Fuel consumption and air emissions in one of the world’s largest commercial fisheries

Environmental performance of Cantabrian (Northern Spain) pelagic fisheries: Assessment of purse seine and minor art fleets under a life cycle approach

“…These outcomes are in the range of values available in current literature (Bastardie et al, 2022). It is worth mentioning that the comparison between studies is not straightforward as literature suggests that FUI varies greatly between fisheries targeting different species, employing different gears and vessels with distinct characteristics, as well as fishing in disparate regions using diverse strategies (Chassot et al, 2021). Small pelagic fisheries are broadly regarded to be one of the lowest impact fisheries, with purse seining usually highlighted as the most fuelefficient fishing method (Sandison et al, 2021), especially when compared to higher trophic level species caught by trawl or longline , even though the improved efficiency of mid-water trawling as compared to bottom trawling (Ruiz-Salmón et al, 2021b).…”

Driving Factors and Spatiotemporal Characteristics of CO2 Emissions from Marine Fisheries in China: A Commonly Neglected Carbon-Intensive Sector

“…From the perspective of influencing factors, CO 2 emissions from marine fisheries are directly tied to fuel consumption, and fuel consumption by fishing vessels has been demonstrated to be an appropriate indicator for measuring CO 2 emissions from fishing activities [33][34][35]. Fuel is needed to propel the vessel, handle the catch on board and freeze it, and provide electricity for the fishermen on board [36]. Other upstream fishing processes, such as vessel construction and maintenance, gear manufacturing, and bait supply, as well as downstream post-landing activities such as processing, packing, and transportation, all consume energy and produce emissions [37].…”

Is FAD fishing an economic trap? Effects of seasonal closures and other management measures on a purse‐seine tuna fleet

“…Surprisingly, based on individual purse-seine data on fuel consumption by type of fishing, the FAD strategy proved to be more energy-consuming than the FSC strategy, presumably because vessels were moving more frequently at full speed (Basurko et al, 2022;Chassot et al, 2021;Maufroy, 2016). Yet, this would not degrade the vessel profitability either, because of this higher efficiency of FADs over a FSC strategy (Hamjan & Mallawa, 2020).…”

“…Some authors may consider that FAD fishing should result in lower fuel consumption per tonne of landed fish because of a reduced searching time (Dagorn et al., 2013; Hanich et al., 2019; Holmes et al., 2019; Parker et al., 2015). Surprisingly, based on individual purse‐seine data on fuel consumption by type of fishing, the FAD strategy proved to be more energy‐consuming than the FSC strategy, presumably because vessels were moving more frequently at full speed (Basurko et al., 2022; Chassot et al., 2021; Maufroy, 2016). Yet, this would not degrade the vessel profitability either, because of this higher efficiency of FADs over a FSC strategy (Hamjan & Mallawa, 2020).…”