U.S. and international container shipping ports are among the world's biggest sources of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, because of their reliance on diesel fuel for goods movement. But progress toward reducing harmful emissions by switching to clean alternative fuels is gaining momentum worldwide, according to a new research study,
Container Ports and Air Pollution, published by
Energy Futures, Inc.
The 77-page report presents findings from a 10-month-long study that included on-site visits to evaluate air pollution control efforts at top container ports in the U.S., Europe and Asia. The new Energy Futures study updates and expands on a report entitled
U.S. Container Ports and Air Pollution: A Perfect Storm, which was published in February, 2008. That study identified environmental protection alternative fuel programs at each of the Top 10 U.S. container ports, including their use of natural gas and biodiesel.
Speaking at the GreenPorts 2009 Conference in
Naples, Italy,
James S. Cannon, President, Energy Futures. Inc., said, “A key premise of our studies of air pollution in the container shipping industry is that alternative fuels offer viable options for use in goods movement operations to replace polluting fuels that are derived from oil. These clean-burning fuels are known to work well in port goods movement, and there is great promise that they can be more widely used in the shipping supply chain.”
Overall, the new Energy Futures report is a “call to action” that asks decision makers to increase alternative fuel use to protect public health and environmental quality in port communities when they formulate policies designed to maintain port growth.
Included in the new report are updated profiles that showcase air pollution control efforts at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, CA; the Port of New York and New Jersey; the Port of Savannah, GA; the Port of Oakland, CA; the Port of Hampton Roads, VA; the Port of Seattle, WA; the Port of Tacoma, WA; the Port of Houston, TX, and the Port of Charleston, SC. Case studies at the Port of Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and the Port of Hong Kong are also included.
Cannon explained that the U.S. is the largest importer of containerized goods, yet the millions of containers handled at U.S. ports annually comprise only about 10 percent of the global container trade. The study documents significant progress during 2008 in environmental programs affecting international goods movement. Most importantly, the London-based
International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted amendments to regulations governing air pollution from ships.
The IMO revisions call for a progressive reduction in the global sulfur cap on bunkerfuel, from the current limit of 45,000 parts per million to 5,000 parts per million. “The bunkerfuel that powers most ships is the dregs of oil refining,” Cannon said. Typically, container ships burn bunkerfuel when idle in port, to provide for their electrical needs.
The report points out that a a switch to a cleaner grade of petroleum fuel means switching to higher-priced middle distillate fuels. The distillate fuel market is already the most competitive market for oil derived fuels, including diesel truck fuel and aviation jet fuel. Thus, a rise in marine diesel fuel demand would further strain supplies and could cause prices to escalate, the study says.
Switching to alternative fuels is another option. Natural gas is the alternative fuel most widely used in ships. The report mentions that there are currently 52 oceangoing ships either operating or on order worldwide powered by natural gas with a total power capacity of 2,000 MW. Emissions of particulate matter decline 70 percent, nitrogen oxides fall 72 percent and sulfur dioxide emissions are virtually eliminated when bunkerfuel is replaced by natural gas.
The study says renewable fuels, particularly wind power, could replace at least a portion of bunkerfuel burned in ships. German firm
SkySails GmbH & Co. is currently marketing a large towing kite that can reduce ship fuel consumption by 50 percent under favorable conditions.
“Switching entirely from bunkerfuel to natural gas to power container ships would significantly lower emissions,” Cannon said. “Particulate matter pollution has been shown to decline 70 percent, while nitrogen oxides fall 72 percent and sulfur dioxide emissions are virtually eliminated when bunkerfuel is replaced by natural gas.”
Europe’s largest container port, located in
Rotterdam, manages an extensive array of programs designed to reduce air pollution from container handling. For example, the port is studying the use of natural gas as a fuel for hundreds of barges that daily carry containers to inland destinations.
In Asia, the study’s review of port clean-up efforts included Singapore, Hong Kong and Shanghai. Onsite Energy Futures researchers found several port programs involving the use of alternative fuels and advanced propulsion technologies. Various applications of electrical energy are the current alternatives of choice in the region.
[Pictured: Natural Gas molecule]
