Promoting an environmental management system for each port is a necessary condition to seek the implementation of practical measures that contribute to so-called sustainable ports. Public policies focused on this area, involving companies that use private and public port terminals and state-owned companies that manage port operations, is a differential that can positively contribute to the search for sustainability and use of renewable and clean energy in port operations.

Having a port integrated with its surroundings, which knows how to live harmoniously with the city that surrounds it, generating wealth and not denigrating the environment, is a great challenge for humanity.

Some world ports located in Europe and the United States can serve as a reference model for other ports around the world. These ports use renewable energy in their transport, storage and handling operations. They use renewable energies to load and unload ships, minimize or eliminate the use of fossil fuels in their day-to-day operations, and manage the entire chain of entrances and ships at their terminals, as well as other modes integrated to ports.

This study will analyze some of the experiences of international ports in the use of the design of sustainable logistic operations and report on the role of each player in the quest to meet environmental aspects and promote a harmonious environment between ports and their surroundings, contributing to the low emission of gases contributing to the world more logistically sustainable.


Green port Renewable energy Port operations Environmental management system 



Project 2015/00277-8, sponsored by FAPESP, a Foundation for Research Support of the State of São Paulo.


  1. 1.
    Acciaro, M., Ghiara, H., Cusano, M.I.: Energy management in seaports: a new role for port authorities. Energy Policy 71, 4–12 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chiu, R.-H., Lin, L.-H., Ting, S.-C.: Evaluation of green port factors and performance: a fuzzy AHP analysis. Math. Probl. Eng. 2014, 12 p. (2014). Article ID 802976. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davarzani, H., Fahimnia, B., Bell, M., Sarkis, J.: Greening ports and maritime logistics: a review. Transp. Res. Part D 48, 473–487 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Duran, M.P.: Identification and selection of environmental performance indicators (EPIS) for use in the management of European seaports. A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy (MPhil) in Cardiff University, School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, February 2012Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lirn, T.-C., Wu, Y.-C., Chen, Y.J.: Green performance criteria for sustainable ports in Asia. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 43(5/6), 427–451 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Puig, M., Pla, A., Seguí, X., Darbra, R.: Tool for the identification and implementation of Environmental Indicators in Ports. Ocean Coast. Manag. 140, 34–45 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roh, S., Thai, V.V., Wong, Y.D.: Towards sustainable Asean port development: challenges and opportunities for Vietnamese ports. Asian J. Shipp. Logist. 32(2), 107–118 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pavlic, B., Cepak, F., Sucis, B., Peckaj, M., Kandus, B.: Sustainable port infrastructure, practical Implementation of the green port concept. Therm. Sci. 18(3), 935–948 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Peris-Mora, E., Orejas, J.M.D., Subirats, A., Ibánez, S., Alvares, P.: Development of a system of indicators for sustainable port management. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 50, 1649–1660 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Puig, M., Wooldridge, C., Casal, J., Darbra, R.M.: Tool for the identification and assessment of Environmental Aspects in Ports (TEAP). Ocean Coast. Manag. 113, 8–17 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Puig, M., Wooldridge, C., Darbra, R.M.: Identification and selection of Environmental Performance Indicators for sustainable port development. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 81, 124–130 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sciberras, E.A., Zahawi, B., Atkinson, D.J.: Reducing shipboard emissions – assessment of the role of electrical technologies. Transp. Res. Part D 51, 227–239 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Seguí, X., Puig, M., Quintieri, E., Wooldridge, C., Darbra, R.: New environmental performance baseline for inland ports: a benchmark for the European inland port sector. Environ. Sci. Policy 58, 29–40 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yu, H., Ge, Y.-E., Chen, J., Luo, L., Tan, C., Liu, D.: CO2 emission evaluation of yard tractors during loading at container terminals. Transp. Res. Part D 53, 17–36 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tang, J., McNabola, A., Misstear, B., Caulfield, B.: An evaluation of the impact of the Dublin Port Tunnel and HGV management strategy on air pollution emissions. Transp. Res. Part D 52, 1–14 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Walker, T.R.: Green Marine: an environmental program to establish sustainability in marine transportation. Mar. Pollut. Bull 105, 199–207 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yang, Y.-C.: Operating strategies of CO2 reduction for a container terminal based on carbon footprint pespective. J. Clean. Prod. 141, 472–480 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bichou, K., Gray, R.: A critical review of conventional terminology for classifying seaports. Transp. Res. Part A 39, 75–92 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lam, J., Notteboom, T.: The greening of ports: a comparison of port management tools used by leading ports in Asia and Europe. Transp. Rev. 34(2), 169–189 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Maritz, A., Yeh, S.-P.: Innovation and success factors in the construction of green ports. J. Environ. Prot. Ecol. 15(3A), 1255–1263 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Federal University of ABCSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations