Environmental regulations in shipping: Policies leaning towards globalization of scrubbers deserve scrutiny

Abstract

Emission regulations for Sulphur oxides (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are motivated by health-and other environmental objectives in local and regional settings, while global warming concerns motivate policies for carbon dioxide (CO2). We point out that the direction chosen by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) -to tighten SOx and NOx limits globally -carries important risks. First, extending to a global setting the present regulations in coastal emission control areas (ECAs, in North America and Northern Europe)gives negligible or negative environmental benefits, and raises global warming impacts.Second, 'end-of-pipe' solutions, such as scrubbing and tuning, become dominant responses, and they reduce energy efficiency. Third, the adoption of these end-of-pipe solutions carry risks of deflecting attention from development of cleaner fuels and improving energy efficiency. Distinguishing local environmental benefits from global ones is important in general, and our research concludes that in the case of shipping, this distinction better serves the needs of the local environment, the global climate, and conserves on abatement costs.

Sulphur abatement globally in maritime shipping

“…HFO is mainly used by the largest ships, corresponding to 25 % of the approximately 120 000 vessels in the global fleet (Lindstad and Eskeland, 2016). The remaining 25 % of the fuel is consumed by a range of different vessels, generally smaller in size, representing 75 % of the vessels in numbers.…”

“…This is lower than a few years back in time (Lindstad et al, 2015b), which indicates that the technology is becoming more mature. The starting cost for a hybrid scrubber is 50 % higher than for an open loop scrubber, while the additional cost per kW installed is of the same magnitude as an open loop (Lindstad and Eskeland, 2016;Faber 2016;Wärtsilä, 2017). With increased use of scrubbers, there will be ports where open loop will be banned from being used, while hybrid scrubbers running in closed loop mode will be allowed.…”

“…Fuels considered are typically HFO, LNG, diesel, biofuels and methanol. Lindstad and Eskeland (2016) show that the "HFO and scrubbers" option gives lowest cost for large vessels. LNG is an option for new-buildings, if the LNG price is equal to, or lower than, the HFO price (Lindstad et al, 2015b), while it tends to be too costly for retrofitting (Acciaro, 2014;Lindstad et al, 2015b).…”

“…Previous studies of maritime fuel emission regulations have mainly focused on alternative fuels and technical options (Brynjolf et al, 2014;Jiang et al, 2014;Acciaro, 2014;Lindstad et al, 2015a, Lindstad et al, 2015bLindstad and Eskeland 2016). Fuels considered are typically HFO, LNG, diesel, biofuels and methanol.…”

A New Perspective at the Ship-Air-Sea-Interface: The Environmental Impacts of Exhaust Gas Scrubber Discharge

“…This will depend on legal regulations as well as economic aspects such as price spread between marine gas oil and heavy fuel oil, investment costs in case of existing ships (retrofit), and new build ships (Jiang et al, 2014;Lindstad et al, 2015;Lindstad and Eskeland, 2016). Accurately forecasting the effect of scrubbers on ship emission in future decades requires merging a number of relevant techniques into a comprehensive model.…”