European Commission. Quantification of emissions from ships associated with ship movements between ports in the European Community.

Transcription

1 European Commission Quantification of emissions from ships associated with ship movements between ports in the European Community Final Report Entec UK Limited

2 Report for Nicola Robinson European Commission DG ENV.C1 Rue de la Loi, 200 B-1049 Brussels Belgium Main Contributors Chris Whall David Cooper (IVL) Karen Archer Layla Twigger Neil Thurston David Ockwell Alun McIntyre Alistair Ritchie European Commission Quantification of emissions from ships associated with ship movements between ports in the European Community Final Report Issued by Chris Whall Entec UK Limited Approved by Alistair Ritchie Entec UK Limited Windsor House Gadbrook Business Centre Gadbrook Road Northwich Cheshire CW9 7TN England Tel: +44 (0) Fax: +44 (0) Certificate No. FS \\enorfs01\data\data\projects\em-260\06000 projects\06177 ec ships\final report\ doc In accordance with an environmentally responsible approach, this report is printed on recycled paper produced from 100% post-consumer waste.

3 Glossary ACC AE EEA GRT GT HC HSD kwh MCR MDO ME MGO MSD PM RO S Sfc SSD ST Accession Candidate Country auxiliary engine European Economic Area country (Norway & Iceland for the purposes of this study) gross registered tonnage gas turbine hydrocarbons high speed diesel kilo Watt hour maximum continuous rating marine diesel oil main engine marine gas oil medium speed diesel particulate matter residual oil sulphur specific fuel consumption slow speed diesel steam turbine

4 i Executive Summary Background As increasingly stringent controls are placed on land-based sources of atmospheric emissions, there is mounting pressure to bring ship emissions more closely within air quality policy across the European Community. For example, the negotiations on the National Emissions Ceilings Directive have considered the potential of bringing ship emissions within national ceilings. Ship emissions have not been as tightly controlled as many land-based emission sources and the international transboundary context of the shipping sector has posed specific difficulties to achieving progress in improving environmental performance. Research has demonstrated that ship emissions can make a significant contribution to air pollution problems in the European Community and, in particular, are major emitters of acidifying gases. These findings are based on previous studies of emissions estimates for ship movements in the North Sea, English Channel, Baltic Sea, North East Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea. In order to inform future EU policy on ship emissions, the European Commission decided it was necessary to develop a comprehensive inventory of all ship emissions in EU sea areas in the year This Study Accordingly, this study has been conducted by Entec UK Ltd on behalf of the European Commission, with sub-consultants IVL of Sweden, to address the following key tasks: to quantify ship emissions of SO 2, NO x, CO 2 and hydrocarbons in the North Sea, Irish Sea, English Channel, Baltic Sea, Black Sea and Mediterranean, as well as quantifying in-port emissions of these pollutants plus particulate matter; to determine these emissions for all vessels as well as separately for each vessel type and flag state (Registered in the European Community or outside) if possible. This should separately consider: (a) all vessel movements; (b) where the starting port and destination port are both in the Community; (c) where the starting port is inside the Community but the destination port is not; (d) where the destination port is in the Community but the starting port is not; and (e) where no stops at any Community port are undertaken; Estimation of the effects of the MARPOL Agreement and additional future scenarios upon emissions, principally sulphur dioxide and particles, in the North Sea and Baltic Sea and other European seas; to present these emissions in tabular and map form; to undertake a market survey of low sulphur marine distillates; and to investigate the feasibility of ships storing and using multiple grades of marine distillates.

5 ii Information Sources The primary source of information in terms of ship movements was a comprehensive database provided by Lloyds Marine Intelligence Unit (LMIU). This is the only commercial database of all ship movements world-wide (over 46,000 merchant vessels calling at over 6000 ports). It comprises up-to-date data resolved to a daily timeframe and over 3 million movements are processed annually. The most up-to-date ship movements available at the time of this study (year 2000) were utilised in the transit analysis component of the emissions study. Due to the large number of vessel movements world-wide on an annual basis and the complexities of the data analysis and level of disaggregation required for this project; a four-month sample of the data was obtained. The data was for four discrete months to reflect seasonal variations in shipping activity. The months selected were January, April, July, October 2000, to represent movements representative of winter, spring, summer and autumn. LMIU has confirmed that there were 1,831,838 shipping movements in the area of interest during 2000 and that, in their experience, there is little variation between annualised quarterly projections and yearly actual movements. In particular, there were 608,942 vessel movements in the 4-month period of data selected which, when annualised, produces a yearly estimate of 1,826,826. Thus, the estimate is within 1% of the actual figure for The shipping movements database was combined with other sources of information as follows: a vessel characteristics database that lists the characteristics of each vessel worldwide (over 500 Gross Registered Tonnes), in terms of the type of vessel and information on the engine type and size; an emission factors database, for the air pollutants nitrogen oxides (NO x ), sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ), hydrocarbons (HC) and particles (PM) (only in-port emissions of particles were considered in this study) and for the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO 2 ); GIS representation of the EMEP domain (see Figure 1 below), in which vessel routings corresponding to the origin and destination points (ports) in the vessel movements database are embedded and ship emissions are assigned to 50km x 50km grid squares; Details on the times that classes of vessels spend on in-port activities, in order to enable calculation of pollutant emissions while in-port, derived from a questionnaire survey of ports; and Information on fuel consumption by fishing vessels in the UK and other EU-15 countries, data on annual fish catches and the locations of fishing grounds.

6 iii Figure 1. EMEP Domain Results Emissions Estimates For the year 2000, total emissions of the five pollutants considered from shipping movements in the EMEP domain are included in Table 1 below. A spatial representation of total sulphur dioxide emissions from vessels during 2000 in the EMEP domain is contained in Figure 2 below. Further emission maps are included in the main body of the report at the end of chapter 2. Table 1. Total calculated pollutant emissions for 2000 Source NO x SO 2 CO 2 HC PM (in port) Kte/annum Kte/annum Kte/annum Kte/annum Kte/annum Vessels+ferries 3,535 2, , Fishing , * TOTAL 3,617 2, , * Not calculated Subdivision of these emission estimates between the North Sea/Baltic and other areas was made. The results of this are included in Table 2 below.

7 iv Table 2. Subdivision of emission estimates for 2000 between North Sea/Baltic and Other Areas Area NO x SO 2 CO 2 HC PM (in port) Kte / annum Kte / annum Kte/ annum Kte/annum Kte/annum North Sea/Baltic 1, , Other Areas 2,543 1, , Total 3,617 2, ,

8

9 vi Results Emission Breakdowns A breakdown of the total calculated sulphur dioxide emissions by vessel origin and destination state is shown in the pie chart below. Figure 3. Total SO 2 emissions breakdown by movement 7% 4% 4% Movement Type 4% 7% 40% EU-15 to EU-15 EU-15 to NON NON to EU-15 NON to NON ACC to ACC ACC to EU-15 7% EU-15 to ACC NON to ACC 13% 14% ACC to NON It is clear that the majority of emissions arise from certain key groups of movements including, in order of decreasing priority: EU-15 member states to EU-15 member states; EU-15 member states to Non-member, Non Accession Candidate Country states and Non-member, Non Accession Candidate Country states to EU-15 member states. A similar pattern is evident for the other pollutant emissions. Results Breakdown of Vessel Movements A breakdown of the vessel movements between states is shown in the second pie chart below. Figure 4. Breakdown of vessel movements by origin and destination state 22% EU-15 to EU-15 3% EU-15 to ACC ACC to EU-15 ACC to ACC 51% 1% 3% 4% 10% 3% 3% EU-15 to NON NON to EU-15 ACC to NON NON to ACC NON to NON

10 vii The greatest proportion of vessel movements include, in order of decreasing priority: Non-member, Non Accession Candidate Country states to Non-member, Non Accession Candidate Country states; EU-15 member states to EU-15 member states; EU-15 member states to Non-member, Non Accession Candidate Country states and Non-member, Non Accession Candidate Country states to EU-15 member states. It is noted that whilst the greatest proportion of vessel movements are between Non-member, Non Accession Candidate Country states, these movements contribute a relatively lower proportion of total emissions as they generally spend less time in the EMEP domain. Results Future Emission Projections A range of potential future emission scenarios was developed jointly by Entec and the European Commission, incorporating the provisions of MARPOL Annex VI. These dealt with reductions in the sulphur content of residual oil (RO) in the North Sea and Baltic waters, reductions in marine gas oil (MGO) sulphur contents for use by vessels in port and restrictions upon RO sulphur content in territorial waters to 1.5%. Vessels operating in areas outside the Baltic and North Sea were assumed to use RO with a sulphur content of 2.7%, equivalent to that for the Business as Usual (BAU) scenario. The range of scenarios considered in this analysis is contained in Table 3, dealing with BAU cases for 2006, 2008 and 2010 and various cases for these years with low sulphur content residual oil (RO) usage in the North Sea and Baltic, low sulphur distillate fuel usage in-port and low sulphur RO use in territorial waters. Table 3. Future scenarios considered Scenario No. / Year Sulphur in fuel and fuel type legislation NO x, PM, HC and CO BAU* as in assigned emission factors for year 2000 ( Actual 2000 ) as in Actual ,5% in RO for North Sea/Baltic as in Actual lower PM ,5% in RO for North Sea/Baltic + 0,2% in MGO in port for AEs only ,5% in RO for North Sea/Baltic + 0,2% in MGO in port and manoeuvring for both AEs and MEs as in Actual lower PM + NO x, CO 2 reductions due to increase in MGO use (lower sfc) as in Actual lower PM + NO x, CO 2 reductions due to increase in MGO use (lower sfc) BAU as in Actual 2000 as in Actual ,5% in RO for North Sea/Baltic As in Actual lower PM ,5% in RO for North Sea/Baltic + 0,1% in MGO in port for AEs only as in Actual lower PM + NO x, CO 2 reductions due to increase in MGO use (lower sfc)

11 viii Scenario No. / Year Sulphur in fuel and fuel type legislation NO x, PM, HC and CO ,5% in RO for North Sea/Baltic + 0,1% in MGO in port and manoeuvring for both AEs and MEs ,5% in RO for North Sea/Baltic and all territorial waters + 0,1% in MGO in port and manoeuvring for both AEs and MEs as in Actual lower PM + NO x, CO 2 reductions due to increase in MGO use (lower sfc) as in Actual lower PM + NO x, CO 2 reductions due to increase in MGO use (lower sfc) BAU As in Actual 2000 As in Actual 2000 * BAU Business as Usual Annual growth rates for vessel movements were selected as 1.5% per annum and 3.0% per annum after IMO (2000). These were applied to all vessels except for ferries and fishing vessels, for which no growth was assumed. The resultant projections for the 1.5% per annum growth rate are contained in Table 4 below. A more detailed breakdown of the scenario calculations is contained in Appendix F, together with the summarised results for the 3% per annum growth factor.

12 ix Table 4. Emissions estimates for future scenarios Scenario NO x SO 2 CO 2 HC PM (in port) Kte / annum Kte / annum Kte/ annum Kte/annum Kte/annum 2000 BAU 3,617 2, , BAU 3,833 2, , ,833 2, , ,831 2, , ,826 2, , BAU 3,922 2, , ,922 2, , ,919 2, , ,915 2, , ,915 1, , BAU 4,015 2, , Market Survey of Marine Distillates Marine distillates can be broadly divided into two categories: marine gas oil (MGO) and marine diesel oil (MDO). MDO is classed as fuel with a viscosity (measured at 50 o C) between 5,5-50 cst and MGO 1-5,5 cst. 1 The majority of world-wide sales of marine distillates are produced and sold under quality standards categorised under ISO 8217 which places maximum limits on their chemical and physical properties, including sulphur content. Four main areas are addressed in this report: The proportion of European ports which sell low sulphur (0.2%) grades; The proportion of low sulphur marine distillates sold in the EU relative to the higher sulphur equivalents in ISO 8217; Typical price premiums in the EU between low and high sulphur distillate grades; and The availability of low sulphur marine distillates outside the EU. A survey was constructed asking for information on the four key areas and sent electronically to listed bunker suppliers, traders and brokers within the November 2001 Bunker News Directory. 400 questionnaires were sent out in total and 56 responded. The resulting information was then 1 IVL 2002

13 x analysed by country and region. The major oil companies were individually contacted independently from the survey. The general picture derived through this study, as a result of both the survey and extensive dialogue with industry contacts, is that low sulphur marine distillates are available at ports throughout Europe except certain areas of Greece, Spain and the Canary Islands. Most Scandinavian and Baltic States, as well as the UK and Ireland tend to sell only max 0.2% sulphur gasoil. Northwest Europe tends to be mixed with low sulphur available but some suppliers still supplying high sulphur gasoil at a discounted price. Portugal tends to be exclusively 0.05% sulphur with the same grade of distillate (all DMA) supplied for road and marine use. The Mediterranean and Aegean markets are also mixed with 0.2% available except in parts of Greece where it is only available by truck. Notably, the survey suggested that the availability of low sulphur marine distillates is predominantly MGO. MDO tends not to be widely available at <0.2% sulphur. In summary, it is estimated that low sulphur (<0.2%) distillates are available at approximately 95-99% of ports within the EU. However, the quantities in which they are available may vary significantly between ports and regions. Price information that distinguishes between low and high sulphur marine distillates is not readily available. The survey results are therefore based on estimates by the responding bunker suppliers based on their own recent observations of the market. The predominant view expressed by industry contacts during the course of this study is that where both low and high sulphur distillates are available, there is a premium of around $10-15 per metric tonne (mt) on the low sulphur fuel. The results of the survey show that this is a fairly representative estimate. Premiums seem to be highest in certain EU15 countries including Greece, Germany, and Sweden. Low sulphur MGO and MDO tend to be available in North America (US and Canada) and South America. There is also limited availability of both in Central America. Low sulphur MGO (DMA) is also available in Russia, where it is almost exclusively low sulphur. Low sulphur MGO (DMA) is also available in the Middle East in limited quantities. Correspondence with industry contacts together with the results of the survey suggested that in Asia, including Singapore and Fujairah but with the exception of the Philippines, there is very limited availability of low sulphur MGO (DMA). This is significant because Singapore and Fujairah are major world bunker suppliers. Feasibility of ships storing multiple grades of marine distillates As shown by the market survey, the majority of sales of marine distillates outside of the EU tend to be high sulphur. This has obvious implications in terms of ships bunkering with high sulphur distillates outside the EU before entering Community territorial seas. Burning these fuels then places them in breach of Directive 1999/32/EC which obliges them to burn low sulphur (<0.2%) grades within EU waters. The feasibility of multiple fuel storage by vessels has therefore been investigated through contact and discussions with shipbuilders, repairers and marine engine specialists. The principal issues arising out of this investigation can be categorised as engine operational specific issues and fuel tank installation issues (split or double tanks; structural conversion issues; increased fuel consumption and operational issues).

14 xi With use of low-sulphur distillate fuels, an additional cylinder lubrication system, incorporating a storage tank and delivery system, would be required to prevent calcium deposits in the engine cylinders and subsequent damage to the cylinders. With regard to the splitting of existing fuel tanks or installation of additional capacity, it would appear that the former course of action would be less costly than the latter. The latter is likely to constitute a major conversion of the vessel, potentially requiring older vessels to be reclassified as new ships and corresponding upgrading to meet all present-day conventions. Installation of additional tanks may also lead to slightly increased fuel consumption. The overall conclusion is that, while there are technical, engineering and cost issues to be addressed, these would not present an insurmountable barrier to dual fuel usage.

15 xii

16 xiii Contents 1. Introduction Background This report 1 2. Quantification of ship emissions Sea Areas within the Scope of this Study Ship Movement Analysis Details of database used in ship movement analysis Key assumptions used in ship movement analysis Ship characteristics analysis Details of database used in ship characteristics analysis Key assumptions used in ship characteristics analysis In-port emissions quantification Development of assumptions Ship Emission Factors Proposed Vessel Emission Factors Results Quantification of emissions Discussion of Emission Results Market Survey of Marine Distillates with 0.2% Sulphur Content Background Data Gathering Supply Chain Complexity Optimal Approach Results Response Rate Proportion of European Ports Which Sell Low Sulphur (0.2%) Grades Proportion of Low Sulphur Marine Distillates Sold in the EU Relative to Higher Sulphur Equivalents Typical Price Premiums Between Low and High Sulphur Distillate Grades 81

17 xiv Availability of Low Sulphur Marine Distillates Outside the EU Data Quality Data Sources Data Age, Geographical and Technical Coverage Data Precision, Completeness and Representativeness Consistency and Reproducibility Uncertainties References Feasibility of Ships Storing Multiple Grades of Marine Distillates Vessel Type and Applicability Engine Specific Issues Fuel Tank Installation Issues Cost Isolation Split Tank or Double Capacity? Major Conversion Issues Increased Fuel Consumption Operational Issues Data Quality 88 Table 1. Total calculated pollutant emissions for 2000 iii Table 2. Subdivision of emission estimates for 2000 between North Sea/Baltic and Other Areas iv Table 3. Future scenarios considered vii Table 4. Emissions estimates for future scenarios ix Table 2.1 Estimated total fuel consumption by fishing fleets in each Fishing Zone in Europe 6 Table 2.2 Ship categories used in emissions analysis 8 Table 2.3 Assumptions for the duration (hours) of in-port activities, based on port surveys 10 Table 2.4. A comparison of IVL and selected Lloyds Register Engineering Services data for main engine marine emission factors and specific fuel consumption (sfc) in g/kwh at steady state engine loads of % MCR. 12 Table 2.5. Assumptions regarding engine operation for the different activities. 13 Table 2.6. Example of profile for vessel type A13 Oil Tanker regarding engine / fuel profile for MEs and AEs. SSD = slow speed diesel, MSD = medium speed diesel, HSD = high speed diesel, GT = gas turbine, ST = steam turbine, MGO = marine gas oil, MDO = marine diesel oil, RO = residual oil. 14 Table 2.7 Sulphur and Carbon Contents of Fuels 15 Table 2.8. Emission factors in g/kwh regarding engine / fuel type for MEs at sea. SSD = slow speed diesel, MSD = medium speed diesel, HSD = high speed diesel, GT = gas turbine, ST = steam turbine, MGO = marine gas oil, MDO = marine diesel oil, RO = residual oil. 17 Table 2.9 Emission factors in g/kwh regarding engine / fuel type for MEs in port and manoeuvring. SSD = slow speed diesel, MSD = medium speed diesel, HSD = high speed diesel, GT = gas turbine, ST = steam turbine, MGO = marine gas oil, MDO = marine diesel oil, RO = residual oil. 18 Table Emission factors in g/kwh regarding engine / fuel type for AEs (all three activities). MSD = medium speed diesel, HSD = high speed diesel, MGO = marine gas oil, MDO = marine diesel oil, RO = residual oil. Note none of the AEs in the LMIS dataset were of slow speed diesel, gas turbine nor steam turbine engine types 19 Table Emission factors for at sea operation regarding ship type. 20 Table Emission factors for in port operation regarding ship type. 21 Table Emission factors for manoeuvring operation regarding ship type. 22 Table Estimated uncertainties at the 95% confidence interval given as relative percent of the emission factors (in g/kwh or kg/tonne fuel). For example, the NO x emission factor at sea

18 xv has a 20 relative % uncertainty assigned, which means that 95% of ships emissions will lie within + or 20% of the assigned factors. Thus, the NO x emission factor range expected for a Chemical tanker A12 would be 13,2-19,8 g/kwh (i.e. uncertainty margin calculated from 16,5 g/kwh in Table 2.11 multiplied by 0,20). 23 Table Envisaged future scenarios and their influence on Actual 2000 emission factors 25 Table 2.16 Emission of Pollutants during 2000 from Vessels at Sea subdivided by Origin & Destination Port and by Flag Status (excludes Ferries & Fishing Vessels), Kilotonnes 27 Table 2.17 Emission of Pollutants during 2000 from Vessels in Port and Manoeuvring subdivided by Origin & Destination Port and by Flag Status (excludes Ferries & Fishing Vessels) 28 Table 2.18 Total (at Sea, In-Port plus Manoeuvring) Pollutant Emissions during 2000 from Vessels subdivided by Origin & Destination Port and by Flag Status (Excludes Ferries & Fishing Vessels) 29 Table 2.19 Pollutant Emissions during 2000 from Ferries at Sea subdivided by Origin & destination Port and by Flag Status 30 Table 2.20 Pollutant Emissions during 2000 from Ferries Manoeuvring subdivided by Origin & Destination Port and by Flag Status 31 Table 2.21 Pollutant Emissions during 2000 from Ferries In-Port subdivided by Origin & Destination Table 2.22 Port and by Flag Status 32 Grand Emission Totals during 2000 for all Vessels subdivided by origin & Destination Port and by Flag Status 33 Table 2.23 EU(15) to EU(15) ship movements for 4 months in 2000 (excluding ferries) 36 Table 2.24 EU(15) to Accession Country ship movements for 4 months in 2000 (excluding ferries) 37 Table 2.25 Accession Country to Accession Country ship movements for 4 months in 2000 (excluding ferries) 38 Table 2.26 Accession Country to EU(15) ship movements for 4 months in 2000 (excluding ferries) 39 Table 2.27 Summary of other ship movements for 4 months in 2000 (excluding ferries) 40 Table 2.28 Summary of Total Pollutant Emissions during Table 2.29 Subdivision of Emission estimates for 2000 between North Sea/Baltic and Other Areas 42 Table 2.30 Pollutant Emission Estimates in 2000 for In-Port (includes manoeuvring, loading/unloading and hotelling) 43 Table 2.31 Ports in the EU ranked by estimated annual emissions of NO X in Table 2.32 Past and Future Estimated Shipping Emissions 44 Table 2.33 Comparison of emission estimates for 2000 with a previous study 45 Table 2.34 Future emission scenarios 46 Table 2.35 Emissions estimates for Future Scenarios 47 Table 3.1 International Fuel Oil Standards (ISO 8217) 75 Table 3.2 EU-15: Average Proportions of Low Sulphur Marine Distillate Sold and Price Premiums Between High and Low Sulphur Distillates 79 Table 3.3 Accession Countries: Average Proportions of Low Sulphur Marine Distillate Sold and Price Premiums Between High and Low Sulphur Distillates 80 Table 3.4 Rest of World: Average Proportions of Low Sulphur Marine Distillate Sold and Price Premiums Between High and Low Sulphur Distillates 82 Table C.1. Marine combustion sources 100 Table C.2. Marine fuel types and general properties. Data based on averages from 50 analyses of ROs, 11 analyses of MDOs and 43 analyses of MGOs from ships operating in northern EU seas. 102 Table C.3. Details of the IVL in-house emission database. 104 Table C.4. Details of the Lloyds Register Engineering Services database. 107 Table C.5. Lloyds Register Engineering Services emission factors in g/kwh and kg/tonne fuel for diesel engines (Lloyds Register Engineering Services, 1995). 108 Table C.6. Lloyds Register Engineering Services emission factors in kg/hr. (Lloyds Register Engineering Services, 1995). P = engine power (kw) x engine load (85% MCR), N = No. of MEs, A = Total auxiliary power (kw), C = 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 where vessel GRT is <1000, , , and > respectively. 108 Table C.7. TECHNE s proposed emission factors (in kg/tonne fuel) used for the European Commission s MEET project. 112 Table C.8. TECHNE s proposed emission factors (in kg/tonne fuel) for Auxiliary engines. Regression analysis from data provided in EPA, (1985). P = rated power output at generator in kw, L = Load in % of rated power, s = sulphur content of fuel. 114 Table C.9. IPCC default emission factors for ocean-going ships. 115 Table C.10. Table C.11. Table C.12. EMEP/CORINAIR emission factors for ships using simplified fuel consumption methodology. 116 Emission factors derived by EPA from Lloyds Register Engineering Services and US Coastguard studies. In addition, specific fuel consumption can be calculated by sfc = 14,12/ (Fractional load) + 205,717. n/a refers to not applicable and n/s not significantly significant. 117 A comparison of marine emission factors in kg per tonne fuel and fuel consumption in g/kwh presented in IMO (2000). 119

