Transcript A Shipowner Point of View - North American Marine Environment

Mitigating Air Emissions –
A Shipowner Point of View
Kevin Krick
APL Head of Security and Environment, Americas
NAMEPA
18 FEB 2015
Shipping & Emissions
More than 90% of the total global transportation is
accomplished by the shipping industry
1
Container Shipping & Emissions
•Shipping is the most environmental friendly and energy efficient form of transportation
2
Second IMO GHG Study 2009
CO2 emissions from shipping vs Global CO2 emissions
3
One challenge we all need to overcome…
4
APL’s Environmental Policy
5
A Shipowner Point of View
 What drives our environmental efforts?
– “…committed to sound environmental stewardship…” - APL
 Air Emission Challenges:
– Reducing Carbon
– Addressing Criteria Pollutants




SOx
NOx
PM
VOCs
– Mandates for specific fuels (low sulfur) or technologies (cold
ironing)
– Strategies:
 Improving Operations
 New Technologies & Designs
6
Differentiating Air Emissions
 Carbon Reductions
– Voluntary with some regulatory schemes (e.g. California’s
AB32, EU targets & trading)
– Shipping regulations remain to be developed; commercial
reasons continue to drive reductions
 Criteria Pollutants
– Regulations in place & continue to evolve
 Low Sulfur Fuels:
– SOx, PM
 Emission Control Areas:
– SOx, NOx, PM
 Cold Ironing:
– SOx, NOx, PM, VOCs
7
Shipowner Carbon Reductions
 Operational Improvements
–
–
–
–
–
Less Fuel Consumed = Less Carbon Produced
Slow Steaming
Managing Trim
Weather Routing
Hull Maintenance
 Design Improvements
– New Builds - Comparing my 1972 Chevelle (6 MPG) with
my 2012 MINI (39 MPG)
– Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI)
– Electronic Engine Controls
– Innovative Rudder and Propeller Designs
– Hull Coatings
8
Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI)
New builds must be as efficient as the average efficiency of vessels
over the IMO baseline 10 year period (1999 – 2009)
Ship Type
Size
Phase 0 2013-2014
(percent
reduction)
Phase 1 20152019 (percent
reduction)
Phase 2 20202025 (percent
reduction)
Phase 3 2025 &
beyond (percent
reduction)
Container
Ship
15,000 DWT &
above
0
10
20
30
10,000 to
15,000 DWT*
N/A
0-10
0-20
0-30
* For smaller vessels (10,000 to 15,000 dwt) the percent reduction is dependent upon their size within the range specified.
EEDI
=
CO2 emission
transport work
=
ΣP x CF x SFC
capacity x speed
EEDI
10%
Unit: gram CO2 / (ton* nautical mile)
20%
30%
DWT
9
APL and EEDI
• 34 New Builds between 2011 and 2014
• APL Temasek is 33.4% more efficient than IMO’s required EEDI
• 14,000 TEU vessel - Length: 369m, Breadth: 51m, Draft: 13m
10
APL’s New Builds – Environmental Excellence
11
APL’s Carbon Reduction Strategy
 In 2010, APL announced a carbon goal of:
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated
with cargo transportation and handling to 30%
below 2009 emission levels.
 In doing so, APL became the first carrier to:
– Have its carbon data independently and annually
verified by a third-party class society verifier as part
of the process, and
– Include all Scope 1 emissions beyond just those
produced by vessels.
12
APL’s Carbon Reduction Strategy Result
By 2013, APL’s aggressive, across the board
investment in efficiency coupled with operational
improvements to reduce fuel consumption resulted in:
APL successfully reducing emissions by 33.4%
thereby achieving our carbon emission reduction
goal two years early.
