IMO s GHG REGULATORY FRAMEWORK UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Transcription

1 IMO s UNDER CONSTRUCTION AB jan.bergholtz@kattegattdesign.se 1

2 Background: Shipping not covered by the Kyoto Protocol (1997) IMO under pressure to deliver GHG-mitigation instrument IMO GHG Study, 1 st edition 2000 followed by 2 nd edition Shipping % of Global CO 2 -impact Growth of Sector Shipping 12-18% of Global CO 2 by 2050 CO 2 -reduction targets: 20% by 2020 and 50% by 2050 Global Warming 2⁰C increase at 50% probability If IMO fails Regional Measures: EU, North America, etc 2

3 Global CO2-emissions Global CO2 Emissions 0.60% 2.70% 1.90% 0.50% Domestic shipping & Fishing 18.20% International Shipping 4.60% 21.30% International Aviation Rail Other Transport (Road) 15.20% Electricity and Heat Production Other 35% Other Energy Industries Manufacturing Industries & Construction Ref. 2:nd IMO GHG Study 2009, April 2009, Buhaug Ö et al 3

4 Modal Comparison Range of typical CO2 efficiencies for various cargo carriers Crude LNG General Cargo Reefer Chemical Bulk Container LPG Product RoRo / Vehicle Rail Road g CO2 / ton*km Ref. 2:nd IMO GHG Study 2009, April 2009, Buhaug Ö et al 4

5 The IMO Cure : Operational Measures: SEEMP, EEOI Market Based Measures (MBM:s): ETS, Bunker-Levy SE taking note of the progress but can still not engage (constitutional issue rel. to SE tax-money) Measures: EEDI for New Built Ships Attained EEDI >400 GT Size Limit when to apply Required EEDI Reduction Rates and Phases (stepped approach) Proposals have been made to link MBM:s to EEDI also for existing ships, MEPC 61/5/16 (US) 5

6 The EEDI Concept (> 400GT): GHG Impact Main Engines Aux Engines Shaft Motors Novel Tech. Novel Tech. M f nme P SFC C P SFC C M npti f P f Capacity V j ME( i) ME( i) FME ( i) AE AE FAE j PTI ( i) eff ( i) AEeff ( i) AE FAE j1 i1 j1 i1 i1 i1 i ref neff f f w P SFC C neff f eff ( i) P eff ( i) SFC ME C FME Benefit to Society 6

7 The EEDI Reference Lines: Shipping divided into 12 Ship Types Based on Statistics, IHS Fairplay Database, hence some generic assumptions are needed Average EEDI for Comparable Ships (Ship Types) v:s Capacity. Reference Lines should constitute a fair basis for comparison Level of Compliance to be reduced in steps 7

8 EEDI [g CO 2 / (tonnes x nm)] Attained / Required EEDI: Lower Size Limit for Required EEDI Reduction Levels: Phase 0 Year 0 0% Phase 1 Year 2 0% to 10% Phase 2 Year 7 0% to 20% Phase 3 Year 12 0% to 30% Capacity - DWT [tonnes] 8

9 9

10 Implications: Direct impact on Installed Power (not Shaft Power) Robustness of proposed methodology Deep Sea / Short Sea SE efforts to display Conditions for SSS Coverage DSS almost 85% of CO 2 -imprint Imprecision For RoRo 0% reduction -> 17% in reality EE Devices in SSS Inherent Margin (SFC Medium Speed Engines) Safety min Speed in Adverse Weather (Redundancy) Are proposed reduction rates feasible (e.g. Ice Class) 10

11 The Political Climate prior to MEPC61: Tremendous pressure on the IMO to deliver, Shipping must contribute to GHG-reduction EC political agenda IMO Objective to Circulate Draft Regulation amendment to MARPOL Annex VI for finalization MEPC62 Developing Countries, CBDR (UNFCCC) <-> IMO NST Good co-operation w STA and between EU Flag States 11

12 MEPC 61: Proposal by China - EEDI mandatory for Developed Countries but voluntary for Developing Countries CBDR UNFCCC ( NST IMO) Technology Transfer Capacity Building MARPOL Annex VI No Circulation of Draft Regulation prior to MEPC62 Correspondence Group in order to finalize unresolved issues 12

13 Future Work: EU (EC) promise / threat to develop Regional Regulations if IMO fails NO and US similar objectives 2 nd EMSA Study on SSS SE proposal of alternative EEDI-framework for SSS 13

14 Thank you for your attention! AB