19 xvi Table C.13. Estimated uncertainties given as relative percent of average value at the 95% confidence interval. 120 Table E.1. Emission factors for at sea operation (North Sea/Baltic region) regarding ship type (scenario ). 144 Table E.2. Emission factors for in-port operation (North Sea/Baltic region) regarding ship type (scenario ). 145 Table E.3. Emission factors for manoeuvring operation (North Sea/Baltic region) regarding ship type (scenario ). 146 Table E.4. Emission factors for in-port operation (in other territorial waters ) regarding ship type (scenario ). 148 Table E.5. Emission factors for in-port operation (in North Sea/Baltic region) regarding ship type (scenario ). 149 Table E.6. Emission factors for in-port operation regarding ship type (scenario ). 151 Table E.8. Emission factors for in-port operation (in other territorial waters ) regarding ship type (scenario ). 154 Table E.9. Emission factors for in-port operation (in North Sea/Baltic) regarding ship type (scenario ). 155 Table E.10. Emission factors for in-port operation regarding ship type (scenario ). 157 Table E.11. Emission factors for manoeuvring operation regarding ship type (scenario ). 158 Table F.1 TOTAL EMISSION PROJECTIONS (ALL SEA AREAS) 161 Table F.2 EMISSION PROJECTIONS FOR NORTH SEA AND BALTIC ONLY 165 Table F.3 EMISSION PROJECTIONS FOR OTHER SEA AREAS 169 Table F.4 Emissions estimates for Future Scenarios 3% per annum assumed growth rate 173 Figure 2.1 EMEP Geographical Area 3 Figure 2.2 Total SO 2 Emissions Breakdown by Movement 35 Figure 2.3 Breakdown of Vessel Movements by Origin and Destination State 40 Figure 2.4 Total SO 2 emissions 49 Figure 2.5 Total NO x emissions 51 Figure 2.6 Total PM emissions in port 53 Figure 2.7 Total HC emissions 55 Figure 2.8 Total CO 2 emissions 57 Figure 2.9 EU flag registered SO 2 emissions 59 Figure 2.10 ACC flag registered SO 2 emissions 61 Figure 2.11 NON EU/ACC flag registered SO 2 emissions 63 Figure 2.12 Total SO 2 emissions Fishing vessels 65 Figure 2.13 Ferry Total SO 2 emissions 67 Figure 2.14 Total SO 2 emissions group EU to EU 69 Figure 2.15 Total SO 2 emissions group ACC to ACC 71 Figure 2.16 Total SO 2 emissions group NON EU/ACC to ACC 73 Figure 3.1 Map of European Sea 78 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Map of Fishing Effort Areas Details of In-Port Times Factors Influencing Ship Emissions Breakdown of Vessel profiles Emission Factors for Future Policy Scenarios Detailed Breakdown of Scenario Emission Calculations

20 1 1. Introduction 1.1 Background Ship emissions can make a significant contribution to air pollution problems in the European Community, as demonstrated by previous studies of emissions estimates for ship movements in the North Sea, English Channel, Baltic Sea, North East Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea. In particular, they are major sources of emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) and nitrogen oxides (NO x ), which lead to acidification and eutrophication as well as leading to the formation of ground level ozone and particulate matter. EU Member States are already committed to achieving significant reductions in land-based emissions of these pollutants, for example through the recent directives 2001/80 on Large Combustion Plants and 2001/81 on National Emissions Ceilings (NEC). But for the most part, seagoing ships are exempted from existing EU air quality legislation, including the NEC directive, and to date, marine heavy fuel oils have not been subject to EU environmental legislation. Furthermore, it might be possible that within the shipping sector relatively cost effective emission reduction measures could be implemented that would be attractive in comparison to rising marginal abatement costs for achieving extra reductions for certain land-based emission sources. In order to inform the development of a Community strategy on air pollution from seagoing ships this study is to quantify ships emissions more precisely, based on year 2000 ship movements, including in-port emissions for the first time. In particular, this study is to quantify ship emissions of SO 2, NO x, CO 2 and hydrocarbons in the North Sea, Irish Sea, English Channel, Baltic Sea, Black Sea and Mediterranean. It is also to quantify in-port emissions of these pollutants plus particulate matter. In order to assess the potential for Community measures (such as differentiated port charges) to reduce these emissions, disaggregation of information is required to differentiate between those emissions associated with vessels making stops at Community ports and those emissions associated with ships which make no stops at all or which enter non-community ports. Furthermore, in relation to Directive 1999/32/EC which sets the maximum permissible sulphur content of marine distillates used by ships in Community territorial seas of 0.2%, this study incorporates a market survey of low sulphur marine distillates and an investigation into the feasibility of ships storing and using multiple grades of marine distillates. 1.2 This report This is the final report of the quantification of emissions from ships associated with ship movements between ports in the European Community. As detailed above, this study is to inform the development of a Community strategy on air pollution from seagoing ships with specific objectives being:

21 2 to quantify ship emissions of SO 2, NO x, CO 2 and hydrocarbons in the North Sea, Irish Sea, English Channel, Baltic Sea, Black Sea and Mediterranean, as well as quantifying in-port emissions of these pollutants plus particulate matter; to determine these emissions for all vessels as well as separately for each vessel type and flag state (Registered in the European Community or outside) if possible. This should separately consider: (a) all vessel movements; (b) where the starting port and destination port are both in the Community; (c) where the starting port is inside the Community but the destination port is not; (d) where the destination port is in the Community but the starting port is not; and (e) where no stops at any Community port are undertaken; to present these emissions in tabular and map form; to undertake a market survey of low sulphur marine distillates; and to investigate the feasibility of ships storing and using multiple grades of marine distillates. The structure of this report is as follows: Section 2 presents the quantification of ship emissions. This outlines the methodology used to quantify emissions, including the ship movement analysis, vessel characteristics analysis and determination of emission factors. The results of the quantification for each pollutant are presented in tabular form, in accordance with the different movement types. The results are inclusive of all key vessel movements and include in-port emissions; Section 3 presents the findings of market survey of low sulphur marine distillates; and Section 4 presents the findings of the investigation into the feasibility of ships storing and using multiple grades of marine distillates. A glossary of terms used in this report is included at the front of this report. This project has been undertaken by a team of specialist Entec staff working in partnership with IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute. IVL has several years experience of research and contract work involving ship emission measurements and has undertaken the development of representative ship emission factors for this project based on detailed investigations into relevant data and information sources.