CNBC Business | Smoke signals

Smoke signals

It carries around 90% of world trade, yet international shipping has attracted relatively little attention from environmentalists and legislators... until now. Nick Jameson reports

Citing ‘confidential research’, UK newspaper The Guardian recently alleged that, based on engine size and fuel quality, “15 of the world’s biggest ships may now emit as much pollution as all the world’s 760 million cars”. Meanwhile, Danish politicians last year accused A.P. Moller-Maersk Group, owner of the world’s largest fleet of container carrying vessels, of emitting as much CO2 as the whole of Denmark. And James Corbett, marine policy professor at the University of Delaware, asserts that ship-generated pollution causes 60,000 premature deaths a year in the US alone.C

Suddenly, what environmentalist Jonathon Porritt calls the “joyful, unregulated dream world” of the shipping industry is being torpedoed by claims that Europe’s governments are ignoring the risks of harmful pollutants routinely released into the wind from ships’ funnels. “Ship pollution affects the health of communities in coastal and inland regions around the world, yet pollution from ships remains one of the least regulated parts of our global transportation system,” says Corbett. 

In the face of such charges – and, more importantly, the likelihood that the EU will call for shipping emissions to be included in the new UN Framework Convention on Climate Change – the shipping industry has been attempting to frame a coherent response. Robert Ashdown, head of the technical division at the British Chamber of Shipping, says: “The reality is that international shipping is a highly regulated, responsible industry that delivers 90% of world trade for only 2.7% of global carbon emissions.” Indeed, Ashdown reckons that governments should be “actively encouraging a shift from road and air to shipping as part of the battle against global warming”. Estimates from outside the industry, put shipping’s CO2 emissions at 1.12 billion tonnes a year, equivalent to 3.5%–4.5% of global emissions. 

But even Ashdown accepts that governments, the shipping industry, and the UN must “dramatically reduce shipping’s negative health impacts.” The trick, he says, is that governments must do this “while maintaining the capacity to transport cargoes essential to clothe, heat and feed their populations”. And during the deepest recession for 60 years. 

The sole contender for the role of global regulator is the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a UK-based UN body that was created in 1948 and, in what its detractors say was a sign of things to come, took 11 years to hold its first meeting. Although environmental concerns have been slow to work their way up the IMO’s agenda, the body has at least provided a timetable for reducing the sulphur content of marine fuel (known as bunker fuel) over the next decade, a move that will slash harmful sulphur oxide (SOx) emissions.  

The IMO’s success in unifying member states on SOx reduction could be the blueprint for progress in the larger issue of controlling and cutting shipping’s CO2 emissions. The industry and environmentalists will get a sense of which way the wind is blowing this month when the IMO’s environment committee discuss ways to limit shipping’s impact on climate change.  

Among the leading ideas are: a global levy, on bunker fuel, an option proposed by Denmark in 2008 and reportedly favoured by Japan. Supporters say money raised could be used to help developing countries cut their greenhouse gas emissions. The downside is it would raise the cost of trade. The preferred approach of some major industry players, is a Cap-and-Trade of emissions trading.  

More wide-reaching proposals include fuel-saving changes in ship design. Technologies already proven, or theoretically possible, include innovative propeller designs and ‘air lubrication’, which creates a cushion of air under a ship’s hull to reduce drag through the water. However, sceptics state that if the technologies actually significantly cut fuel consumption, industry would be adopting them now without official encouragement. A variation on ship design is wind power, with trials on relatively small merchant vessels suggesting towing kits could cut bunker fuel consumption some 30%.  

Another idea gaining traction is marine exhaust gas cleaning systems, ‘scrubbers’, which treat exhaust gases before they are released into the atmosphere, reducing pollutants such as SOx and particulate matter (PM). Although this technology has focused on removing noxious material, environmental technology firms have suggested it could be adapted to cut CO2 emissions. Andy Osbourne, business development director of UK firm Krystallon has said the technology has the potential to cut CO2 emissions. In 2009, Singapore-based Ecospec Global Technology echoed this.  

Of course, the most obvious solution would be to change the specifications of marine fuel: Most of this is heavy fuel oil, derived from the residue left by refining and sometimes characterised as particularly noxious and polluting. Some in the industry argue though that the IMO’s target reductions are so radical that heavy, residual fuel oil will be unable to meet the new specifications and ships will be forced to burn much more expensive, cleaner, distillate product. Others have called for ships to be required to burn ‘clean’, distillate fuel, whether or not fuel oil can be treated to meet the new low sulphur standards. But the issue, in terms of CO2 reduction, is far from clear.  

Some, including the body that represents independent tanker owners, say ships should switch to distillate fuel immediately, which would cut SOx and CO2 emissions. However, opponents, say that although a switch to more energy-efficient distillates would mean burning less fuel, CO2 emissions would actually increase as refineries worked to meet the increased demand for distillate products. 

Switching to distillates would have health implications too. Researchers now believe that the most dangerous element escaping into the air via ships’ funnels  is PM. These ‘primary sulphate’ microscopic particles, less than 1.5 microns or millionth of a metre in size, are directly linked to the presence of sulphur in bunker fuel. They can travel extremely long distances and, unlike bigger dust grains, can remain in the lungs. Scientists agree that PM emissions can be carcinogenic in certain micron sizes and can contribute to breathing problems. The specifications for distillate fuels now being considered for the shipping industry have a far lower sulphur content than is currently allowed in residual fuel oil, and would drastically cut the volume of primary sulphates produced by ship engines. A switch to scrubbers would also cut the output of dangerous particulates from funnels.  

The big danger is that if the IMO fails to reach a solution, governments may decide the shipping industry is incapable of facing its responsibilities, clearing the way for the fragmented, regionally based legislation that shipping companies claim would be disastrous for their industry and world trade.  

shipshaping

Some of the innovators that could shape the future of the maritime transport sector. 

Krystallon
UK-based Krystallon has one of the only marine exhaust-gas scrubbing systems in commercial operation. It claims it removes 100% of sulphur oxide and 80% of particles. 

DK Group  
Netherlands-based DK Group is developing fuel saving technology for ocean-going ships. Its Air Cavity System, which creates an air cushion under a vessel’s hull to reduce drag  in the water, underwent sea trials last year.  It claims the system can give fuel savings of  up to 15%, allowing reductions of harmful emissions and CO2. 

A.P. Moller-Maersk 
The Danish shipping giant is working with one of the world’s leading aerospace companies to develop biofuels for ships and aircraft. “We have engaged in dialogue with Boeing on the use of biofuel to see if there might be synergies between shipping and aviation,” a senior Moller-Maersk official said in April.  

Ecospec Global Technology 
The Singapore-based company claims to be developing an exhaust-gas scrubbing system that can reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide, sulphur dioxide and particulate matter in a single process system. The claims are still being evaluated in the industry. If they were validated, the technology would be a major breakthrough. 

SkySails  
The German company has developed and tested a towing-kite. Last year a small cargo ship used the system on 12,000-nautical-mile round voyage across the Atlantic proving,  according to the company, that the 160m2  kite could cut bunker fuel consumption by between 10% and 35%.