13
Criteria Pollutant Reductions
 Twin Approaches:
– Setting Emissions Standards for the Industry
– Mandating Technology or Materials
 Setting Standards
– Need to be realistic
– Encourage investment in technology & approaches to
address the reductions
– From a Shipowner Point of View: Optimal
 Mandates
– Lock shipowners into one means of emission reductions
– While this approach may achieve the desired result, it does
so at a higher economic cost with fewer benefits
14
North American ECA – 01 AUG 12 & 01 JAN 15
200 nautical miles off coastlines
- 1.0% S in fuel initially
- 0.1% S in fuel in January 2015
- Tier III engines in 2016
15
Air Emissions – LSF & SOx Timeline
Fuel Sulphur Content
(Equivalent) [%]
4.5
4
General
3.5
All vessels (old and new)
3
2.5
2
1.5
in ECAs
1
0.5
0
2008
2010
2012
California Clean Fuel Regulations – 24nm
16
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
Air Emissions – NOx Timeline
The NOx control requirements of Annex VI
NOx [g/kWh]
Tier I
Tier II
Tier III
2008
in ECAs
Only New Buildings
2010
2012
Tier
2014
II
III*
* Proposal to delay
17
2018
2020
2022
NOx Emission Limit
(gms/KWHr)
(n<130)
The NOx control requirements
of Annex VI
Ship Construction
NOx Emission Limit (gms/KWHr)
on or after
n<130
n = 130-1999
n ≥ 2000
Ship Construction, on or after
Tier
I
2016
January 1, 2000
I
January 1, 2000
2011 1, 2011
IIJanuary 1,January
17
14.4
17
45x(n-0.2)
9.8
14.444x(n-0.23)
7.7
9x(n-0.2)
III*
3.4
2
January 1,January
2016 1, 2016
3.4
* subject to a technical review to be concluded 2013 this date could be delayed
California Cold Ironing
Connecting the ship to shore side grid-based electrical power
and shutting down the auxiliary diesel generators at berth.
Effective January 1, 2014
 2014-2016 - 50% of vessels / 50% emissions reduction.
 2017-2019 - 70% of vessels / 70% emissions reduction.
 2020-beyond - 80% of vessels / 80% emissions reduction.
 No annual averaging, compliance by quarter.
 Non-compliance fines can be up to USD $100K per hour.
18
Cold Ironing – Schematic
19
Innovative Technologies – One Example
 Krystallon Seawater Scrubber
• Installed aboard the APL England.
• The scrubber features an advanced emission control
technology in which seawater is used to scrub, or filter
contaminants from a ship’s auxiliary engines and
boiler before exiting the exhaust stack of a ship.
• Wash water discharged from the treatment system
complies with MARPOL IV and the NPDES General
permit issued for Exhaust Gas Cleaning Devices by
EPA.
• All recovered solids are disposed ashore as
hazardous waste.
• Emission Reductions: 99% SOx & 70% PM.
20
Seawater Scrubber Viewed From Stern
21
Looming Challenges for Criteria Pollutants
 2020 Worldwide Sulfur Cap of 0.5%:
– Industry leaders: Will result in carriers incurring tens of billions of
dollars annually in higher fuel costs, with no clear mechanism for
recovering those costs from customers.
 “When you go from burning bunker to burning a distillate fuel
everywhere, you’re talking about the better part of $100 billion,
annually, for the container industry alone.” - Ron Widdows,
World Shipping Council chairman
 As per the International Chamber of Shipping, “for better or
worse, the global cap is very likely to be implemented in 2020,
almost regardless of the effect that any lack of availability of
compliant fuel may have on the cost of moving world trade by
sea.”
 Question of Health Benefits…worth the cost?
22
Customers Focus on the Environment
 Want to improve their
environmental
performance throughout
their supply chain.
 Want to be associated with
a company that has
environmental
stewardship.
23
Partnerships Make the Difference
Regulators &
Environmental Agencies
Understand perspectives, provide information
and work towards attainable, effective
practices
Equipment
Manufacturers
Fuel Suppliers
Anticipating
need for
worldwide
availability of
low-sulphur
fuel
Innovation
Staying ahead of
regulatory
requirements
Industry Partners
Business for Social Responsibility’s Clean Cargo Working Group
World Shipping Council
Singapore Shipping Association
Pacific Maritime Shipping Association
North American Marine Environment Protection Association
24
A Shipowner Point of View
 Reducing Carbon
– Being Accomplished in
Advance of Regulations
 Addressing Criteria
Pollutants
– “Economic
Environmentalism”
 Mandates vs. Targets
– Set goals, not limits on
how to achieve them
 Collaboration is Key
“…committed to sound environmental stewardship…”
25
Caring about Climate Change
26
Thank You!