Economic and Environmental Trade-Offs in Water Transportation

  • Thalis ZisEmail author
  • Panagiotis Angeloudis
  • Michael G. H. Bell
Part of the Greening of Industry Networks Studies book series (GINS, volume 4)


In recent years slow steaming has resurfaced as a fuel saving measure allowing ship owners to significantly cut operational costs. Reduced fuel consumption leads to lower levels of greenhouse gases and pollutant emissions. Port authorities have considered offering incentives to ship operators that significantly reduce sailing speed in the port proximity, as a means to improve local air quality. This chapter conducts a literature review on emissions modelling methodologies for maritime transport and develops a framework that allows the estimation of pollutant emissions under different sailing scenarios. The chapter presents existing regulations and port initiatives that aim to reduce maritime emissions. The merits of localised slow steaming near the calling port for various case studies including different ship size, trip distance, sailing speed and fuel policies in place are examined. An activity based methodology is used to estimate fuel consumption and emissions savings during lower sailing speed operation for machinery on-board. Fuel price and the value of time lost govern the extent to which slow steaming and local speed reductions can be effective. The economic and environmental trade-offs occurring at different sailing speeds are discussed from the perspective of both the ship operator and the port authority considering the implications of regulatory policies such as the expansion of Emission Control Areas (ECA). The chapter concludes with a set of guidelines to port authorities on designing attractive speed reduction programmes, and recommendations to shipping companies on improving fuel efficiency across their schedule when such programmes are available.


Shipping emissions Emission control areas Speed optimization Environmental trade-offs Speed limits 


  1. California Air Resources Board. (2012). Ocean-going vessels—Fuel rule. Accessed July, 2013, from
  2. Cariou, P. (2011). Is slow steaming a sustainable means of reducing CO2 emissions from container shipping? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16, 260–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Corbett, J. J., & Fischbeck, P. S. (2000). Emissions from waterborne commerce vessels in United States continental and inland waterways. Environmental Science and Technology, 34(15), 3254–3260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Corbett, J. J., & Koehler, H. W. (2003). Updated emissions from ocean shipping. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012), 108(D20).Google Scholar
  5. Corbett, J. J., Fischbeck, P. S., & Pandis, S. N. (1999). Global nitrogen and sulfur inventories for oceangoing ships. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012), 104(D3), 3457–3470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Corbett, J. J., Wang, H., & Winebrake, J. J. (2009). The effectiveness and costs of speed reductions on emissions from international shipping. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 14(8), 593–598.Google Scholar
  7. Corbett, J. J., Winebrake, J. J., Green, E. H., Kasibhatla, P., Eyring, V., & Lauer, A. (2007). Mortality from ship emissions: A global assessment. Environmental Science and Technology, 41, 8512–8518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dolphin, M. J. & Melcer, M. (2008). Estimation of ship dry air emissions. Naval Engineers Journal 120(3), 27–36.Google Scholar
  9. Endresen, Ø., Sørgård, E., Behrens, H. L., Brett, P. O., & Isaksen, I. S. (2007). A historical reconstruction of ships' fuel consumption and emissions. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012), 112(D12).Google Scholar
  10. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2000). Analysis of commercial marine vessels emissions and fuel consumption data. Accessed March 2012, from
  11. European Commission. (2005). Directive 2005/33/EC amending Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur content of marine fuels. Accessed May 2013, from
  12. European Commission and ENTEC UK Limited. (2002). Quantification of emissions from ships associated with ship movements between ports in the European Community. European Commission, DG ENV.C1, Rue de la Loi, 200, B-1049: Brussels.Google Scholar
  13. Eyring, V., Köhler, H. W., van Aardenne, J., Lauer, A. (2005). Emissions from international shipping: 1. The last 50 years. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 110(D17).Google Scholar
  14. Flanner, M. G., Zender, C. S., Randerson, J. T., & Rasch, P. J. (2007). Present‐day climate forcing and response from black carbon in snow. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012), 112(D11).Google Scholar
  15. Hvattum, L. M., Norstad, I., Fagerholt, K., & Laporte, G. (2013). Analysis of an exact algorithm for the vessel speed optimization problem. Networks, 62(2), 132–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. International Energy Agency. (2012). Electricity/Heat by Country /Region, OECD Member Countries. Accessed July 2014, from
  17. International Maritime Organization. (1997). Annex VI prevention of air pollution from ships (entered into force 19 May 2005).Google Scholar
  18. International Maritime Organization. (2014). Third IMO GHG Study 2014.Google Scholar
  19. Koffi, B., Szopa, S., Cozic, A., Hauglustaine, D., & Velthoven, P. V. (2010). Present and future impact of aircraft, road traffic and shipping emissions on global tropospheric ozone. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 10(23), 11681–11705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kontovas, C. A., & Psaraftis, H. N. (2009). An online ship emissions calculator as a decision-making aid and policy evaluation tool. In 13th Congress of International Maritime Association of Mediterranean IMAM (pp. 12–15).Google Scholar
  21. Linder, A. J. (2014). Explaining participation in voluntary vessel emission reduction programs at the ports of los angeles and long beach. In Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting (No. 14-1158).Google Scholar
  22. Lloyds Register Engineering Services (1999). ‘Marine exhaust emissions quantification study—mediterranean sea’, Report 99/EE/7044, Lloyds Register Engineering Services, London: UK.Google Scholar
  23. Maloni, M., Paul, J. A., & Gligor, D. M. (2013). Slow steaming impacts on ocean carriers and shippers. Maritime Economics and Logistics, 15, 151–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. MAN Diesel A/S. (2009). Low container ship speed facilitated by versatile ME/ME-C engines. Accessed May 2013, from
  25. Peters, G. P., Marland, G., Hertwich, E. G., Saikku, L., Rautiainen, A., & Kauppi, P. E. (2009). Trade, transport, and sinks extend the carbon dioxide responsibility of countries: An editorial essay. Climatic Change, 97(3–4), 379–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Port of Los Angeles. (2013). Inventory of air emissions—2012. Accessed March 2014, from
  27. Psaraftis, H. N., & Kontovas, C. A. (2010). Balancing the economic and environmental performance of maritime transportation. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 15(8), 458–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Trozzi, C., & Vaccaro, R. (1998). Methodologies for estimating air pollutant emissions from ships. Techne report MEET RF98.Google Scholar
  29. UNCTAD (2013). Review of maritime transport 2013. Accessed November 2014, from
  30. Wang, C., Corbett, J. J., & Firestone, J. (2007). Modeling energy use and emissions from north american shipping: application of the ship traffic, energy, and environment model. Environmental science & technology, 41(9), 3226−3232.Google Scholar
  31. Wang, S., & Meng, Q. (2012). Sailing speed optimization for container ships in a liner shipping network. Transportation Research Part E, 48, 701–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zis, T., North, R. J., Angeloudis, P., Ochieng, W. Y., & Bell, M. G. H. (2014). Evaluation of cold ironing and speed reduction policies to reduce ship emissions near and at ports. Maritime Economics and Logistics, 16(4), 371–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thalis Zis
    • 1
    Email author
  • Panagiotis Angeloudis
    • 1
  • Michael G. H. Bell
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Transport Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringImperial College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, The University of Sydney Business SchoolThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations