Low Carbon Shipping - A Systems Approach
Lead Research Organisation:
Newcastle University
Department Name: Marine Science and Technology
Abstract
Abstracts are not currently available in GtR for all funded research. This is normally because the abstract was not required at the time of proposal submission, but may be because it included sensitive information such as personal details.
Organisations
Publications
Chandra Lalwani (Author)
(2012)
Optimizing end-to-end maritime supply chains: a carbon footprint perspective
Chiara Paola Donegani (Co-Author)
(2012)
Ports as drivers for a sustainable maritime sector
Daniel John Mangan (Author)
(2012)
Improving the environmental performance of maritime transport in global supply chains
Daniel John Mangan (Co-Author)
(2011)
Logistics and low carbon shipping
Daniel John Mangan (Co-Author)
(2010)
Logistics considerations in a systems approach to low carbon shipping
Gibbs D
(2014)
The role of sea ports in end-to-end maritime transport chain emissions
in Energy Policy
John Dinwoodie (Co-Author)
(2011)
Low Carbon Shipping: forecasting oil tanker movements involving the UK
John Dinwoodie (Co-Author)
(2011)
Low carbon shipping: dry bulk movements involving the UK
John Dinwoodie (Co-Author)
(2010)
Slow steaming and low carbon shipping: revolution or recession?
John Dinwoodie (Co-Author)
(2011)
Low Carbon Shipping: Oil Tanker Movements involving the UK
Mark Bennett (Co-Author)
(2011)
Origin and destination of maritime container flows to and from the United Kingdom
Melanie Landamore (Author)
(2013)
What is the Likely Future Demand for Shipping
in tbc not yet in print
Melanie Landamore (Author)
(2013)
Wider Environmental Costs and Impacts of Shipping
in tbc not yet published
Melanie Landamore (Author)
(2011)
Sustainable Shipping ? A Way Forward? Developing Economic Imperatives in an International Market
Melanie Landamore (Author)
(2013)
What is the Likely Future Demand for Shipping
Melanie Landamore (Co-Author)
(2010)
Low Carbon Shipping - A Systems Approach: Conceptualising a full cost environmental model for sustainable shipping
Michael Woodward (Co-Author)
(2012)
Optimal propellor design when accounting for the manoeuvring response due to environmental loading
Nina Laurie (Author)
(2011)
Mapping shipping activity in the UK
Patrick Rigot-Muller (Author)
(2012)
Assessing emissions of UK international maritime traffic
Patrick Rigot-Muller (Author)
(2012)
Mapping UK international seaborne trade and traffic
Rigot-Muller P
(2013)
Optimising end-to-end maritime supply chains: a carbon footprint perspective
in The International Journal of Logistics Management
Trodden D
(2016)
Accounting for ship manoeuvring motion during propeller selection to reduce CO2 emissions
in Ocean Engineering
| Description | Newcastle University's participation in the UCL led Low Carbon Shipping consortium comprised inputs across three work packages as follows: WP2: 1) Study focussed on the development of a methodology for improved propeller efficiency by 'design for in-service conditions. The aim is to determine if a marine propeller's efficiency can be improved by the philosophy of design for in-service conditions. Ship's motions and response to a seaway were modelled with non-linear ordinary differential equations and solved in the time-domain using a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method. A modified Blade-Element Momentum method models the thrust and torque on the propeller in non-uniform flow. A new propeller optimisation cycle has been proposed for design for ship-in-service conditions. The approach provides a good estimation as to the sea-margin, and also an analysis tool for propeller design by accounting for the drift angle and flow vectors at the propeller plane. Results depend heavily on the ship type and operating profile. For ships which are susceptible to large forces from weather, e.g. container ships, an improvement in efficiency over the basis propeller could be as much as 1.5%, whereas a laden VLCC may improve by 0.5%. 2) The underlying philosophy of this work is that the net carbon dioxide emission for the ship is reliant on; firstly, the carbon budget of the fuel being used; secondly, the manner in which it is used considering actual (rather than assumed ideal) engine operation; and thirdly, what is done with the exhaust products post-combustion. The principal aim in this research was therefore to undertake a three-fold investigation for low-carbon fuel-engine-exhaust systems concepts. Key findings were: 3.1 Future Fuel Usage: Unlike many other studies of this nature, and indeed, the premise behind emerging regulations which generally only consider the carbon cost of fuels on a "pump-to-hull" basis, the research here considered the total carbon footprint of different fuel types used in the full range of marine engine types on a "well-to-hull" basis (or "field-to-hull" in the case of bio-fuels), which therefore includes the up-stream carbon cost of fuel production and transportation to the vessel. On this basis, there is strong indication that existing residual and distillate marine fuels are actually already relatively "carbon-effective" choices. A wide variety of bio-fuels were considered and under some conditions these can offer a net reduction in carbon cost, however, many do not if considered on a "field-to-hull" basis due to the carbon-intensive production processes (including fertilisers, farming methods, etc.). Given the competition between bio-fuel and food production, there is also a limit on how much bio-fuel could actually be used for fuelling shipping transportation and in some cases, the use of bio-fuels can increase the emission of species aside from carbon dioxide. The best performers in terms of carbon-footprint were blends with existing fossil fuels. (L)NG as a fuel also can provide carbon (and other) emission reduction benefits as compared to traditional marine fuels, however, again, the picture is not as clear as might be supposed due to the highly carbon-intensive production cost of fossil fuel LNG. Hydrogen usage as a fuel was also considered, however, under existing production methods this too can be carbon-intensive, although, if renewable energy sources can be used for hydrogen production then this provides a realistic possibility for a net reduction in carbon footprint. 3.2 Engine and emissions modelling concepts: A variety of existing engine and emission models were examined and some initial comparisons with experimental results were made. It is apparent that on an engine-by-engine basis, highly sophisticated modelling tools can provide accurate results in terms of engine performance, but these models are not necessarily concerned with precise emissions products. Relatively accurate emission prediction models on the other hand often only focus on one (or a limited sub-set of) emission species and require a very accurate time-dependant description of the in-cylinder combustion conditions and are not necessarily coupled with engine performance prediction tools. To predict/model emission production over the wide range of ship engines, on a vessel-by-vessel basis, a compromise between accuracy and computational and data-input effort is required. 3.3 Future emission control measures (carbon capture and storage on-board):While some of the techniques/systems for carbon capture did show some potential feasibility (e.g. amine absorption technology) in these terms, the fact that the captured carbon requires further processing for storage and the need for its retention on board the vessel, leads to the ultimate conclusion that, in reality, an on-board CCS system does not appear feasible given current methods and technologies. WP3 (Logistics): We focused in particular on LoLo containers and completed the following tasks: we mapped the 'as-is' shipping activity in the UK; catalogued port-related sustainability initiatives; estimated port-related CO2 emissions and the emissions associated with UK-centric shipping activity (all modes); assessed the impact of transhipment on the CO2 emissions associated with UK-centric shipping activity (containers only); we mapped supply chains for different types of containerised products and estimated the share of maritime related CO2 emissions (containers only) (in conjunction with WP4); and finally we examined the relationship between transport logistics and future ship designs. WP4 (Environmental and Economic Costs of Shipping): For the majority of ship carbon abatement technologies considered, the GHG emission savings from the reduction in fuel consumption are dominant for HFO, MDO, MGO or LNG. Modelling of industry-wide take-up of measures to mitigate operational CO2 allows for identification of routes to global efficiency gains, however, wider impacts from the build, end of life, and maintenance of ships can become significant when action is taken to reduce fuel consumption. Where the potential savings are greatest, e.g. Flettner rotor, Sails and Kites, there is also the greatest opportunity for the embodied environmental cost of the system to become significant, often exacerbated by regular maintenance and replacement requirements. Applying an artificial slow steaming scenario to all shipping demonstrated that in the event of a prolonged reduction in ship speed, as evidenced 2007-2013, the significance of emissions from shipbuilding increases, as it does when ships are scrapped early in search of efficiency gains. Increased take-up of very low CO2 fuels (measured at point of use) such as hydrogen, biofuels or nuclear power will also refocus attention on the build phase of the ship, including any abatement technologies. It seems highly likely that some abatement measures would become carbon abatement neutral, or even negative, if a near zero emission (at point of use) fuel were used, although they are likely to remain economically viable as a fuel saving device. Full LCAs are necessarily limited in their scope and very focused, this work presents a broad model which estimates the greatest contributions to GHG emissions and environmental impact of a wide range of ship types, measures for mitigation of CO2 emissions, and other key factors to allow for comparison of options, and the likely associated economic cost. Application of economic incentives to attempt to reduce environmental impact from shipping, given existing regulations concerning NOx and SOx emissions, as a fuel levy or voyage CO2 levy are appropriate in the short term, considering the current makeup of the global fleet. Applying a carbon levy to emissions from shipbuilding (for example as a levy on new ships) highlights a reduction in the apparent economies of scale within shipping GHG reduction. A proposed model for levying full environmental impact will better embody incentivisation of true emission reduction. Upstream emissions from shipbuilding have the potential to become significant in a very low carbon future scenario, particularly where the uptake of low carbon fuels is high. |
| Exploitation Route | The research is already being applied by certain actors in the maritimer transport chain who, in conjunction with their customers, are using the research to achieve reduced end-to-end emissions reduction in the maritime transport chain. We have already facilitated two workshops with various industry stakeholders. Through the published GloTraM model, Newcastle University's work in WP's 2 & 4 allows for actors throughout the shipping industry and policy makers to understand the impact and cost of measures to mitigate Carbon emissions from shipping. WP4 modelling of the through life environmental impact of shipping and its available carbon mitigation measures, and their associated environmental and economic cost equally informs policy makers at all levels (e.g. UK government, EU, IMO, UNFCCC) and stakeholders throughout the shipping industry of the global cost-benefit balance inherent within shipping's attempts to mitigate carbon emissions. Assessment of balanced environmental impact highlights not only opportunities to reduce shipping's global impact, but also unintended consequences of efforts to mitigate fuel combustion-derived emissions. Our research shows to the various actors along the maritime transport chain (container shipping lines, ports, freight forwarders, freight recipients) firstly the contribution of their node or link in the chain to end-to-end carbon emissions and secondly how this can be mitigated. Through the published GloTraM model, Newcastle University's work in WP's 2 & 4 allows for actors throughout the shipping industry and policy makers to understand the impact and cost of measures to mitigate Carbon emissions from shipping. Published papers and conference publications have addressed the potential for development of a full cost accounting model for shipping, considered the research question "What is the likely future demand for shipping?", collaborated with Plymouth University on the macro and micro economic modelling of shipping, in particular demand driver prediction for dry bulk and liquid bulk trades, and the impact of through life GHG and balanced environmental impact models on cost-benefit decisions normally focused on fuel combustion derived emissions only, particularly decisions aimed at mitigating climate change. Further development and application of the derived models also takes place through existing projects, and follow-on EPSRC funding. |
| Sectors | Energy,Environment,Transport |
| URL | http://lowcarbonshipping.co.uk/ |
| Description | Contribution to knowledge through publications and dissemination, especially via two recent key journal publications (IJLM and Energy Policy). Improved best practice among our industry partners. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2013 |
| Sector | Transport |
| Impact Types | Economic |
| Description | Lloyd's Register collaboration |
| Amount | £50,000 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Lloyd's Register |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 05/2011 |
| End | 04/2013 |
| Description | Lloyd's Register collaboration |
| Amount | £50,000 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Lloyd's Register |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 01/2011 |
| End | 12/2013 |
| Description | Shipping in a Changing Climate |
| Amount | £369,037 (GBP) |
| Funding ID | EP/K039253/1 |
| Organisation | Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) |
| Sector | Public |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | |