CANADA / US EMISSION CONTROL AREA (ECA) FOR SHIPS. Consultation Presentation Vancouver, Ottawa, Halifax Environment and Transport Canada January 2009

Transcription

1 CANADA / US EMISSION CONTROL AREA (ECA) FOR SHIPS Consultation Presentation Vancouver, Ottawa, Halifax Environment and Transport Canada January 2009

2 Contents 1. Purpose & Context 2. Commercial shipping the air pollution context 3. What actions is the government taking to reduce air pollution? 4. What is an ECA? 5. What are the expected results? 6. How can ships comply with ECA standards? 7. What are the next steps? Page 2

3 1. Purpose & Context Leaders of Canada and United States agreed to work together toward an ECA designation for North America at the Security and Prosperity Partnership meeting in March 2006: To reduce marine air pollution. Our two countries are preparing to approach the International Maritime Organization to designate special areas for controlling sulfur emissions from marine vessels. Since 2006, Canada and US are working together to develop the analytical basis for an ECA application Provide an overview of the results of our analyses of the benefits of an ECA Update you on the path forward to IMO Solicit your feedback and advice Page 3

4 We want your feedback Can you provide additional/ improved information re: Ship NOx, SOx, PM emissions? NOx, SOx, PM reduction methods to meet ECA standards? Operational implications/ ramifications of ECA compliance onboard? Information that would assist our analyses? Page 4

5 Commercial shipping is a large contributor to Canadian trade Approximately 50,000 merchant ships trade internationally Responsible for moving 90% of world trade and 50% of Canadian exports Increased trade with Asia substantially increasing Pacific coast ship traffic Page 5 COSCO Vancouver unloads in Vancouver

6 which produces a large amount of emissions Projection of NO x annual emissions from marine commercial shipping sources Page 6 NO x emissions from ships will be of the same order of magnitude as emissions from industrial and on-land transportation sources and concentrated along coastlines and seaways

7 while other emissions are decreasing 2002 Estimated Sox Emissions (113,884 tonnes) 2020 Estimated SOx Emissions (107,626 tonnes) Off-road diesel 14% Locomotives 4% Off-road gasoline 1% Heavy-duty diesel 1% Heavy-duty gasoline 0% Light-duty gasoline 12% Light-duty diesel 0% Heavy-duty gasoline 1% Heavy-duty diesel 5% Marine 63% Marine 98% Light-duty diesel 0% Light-duty gasoline 1% Off-road diesel 0% Off-road gasoline 0% Locomotives 0% Page 7

8 Ship SOx Emissions Large amount of emissions cont d Taller red and orange columns indicate higher emissions intensity Page 8

9 Marine emissions contribute to smog in Canada Marine emissions contribute to smog levels (O 3 and PM 2.5 ) in all Canadian provinces where there is commercial marine activities (BC, Ontario, Quebec, Maritimes) Marine emissions influence extend inland, well beyond coastal areas Influence of marine emissions on summertime ozone levels (top) and on annual fine particulate matter (bottom) in Canada Large portions of the Canadian population are affected by air pollution associated with marine transportation. Page 9

10 And is also an issue in the US Annual average PM2.5 (ug/m3) Seasonal mean 8-hour average ozone (ppb) Page 10

11 Degraded air quality also affects ecosystem health Ship emissions also contribute to acid deposition across Canada The impact on ecosystems is measured through an exceedance of the critical load, i.e. the quantity of acid deposition an ecosystem can receive without sustaining irreversible damage Although contributions to sulphur and nitrogen deposition are higher in Western Canada (top map), ecosystems in eastern Canada, which are more sensitive to deposition, are the more impacted by deposition from ships (bottom map) Both SO x and NO x emission reductions would contribute and improve the short- and longterm sustainability of Canadian ecosystems Influence of marine emissions on annual total-sulfur deposition (top) and Critical Load exceedances (bottom) in Canada Page 11

12 How were these results developed? Several years of emissions inventory work Guidance and assistance by Transportation Development Centre, Chamber of Shipping, ship traffic experts (James Corbett), Canadian Marine Advisory Council s Working Group on Air Emissions Air quality modelling & ecosystem results by Environment Canada s Meteorological Services Group responsible for determining air quality impacts from several sources in Canada Health Canada s health effects modelling expertise In close coordination with US Environmental Protection Agency Emissions Inventory Air Quality Modelling Page 12 Ecosystem Results Health Effects Modelling

13 Other transportation modes meet stringent air emissions limits Canada has a policy of alignment with US standards on air emissions and fuel for the following transportation sources: Railway sector: MOU with industry commits to alignment with newly developed EPA standards, regulations will be put in place to take effect in 2011 Off-Road: amend regulations as necessary to maintain alignment with EPA standards On-Road (includes trucking): amend regulations as necessary to maintain alignment with EPA standards In the U.S. and Canada, large marine engines do not have similar stringent standards Page 13

14 Transportation Fuel Quality Standards in Canada at a glance Date Gasoline Sulphur Limit (ppm) 1 Jan Apr IMO Global Standard Date Until 31 Dec 2011 Sulphur Limit (ppm) 45,000 1 Jan ,000 1 Jan ,000 Date Until 31 May 2006 On-Road Diesel Sulphur Limit (ppm) June Date 1 Jun 2007 to 31 May 2010 Off-Road Diesel Sulphur Limit (ppm) June Date Until 30 Jun 2010 IMO ECA Standard Page 14 Sulphur Limit (ppm) 15,000 1 Jul ,000 1 Jan ,000 Date 1 Jun 2007 to 31 May 2012 Locomotive Diesel Sulphur Limit (ppm) June

15 Future regulations for ships ECA designation in Canada-US waters Emissions standards for ships trading internationally are agreed to at International Maritime Organization (IMO) Standards contain provisions allowing nations to apply to establish Emission Control Areas: All ships must reduce SO x emissions Newer ships must reduce NO x emissions PM emissions will also decrease Canada can continue the policy of alignment by joining the US to apply for an Emission Control Area Page 15

16 Overview of ECA Standards Large ships operating in a North American ECA would be subject to stringent standards for sulphur oxides and nitrogen oxides for significant PM and ozone reductions While operating in the ECA, ships will be required to achieve SOx emissions equivalent to using fuel with a sulphur content less than 0.1% (1,000 ppm) in 2015, a 96% reduction Ships built 2016 or later will be required to meet a stringent NOx standard in the ECA, representing an 80% reduction from current standards Emissions can be reduced through the use of lower sulphur fuels and / or use of after treatment technologies (scrubbers, selective catalytic reduction) Page 16

17 Canadian Fuel Sulphur Content Timeline 5.00% 4.50% 4.00% Sulphur Content (w/w % 3.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.00% 1.50% IMO sulphur limits without an ECA 1.00% 0.50% 0.00% Year Gasoline Diesel Marine Global ECA Page 17

18 Average NOx Emissions from Mobile Source Engines NOx regulations (g/kwh) IMO NOx limits without an ECA Timeline Page 18 On Road Railroad Off Road CI Marine IMO EPA C1-C2

19 Annex VI Ratification and ECA: Approach A country may join a Party to Annex VI when applying for an ECA For example, 14 of the 16 countries that applied for the North Sea SECA had yet to ratify Annex VI. Since the US has ratified, Canada is able to join the US application. Canada on track to ratify Annex VI The Canada Shipping Act and the Regulations Preventing Pollution from Ships must be amended to reflect the October 2008 amendments to Annex VI. Any changes to the Act, and ratification of the Annex, will require action by Parliament. Transport Canada is leading this process and expects to be ratified by end of 2009, before the IMO vote on our ECA application. Page 19

20 ECA will improve air quality Ozone levels are improved over a large portion of Southern BC Coastal areas in Eastern Canada will experience improvements as well Ozone reduction expected for summertime in 2020, if ECA would be enacted; zoomed over Southern BC (top) and Eastern Canada (bottom). Page 20

21 Air Quality cont d Improvements in PM 2.5 levels over large portions of Southern BC will exceed 5% with the implementation of the ECA Coastal areas in Eastern Canada will also see improvements Fine particulate matter reduction expected for summertime in 2020, if ECA would be enacted; zoomed over Southern BC (top) and Eastern Canada (bottom). Page 21

22 ECA will improve our health Reducing ship emissions from today s performance to ECA standards will: 288,000 net acute respiratory symptom days (per year) 151,000 restricted activity days 18,800 asthma symptom days 782 instances of acute bronchitis in children 136 instances of chronic bronchitis 175 deaths Page 22

23 ECA will improve our health The benefits are valued over $900 million Canadian Approximately 60% of these impacts would be felt in BC, another 30% in the Great Lakes/St Lawrence region and 6% in the Atlantic provinces. Page 23

24 ECA will improve ecosystems Exceedances in coastal areas will decline with an ECA and in some cases (dark red squares) acid deposition will be reduced below the critical load. Greatest impact will be in the East, the most sensitive area of Canada. Page 24

25 Canadian Participation in the ECA Aligns with International & US Standards An ECA will: Set enhanced protection for Canada and the US that works with the global standards of the International Maritime Organization Protect Canadian and US citizens from ship emissions in our common air sheds Ensure common standards in Canada and US Level playing field for shipping in both countries No perception of pollution havens or unfair competition Impacts of ECA requirements on domestic fleets are being examined Page 25

26 Vessel Modifications for ECA SOx Requirements To meet ECA SOx requirements, vessel will have to use distillate fuel or install technologies that provide equivalent emission reductions Switching to distillate fuel may require the vessel to be modified with: Additional fuel tanks Modified fuel injectors Modified fuel pumps Scrubbers are a potential alternative Use of distillate fuel may be a favoured short-term option Scrubber use may proliferate in the future if they are shown to be a more cost effective option Page 26

27 Vessel Procedures For ECA SOx Requirements Fuel-switching often performed today will likely be routine practice in California as of 2009 large marine engines generally switch to distillate fuel prior to extended shut-down, and use distillate for start up Engine manufacturers publish procedures for fuel switching Operating in the ECA would require utilizing these fuel switching procedures when entering the ECA Example: Maersk Inc. Inc. has has already performed several successful fuel fuel switchover tests tests with with their their fleet fleet while while operating in in California waters waters Page 27

28 Vessel Requirements for ECA NOx Tier III NOx limits will likely require new vessels built as of 2016 to have a selective catalytic reduction system (SCR) installed as an aftertreatment device SCRs require the use of a urea, a nitrogen oxides reducing agent containing ammonia SCR would require the installation of urea tanks and urea injectors A combination of engine improvements could also be made to meet Tier III standards, for instance: Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) systems Direct water injection Water in fuel emulsion Page 28

29 Vessel Procedures for ECA NOx Requirements When entering an ECA, the vessel operator will be required to commence operation of the vessel s SCR unit (if so equipped) Feedstock (urea) distribution network currently exists for stationary sources and can expand to include the marine industry Page 29

30 US Status on ECA US EPA continues to work with EC and TC on ECA analyses US has begun consultations on ECA in November 2008 and will continue through Jan/Feb 2009 US will continue to work with Canada towards a joint submission Page 30

31 Our ECA Timeline Consultations currently continuing with provinces, territories and stakeholders Canada and US working jointly to submit an ECA application to IMO in April 2009 To be followed by continued consultations with provinces, stakeholders, and IMO members Adoption of ECA in March 2010 at IMO; implementation as early as August 2012 Page 31

32 Our questions again Can you provide additional/ improved information re: Ship NOx, SOx, PM emissions? NOx, SOx, PM reduction methods to meet ECA standards? Practical implications/ ramifications of ECA compliance onboard? Information that would assist our analyses? Page 32

33 Appendix: ECA application requirements delineation of the proposed area of application description of the human populations and environmental areas at risk from the impacts of ship emissions; assessment of contribution of ships to ambient concentrations of air pollution or to adverse environmental impacts. relevant information pertaining to the meteorological conditions in the proposed area of application to the human populations and environmental areas at risk description of ship traffic in the proposed ECA description of the control measures taken by the proposing Party or Parties relative costs of reducing emissions from ships when compared with land-based controls, and the economic impacts on shipping engaged in international trade Page 33

34 ECA SOx Standards 5.0% SOx Emission Limits for All Ships 4.0% percent sulphur 3.0% 2.0% Global Limit (Potential Deferral) ECA Limit 1.0% 0.0% Page 34

35 ECA NOx Standards 20 NOx Emission Limits for New Ships (for <100 rpm engines) grams NOx per kwh Global Limit ECA Limit Page 35