Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An environmental and economic analysis of emission reduction strategies for container ships with emphasis on the improved energy efficiency indexes

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The international maritime organization (IMO) has introduced several legislations to optimize the use of energy generated from machinery onboard ships to reduce the emitted exhaust gas emissions. The aim of the current paper is to study the effect of using emission reduction strategies for container ships with emphasis on the improved Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) from environmental and economic points of view. As a case study, A19 and A7 class container ships are investigated. Three different options are considered including natural gas, treatment equipment, and ship speed reduction. The lowest annual emission rates per transported cargo are achieved by A19. These rates are 18.9, 0.93, and 1.8 kg/TEU for NOx, SOx, and CO2 emissions, respectively. In order to improve the EEDI value for the A7, the ship speed should be reduced by 22.5%. This will comply with the three phases of IMO requirements by reducing CO2 emissions with cost-effectiveness of 52.54 $/ton CO2. On the other hand, using the installed dual-fuel engine infrastructure onboard A19 container ship will improve the energy efficiency by 10.13% with annual fuel saving of 23.73 million dollars.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CO2 :

Carbon dioxide emissions

DFE:

Dual-fuel engine

DO:

Diesel oil

EEDI:

Energy Efficiency Design Index

EEOI:

Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator

HC:

Hydrocarbon emissions

HFO:

Heavy fuel oil

IMO:

International Maritime Organization

MCR:

Maximum continuous rating of the engine

NG:

Natural gas

NOx :

Nitrogen oxide emissions

PM:

Particulate matter

S:

Sulfur

SCR:

Selective catalytic reduction

SOx :

Sulfur oxide emissions

SWS:

Seawater scrubber

TEU:

Twenty-foot equivalent unit

ULSFO:

Ultra-low sulfur fuel oil

References

  • ABS (2013) Ship energy efficiency measures: status and guidance. American Bureau of Shipping, Houston, pp 20–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Alisafaki AG, Papanikolaou AD (2015) On the Energy Efficiency Design Index of Ro-Ro passenger and RO-RO cargo ships. Proc Insti Mech Eng Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment 231(1):19–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Ammar NR (2018) Energy- and cost-efficiency analysis of greenhouse gas emission reduction using slow steaming of ships: case study RO-RO cargo vessel. Ships Offshore Struct 13(8):868–876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ammar NR (2019a) Environmental and cost-effectiveness comparison of dual fuel propulsion options for emissions reduction onboard LNG carriers. Brodogradnja 70:61–77

  • Ammar NR (2019b) An environmental and economic analysis of methanol fuel for a cellular container ship. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 69:66–76

  • Ammar NR, Seddiek IS (2017) Eco-environmental analysis of ship emission control methods: case study RO-RO cargo vessel. Ocean Eng 137:166–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ammar NR, Seddiek IS (2018) Thermodynamic, environmental and economic analysis of absorption air conditioning unit for emissions reduction onboard passenger ships. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 62:726–738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ančić I, Šestan A (2015) Influence of the required EEDI reduction factor on the CO2 emission from bulk carriers. Energy Policy 84(Supplement C):107–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banawan AA, El Gohary MM, Sadek IS (2010) Environmental and economical benefits of changing from marine diesel oil to natural-gas fuel for short-voyage high-power passenger ships. Proc Instit Mech Eng Part M-J Eng Marit Environ 224(M2):103–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Banawan AA, Mosleh M, Seddiek IS (2013) Prediction of the fuel saving and emissions reduction by decreasing speed of a catamaran. J Marine Eng Technol 12(3):40–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Benvenuto G, Trucco A, Campora U (2014) Optimization of waste heat recovery from the exhaust gas of marine diesel engines. Proc Instit Mech Eng Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment 230(1):83–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop JDK, Martin NPD, Boies AM (2014) Cost-effectiveness of alternative powertrains for reduced energy use and CO2 emissions in passenger vehicles. Appl Energy 124(Supplement C):44–61

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bøckmann E, Steen S (2016) Calculation of EEDIweather for a general cargo vessel. Ocean Eng 122(Supplement C):68–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brent-Petersen, H., Rex, C. 2018. Shipping market review 2018. DANISH SHIP FINANCE technical report. Available: https://www.shipfinance.dk/media/1817/shipping-market-review-may-2018.pdf (Accessed 9 May 2019)

  • Bunkerworld. 2019. Bunkerworld. Fuel prices. Available: http://www.bunkerworld.com/prices/ (Accessed 15 April 2019)

  • Chang C-C, Wang C-M (2014) Evaluating the effects of speed reduce for shipping costs and CO2 emission. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 31(Supplement C):110–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Contini D, Gambaro A, Donateo A, Cescon P, Cesari D, Merico E, Belosi F, Citron M (2015) Inter-annual trend of the primary contribution of ship emissions to PM2.5 concentrations in Venice (Italy): efficiency of emissions mitigation strategies. Atmos Environ 102:183–190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett JJ, Wang H, Winebrake JJ (2009) The effectiveness and costs of speed reductions on emissions from international shipping. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 14(8):593–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte. 2019. New Zealand ports and freight year book. Technical report. Available: https://www2.deloitte.com/nz/en/pages/finance/articles/new-zealand-ports-and-freight-yearbook.html (Accessed 20 April 2019)

  • Diab F, Lan H, Ali S (2016) Novel comparison study between the hybrid renewable energy systems on land and on ship. Renew Sust Energ Rev 63:452–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doudnikoff M, Gouvernal E, Lacoste R (2014) The reduction of ship-based emissions: aggregated impact on costs and emissions for North Europe-East Asia liner services. Int J Shipp Transp Logist 6(2):213–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dragan, D., Kramberger, T., Intihar, M., 2014. A comparison of methods for forecasting the container throughput in north Adriatic ports

  • EEA, 2000. Analysis of commercial marine vessels e and fuel consumption data. Office of transportation and air quality, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

  • EIA. 2019. Short-term energy outlook, U.S. Energy Information Administration. Available: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34492 (Accessed 15 April 2019)

  • Eide MS, Endresen Ø, Skjong R, Longva T, Alvik S (2009) Cost-effectiveness assessment of CO2 reducing measures in shipping. Marit Policy Manag 36(4):367–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Gohary MM, Seddiek IS, Salem AM (2015) Overview of alternative fuels with emphasis on the potential of liquefied natural gas as future marine fuel. Proc Instit Mech Eng Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment 229(4):365–375

    Google Scholar 

  • Faber, J., Huigen, T., Nelissen, D. 2017. Regulating speed: a short-term measure to reduce maritime GHG emissions. Available: http://www.cleanshipping.org/download/Slow-steaming-CE-Delft-final.pdf (Accessed 28 November 2017)

  • FleetMon. 2019. Al Dahna container ship. Available: https://www.fleetmon.com/vessels/al-hilal_9349552_57576/?language=en ()

  • GL. 2013. Guidelines for determination of the Energy Efficiency Design Index. Available: http://rules.dnvgl.com/docs/pdf/gl/maritimerules2016July/gl_vi-13-1_e.pdf (Accessed 3 December 2017)

  • Guangrong, Z., Kinnunen, A., Tervo, K., Elg, M., Tammi, K., Kovanen, P., 2013. Modeling ship energy flow with multi-domain simulation, 27th CIMAC World Congress on Combustion Engines. International Council on Combustion Engines, Paper NO.: 279, Shanghai, China

  • Hapag L. 2019a. Products, Al Dahna and Al Hilal container ships Available: https://www.hapag-lloyd.com/en/products.html (Accessed 15 June 2019)

  • Hapag L. 2019b. Services and trades. Hapag-Lloyd. Available: https://www.hapag-lloyd.com/en/service-finder/bydeparture.html (Accessed 20 July 2019)

  • Hunt E, Butman B (1995) Marine engineering economics and cost analysis. Cornell Maritime Press, Centreville (accessed)

    Google Scholar 

  • ICF, (2009a). Current methodologies in preparing mobile source port-related emission inventories. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, pp. 50–60

  • ICF, 2009b. Towboat emission reduction feasibility study, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

  • IMO, (2009). Guidelines for voluntary use of the ship energy efficiency operational indicator (EEOI). MEPC.1/Circ.684, London

  • IMO (2014a) Third IMO GHG study 2014. Executive summary and final report, MEPC 67/6/INF.3. International Maritime Organization, London.

  • IMO (2014b) Resolution MEPC 245(66): 2014 guidelines on the method of calculation of the attained Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new ships. MEPC 66/21/Add.1, Annex 5, 4 April 2014. International Maritime Organization, London.

  • INTERTANKO. 2007. Use of MDO by ships part of holistic approach. Bunker summit, Greece. Available: https://www.intertanko.com/ (Accessed 22 December 2018)

  • IRCLASS. (2013). Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP), guidance notes for ship owners and ship operators. Indian register of shipping. Available: http://www.irclass.org/media/1397/ship-energy-efficiency-management-plan.pdf (Accessed 6 November 2019)

  • Jakub K, Damian S, Krystyna P (2016) The impact of particulate matter (PM) and nitric oxides (NOx) on human health and an analysis of selected sources accounting for their emission in Poland. Medycyna Rodowiskowa 19(3):7–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansson L, Jalkanen J-P, Kukkonen J (2017) Global assessment of shipping emissions in 2015 on a high spatial and temporal resolution. Atmos Environ 167:403–415

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kim K-H, Kabir E, Kabir S (2015) A review on the human health impact of airborne particulate matter. Environ Int 74:136–143

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Knowler, G. 2019. Global container growth forecast to rebound. Available: https://www.joc.com/maritime-news/global-container-growth-forecast-rebound_20190425.html (Accessed 28 December 2019)

  • Marine Traffic. 2019. Al Hilal container ship. Available: https://www.fleetmon.com/vessels/al-hilal_9349552_57576/?language=en (Accessed 16 June 2019)

  • Martin S, Martin J, Pettit S (2015) Container ship size and the implications on port call workload. Int J Shipp Transp Logist 7(5):553–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MEPC (2016) Air pollution and energy efficiency : supplementary information on the draft revised guidelines for determining minimum propulsion power to maintain the manoeuvrability of ships in adverse conditions (MEPC 70/INF.30). Marine Environment Protection Committee, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mikelis NE (2008) A statistical overview of ship recycling. J Marit Affairs 7(1):227–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikopoulou Z, 2008. Reduction of NOx and SOx in an emission market -a snapshot of prospects and benefits for ships in the northern European SECA area, Department of shipping and marine technology ,Division of propulsion and maritime environment, Chalmbers University of technology, ISSN 1652–9189, Report No. 08:107, Göteborg, Sweden

  • Pani C, Vanelslander T, Fancello G, Cannas M (2015) Prediction of late/early arrivals in container terminals - a qualitative approach. Eur J Transp Infrastruct Res 15:536–550

    Google Scholar 

  • Papanikolaou A, Zaraphonitis G, Bitner-Gregersen E, Shigunov V, Moctar OE, Soares CG, Reddy DN, Sprenger F (2016) Energy efficient safe ship operation (SHOPERA). Transp Res Proc 14:820–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perera LP, Mo B (2016) Emission control based energy efficiency measures in ship operations. Appl Ocean Res 60(Supplement C):29–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rehmatulla N, Calleya J, Smith T (2017) The implementation of technical energy efficiency and CO2 emission reduction measures in shipping. Ocean Eng 139:184–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarasquete, A., Juandó, A., Caldas, A., Zapata, F., 2011. Energy efficiency audits on ships: hydrodynamic aspects for energy efficiency improvements, International Congress of Design and Naval Engineering Cartagena de Indias, Colombia

  • Seddiek IS (2016) Two-step strategies towards fuel saving and emissions reduction onboard ships. Ships Offshore Struct 11(8):791–801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seddiek IS, Elgohary MM (2014) Eco-friendly selection of ship emissions reduction strategies with emphasis on SOx and NOx emissions. Int J Naval Archit Ocean Eng 6(3):737–748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stopford M (2009) Maritime economics, 3rd edn. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Tezdogan T, Incecik A, Turan O (2014) Operability assessment of high speed passenger ships based on human comfort criteria. Ocean Eng 89:32–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tezdogan T, Incecik A, Turan O, Kellett P (2016) Assessing the impact of a slow steaming approach on reducing the fuel consumption of a containership advancing in head seas. Transp Res Proc 14:1659–1668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tran TA (2017) A research on the energy efficiency operational indicator EEOI calculation tool on M/V NSU JUSTICE of VINIC transportation company, Vietnam. J Ocean Eng Sci 2(1):55–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD. 2011. Review of maritime transport. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Available: https://unctad.org/SearchCenter/Pages/Results.aspx?k=Review%20of%20Maritime%20Transport (Accessed 9 May 2019)

  • UNCTAD. 2019. Review of maritime transport 2019. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Available: https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/rmt2019_en.pdf (Accessed 28 December 2019)

  • Wang C, Corbett JJ (2007) The cost and benefits of reducing SO2 emissions from ships in the US west coastal waters. Transp Res D 12:577–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wartsila. 2008. WÄRTSILÄ RT-flex96C AND WÄRTSILÄ RTA96C technology review. WÄRTSILÄ. Available: http://www.test.swiss-ships.ch/berichte/berichte/waertsilae/Wartsila-RTA96C-engine-technology-review.pdf (Accessed 16 June 2019)

  • Wärtsilä. 2016. Scrubber system designs. Available: http://www.wartsila.com/products/marine-oil-gas/exhaust-gas-cleaning/sox-abatement/scrubber-system-designs (Accessed 2 October 2019)

  • Yang ZL, Zhang D, Caglayan O, Jenkinson ID, Bonsall S, Wang J, Huang M, Yan XP (2012) Selection of techniques for reducing shipping NOx and SOx emissions. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 17(6):478–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Y, Zhou S, Feng Y, Hu Z, Yuan L (2017) Influences of solar energy on the energy efficiency design index for new building ships. Int J Hydrog Energy 42(30):19389–19394

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the DSR for technical and financial support.

Funding

This work was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR), King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, under grant no. D-094-980-1440.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marine Engineering, Faculty of Maritime Studies, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, 21589, Saudi Arabia

    Nader R. Ammar

  2. Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Alexandria, 21544, Egypt

    Nader R. Ammar

  3. Department of Marine Engineering Technology, College of Maritime Transport & Technology, Arab Academy for Science, Technology & Maritime Transport, Alexandria, 1029, Egypt

    Ibrahim S. Seddiek

Authors
  1. Nader R. Ammar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ibrahim S. Seddiek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nader R. Ammar.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ammar, N.R., Seddiek, I.S. An environmental and economic analysis of emission reduction strategies for container ships with emphasis on the improved energy efficiency indexes. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27, 23342–23355 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08861-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08861-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation