Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
Green House Gas (GHG) emissions are not the only emissions of concern to the international transport community. SOx emissions are non-GHG emissions that are caused by the presence of sulphur in the fuel. As the maximum percentage of sulphur in automotive and aviation fuels is strictly regulated in most countries around the world, much of the attention in recent years has focused on maritime transport. The attention mainly stems from the fact that in marine fuels the percentage of sulphur can be very high: it can be as high as 4.5 % in Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO), which is the fuel typically used in all deep-sea trades. Even though the amounts of SOx produced by ships are substantially lower than CO2, SOx emissions are highly undesirable as they cause acid rain and undesirable health effects in humans and animals. To mitigate these adverse environmental effects, the international shipping community has taken substantial policy measures. With the introduction of new limits for the content of sulphur in marine fuels in Northern European and North American sea areas, short-sea companies operating in these areas will face substantial additional cost. As of 1/1/2015, international regulations stipulate, among other things, a 0.1 % limit in the sulphur content of marine fuels, or equivalent measures limiting the percent of SOx emissions to the same amount. As low-sulphur fuel is substantially more expensive than HFO, there is little or no room within these companies current margins to absorb such additional cost, and thus significant price increases must be expected. Unlike its deep-sea counterpart, in short-sea shipping such a freight rate increase may induce shippers to use land-based alternatives (mainly road). A reverse shift of cargo would go against the EU policy to shift traffic from land to sea to reduce congestion, and might ultimately (under certain circumstances) increase the overall level of CO2 emissions along the entire supply chain. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the potential effect of sulphur regulations on the share of cargo transported by the waterborne mode vis-à-vis land-based alternatives.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Algaba, O. B. (2014). Impact study of the new sulphur regulations on a North Sea short-sea route (Master’s thesis). DTU, Department of Transport, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.
Bank of Greece. (2012, November–December). Bulletin of the Conjunctural Indicators. Number 147.
Bosch, P., Coenen, P., Fridell, E., Åström, S., Palmer, T., & Holland, M. (2009). Cost benefit analysis to support the impact assessment accompanying the revision of directive 1999/32/EC on the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels. Didcot, England: AEA report to European Commission.
Cullinane, K., & Bergqvist, R. (2014). Emission control areas and their impact on maritime transport. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 28, 1–5. CrossRef
Delhaye, E., Breemersch, T., Vanherle, K., Kehoe, J., Liddane, M., & Riordan, K. (2010). The competitiveness of European short-sea freight shipping compared with road and rail transport. COMPASS final report.
EMSA. (2010). The 0.1% sulphur in fuel requirement as from 1 January 2015 in ECAs—An assessment of available impact studies and alternative means of compliance. Technical report of the European Maritime Safety Agency.
Face 3ts. (2008). Environmental performance of the Greece-Italy ferry lines in relation to climate change and air pollution (in Greek). A Face 3ts (Further action on climate, environment, energy, economy, technology and sustainability) project report.
Fagerholt, K., Gausel, N., Rakke, J., & Psaraftis, H. N. (2015). Maritime routing and speed optimization with emission control areas. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 52, 57–73. CrossRef
Grebot, B., Scarbrough, T., Ritchie, A., Mahoney, C., Noden, R., Sobey, M., et al. (2010). Study to review assessments undertaken of the revised MARPOL Annex VI regulations. London, England: Entec UK Limited.
Hader, A., Hübscher, A., Maatsch, S., & Tasto, M. (2010). Reducing the sulphur content of shipping fuels further to 0.1 % in the North Sea and Baltic Sea in 2015: Consequences for shipping in this shipping area. Bremen, Germany: Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics.
Jiang, L., Kronbak, J., & Christensen, L. P. (2014). The costs and benefits of sulphur reduction measures: Sulphur scrubbers versus marine gas oil. Transportation Research Part D, 28, 19–27. CrossRef
Kalli, J., Karvonen, T., & Makkonen, T. (2009). Sulphur content in ships bunker fuel in 2015—A study on the impacts of the new IMO regulations on transportation costs. Prepared by the Centre for Maritime Studies, University of Turku, for the Ministry of Transport and Communications of Finland, Helsinki, Finland.
Kehoe, J., Nikopoulou, Z., Liddane, M., Ramstedt, L., & Koliousis, I. (2010). Impact study of the future requirements of annex VI of the MARPOL convention on short sea shipping. SKEMA study prepared for directorate-general for energy and transport. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.
Kehoe, J., & Woxenius, J. (2010). Assessment of the impact of the application of new sulphur limits to the Mediterranean and the Atlantic European seas. SKEMA study prepared for directorate-general for mobility and transport. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.
Kronbak, J. (2006). The use if GIS for modelling and visualization of cost-competition between land and sea transport. Presented at the IAME 2006 conference, Melbourne, Australia.
Ljungström, T., Leyendecker, J., & Lemieszewski, S. (2009). Consequences of the IMO’s new marine fuel sulphur regulations. Norrköping, Sweden: Swedish Maritime Administration.
Malmqvist, G., & Aldén, B. (2013). Sulfur regulation in the Baltic Sea: Scenarios for the mid Nordic region—threats and opportunities. A North East Cargo Link II report. Sundsvall, Sweden: Midnordic Green Transport Corridor.
Nordås, H. K., Pinali, E., & Geloso Grosso, M. (2006). Logistics and time as a trade barrier (OECD Trade Policy Working Paper No. 35). Paris, France: OECD.
Notteboom, T., Delhaye, E., & Vanherle, K. (2010). Analysis of the consequences of low sulphur fuel requirements. Study commissioned by the European Community Shipowners’ Associations (ECSA). Antwerp, Belgium: University of Antwerp.
Panagakos, G., Stamatopoulou, I. V., & Psaraftis, H. N. (2014). The possible designation of the Mediterranean as a SECA: A case study. Transportation Research Part D, 28, 74–90. CrossRef
Psaraftis, H. N., & Kontovas, C. A. (2009, May 26–29). Ship emissions: Logistics and other tradeoffs. In 10th International Marine Design Conference (IMDC), Trondheim, Norway.
Psaraftis, H., & Kontovas, C. (2010). Balancing the economic and environmental performance of maritime transportation. Transportation Research Part D, 15(2010), 458–462. CrossRef
Schinas, O., & Bani, J. (2012). The impact of a possible extension at EU level of ECAs to the entire European Coastline. Note to the Committee on Transport and Tourism, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium.
Stavrakaki, A., Ritchie, A., Pueyo, A., Lavric, L., Green, C., Scarbrough, T., et al. (2009). Impact assessment for the revised Annex VI of MARPOL. London, England: Entec UK Limited.
Sull, D., & Turconi, S. (2008). Fast fashion lessons. Business Strategy Review, Summer, 5–11.
- Being Green on Sulphur: Targets, Measures and Side-Effects
Christos A. Kontovas
Harilaos N. Psaraftis
- Chapter 10
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© BBL, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, Neuer Inhalt/© hww, So bewältigen Sie Stress im Fernstudium/© granata68 | stock.adobe.com | AdobeStock