Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
As the world turns further away from traditional fossil fuels, the business sector is taking significant steps into the great unknown. The forthcoming regulation change in sulphur levels in 2020 represents one of these challenges. Adaptation in Northern Europe to similar regulations in 2015 was rather mixed among shipping businesses and maritime-based supply chains. As an immediate response, shipping companies either started to use low-sulphur diesel oil or invested in scrubbers. However, as a long-term response, LNG is seen as promising new fuel, and new ships are already in use or being ordered by companies. For supply chains, this change in 2015 meant that traditional routes were reconsidered and so was the extent to which different transportation modes were used in these chains. It seems that road transportation was the winner in unitized transport and on the whole shorter shipping routes have become more favoured.
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:
Anderson, M., Salo, K., & Fridell, E. (2015). Particle—And gaseous emissions from an LNG powered ship. Environmental Science and Technology, 49(20), 12568–12575. CrossRef
Baresic, D., Smith, T., Raucci, C., Rehmatulla, N., Narula, K., & Rojon, I. (2018). LNG as a marine fuel in the EU. Market, bunkering infrastructure investments and risks in the context of GHG reductions. London: UMAS.
Economist. (2018, June 21). A wave of new environmental laws is scaring shipowners. Economist. Available at https://www.economist.com/business/2018/06/23/a-wave-of-new-environmental-laws-is-scaring-shipowners. Retrieved 27 June 2018.
George, L. (2018, April 11). Shipping fuel costs to spike 25 percent in 2020 on sulfuric cap: WoodMac. Reuters, Business News. Available at https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-shipping-fuel-costs/shipping-fuel-costs-to-spike-25-percent-in-2020-on-sulfuric-cap-woodmac-idUKKBN1HI1AT. Retrieved 16 April 2018.
Gilbert, A. Q., & Sovacool, B. K. (2017). US liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports: Boom or bust for the global climate? Energy, 141, 1671–1680. CrossRef
Lindstad, H. E., Rehn, C. F., & Eskeland, G. S. (2017). Sulphur abatement globally in maritime shipping. Transportation Research Part D, 57, 303–313. CrossRef
Notteboom, T. E., Parola, F., Satta, G., & Pallis, A. A. (2017). The relationship between port choice and terminal involvement of alliance members in container shipping. Journal of Transport Geography, 64, 158–173. CrossRef
Olaniyi, E. O. (2017). Towards EU 2020: An outlook of SECA regulations implementation in the BSR. Baltic Journal of European Studies, 7(2), 182–207. CrossRef
Ship & Bunker. (2016, March 9). DFDS: Scrubbers pay off for EVA compliance, but LNG bunkers more efficient solution for newbuilds. Ship & Bunker, EMEA News. Available at https://shipandbunker.com/news/emea/494964-dfds-scrubbers-pay-off-for-eca-compliance-but-lng-bunkers-more-efficient-solution-for-newbuilds. Retrieved 16 April 2018.
Tolli, A., & Laving, J. (2007). Container transport direct call—Logistic solution to container transport via Estonia. Transport, 22(4), 1–6.
- Chapter 8
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta