (2002). Chapter 3 globalization: The maritime nexus. In C. Grammenos (Ed.), Handbook of maritime economics and business (pp. 35–62). London: Informa, Lloyds List Press.Google Scholar
  6. IDSA. (2018). International Data Space Association. https://www.internationaldataspaces.org/en/.
  7. IEA. (2014). International Energy Agency, and organisation for economic cooperation and development, Energy Statistics of OECD Countries and Energy Balances of OECD Countries online data services, with complete data up to 2013 and supply data up to 2014.Google Scholar
  8. IMO. (1965). Convention on facilitation of international maritime traffic (FAL). http://www.imo.org.
  9. IMO. (1980). International convention for the safety of life at sea (SOLAS), 1974.Google Scholar
  10. IMO. (2009). Second IMO GHG study 2009: Executive summary and final report.Google Scholar
  11. IMO. (2014). Third IMO GHG study 2014: Executive summary and final report.Google Scholar
  12. IMO. (2014b). Strategy for the development and implementation of e-navigation, MSC 85/26/Add.1.Google Scholar
  13. IMO. (2018). Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), 72nd session. http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/IMOMediaAccreditation/Pages/MEPC72.aspx.
  14. Lindstad, H. (2013). Strategies and measures for reducing maritime CO2 emissions, Doctoral thesis PhD. Norwegian University of Science and Technology – Department of Marine Technology. ISBN 978-82-461-4513-6.Google Scholar
  15. Lindstad, H., et al. (2016). Lindstad, Haakon Elizabeth; Eskeland, Gunnar, Environmental regulations in shipping: Policies leaning towards globalization of scrubbers deserve scrutiny. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 47, 67–76 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maritime21. (2016). An integrated maritime strategy for research, development and innovation publication. A maritime strategy report for the Norwegian Ministry of Food and Fisheries, coordinated by the Research Council of Norway.Google Scholar
  17. MARNIS. (2009). Maritime navigation and information services. Sixth framework programme priority [1.6.2], Sustainable Surface Transport, Final Report, Deliverable code: D-MT-15.Google Scholar
  18. NSA. (2018). Norwegian Shipowners’ Association. Report: Think Ocean, Maritime Outlook Report 2018. http://www.rederi.no/.
  19. Ramstad, L. S., et al. (2013). MARINTEK, implementing integrated planning–organizational enablers and capabilities. http://www.iocenter.no/system/files/sites/default/files/IO2/Papers/Final%20IGI%20Chapter%20IPL.pdf.Google Scholar
  20. Rødseth, Ø. J., Kvamstad, B., Tjora, Å., Drezet, F. (2009). Ship-shore communication requirements. Flagship Deliverable D-D1.3, 31st December 2009. EU Project contract number TIP5-CT-2006-031406. http://www.mits-forum.org/communication.html.
  21. Rødseth, Ø. J., et al. (2011). Ornulf Jan RODSETH, Kay Endre Fjørtoft, Maria A. LAMBROU. Web technologies for maritime Single Windows. Proceedings of MTEC2011.Google Scholar
  22. Rodseth, O. J., & Kapidani N. (2017). A taxonomy for Single Window environments in seaports (pp. 26–28). Proc. of the MTEC2017 (2017).Google Scholar
  23. SafeSeaNet. (2009). Directive 2009/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 amending Directive 2002/59/EC establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system.Google Scholar
  24. UN/CEFACT. (2005). The United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business. ISBN 92-1-116924-0. Recommendation and Guidelines on establishing a Single Window, to enhance the efficient exchange of information between trade and government. Recommendation No. 33.Google Scholar
  25. UNCTAD. (2014). United Nations Trade and Development, UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics 2014.
  26. Wimmer, M. A. (2002). Integrated service modeling for online one-stop government. Electronic Markets, 12(3), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SINTEF Ocean ASTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations