North Sea Ministerial Meeting

North Sea Ministerial Meeting

on Environmental Impacts of Shipping and Fisheries

Issue Group on Sustainable Shipping

Hamburg, 1-2 March

IGSS MARCH 05/3/

Global Green Shipping Initiatives: Audit and Overview

Presented by WWF

2005-02-18

Background:

WWF welcomes the progress made on the issue of the clean ship approach (BD §48) within IGSS so far.

Reference is made to the background document on the clean ship approach (IGSS 05/3/1) presented by Norway and the Netherlands.

Emphasis is given to Chapter 3“Force Field and Actor Analysis” by which constrainers and drivers are addressed.WWF would like to recall that the IGSS SEPT 04 meeting in Copenhagen discussed the importance of connecting the Clean Ship Approach with incentives(see §3.16 Summary Record). In light of the discussion, WWF announced to come up with global audit and overview report on green shipping initiatives.

The report concludes that a more co-ordinated and inclusive approach is needed if the potential benefits of green ship initiatives are to be realised.

Action requested:

The IGSS is invited to take note of this report, and includeitsfindings in the discussion about possible follow-up actionson §48 BD to be considered by Ministers.

Global Green Shipping Initiatives: Audit and Overview

David Johnson (a), Kate Pike (a) and Simon Walmsley (b)

(a)School of Maritime & Coastal Studies, Southampton Institute, East Park Terrace, Southampton, Hampshire, SO14 OYN. Tel: +44 (0)23 80 319752 email:

(b)WWF-UK, Panda House, Weyside Park, Godalming, Surrey, GU7 1XR . Tel: +44(0)1483 426444 email:

Abstract

In an age where the environmental performance of shipping is under increasingly intensive scrutiny, green shipping initiatives can be viewed as a generic term for efforts intended to encourage excellence rather than punish under-achievement or negligence. Primary industry drivers are perceived to be public relations, compliance and cost savings, with environmental protection as an outcome rather than an ambition. Efforts external to the shipping industry are part of a wider environmental improvement agenda.

An audit of the initiatives suggests that they fall into one of three categories. Firstly, ‘technofix’ initiatives, mostly led by flag states, encourage the design and implementation of improved or cutting-edge environmental management technology. Secondly, accreditation for high specification equipment and high quality operational management, led by port states and international shipping bodies, is encouraged through economic rewards and external recognition. Thirdly, a number of more holistic, proactive initiatives are co-ordinated by NGOs.

Whilst all these initiatives are laudable there is little evidence to confirm that they are making a real difference. Public perception of the environmental performance of shipping remains sceptical and/or unengaged. Economic advantages of good environmental performance are difficult to substantiate. Substantive environmental improvements have largely been achieved through use of legislative ‘stick’ rather than any reward ‘carrot’.

The report concludes that a more co-ordinated and inclusive approach is needed if the potential benefits of green ship initiatives are to be realised. To achieve this it is suggested that WWF should co-ordinate an approach to the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and/or initiate an accepted universal initiative. Financial support for educational work to raise seafarers’ awareness is proposed to achieve lasting change in the long-term. Finally, further specific research into links between legislation and incentives for ship recycling is recommended.

Author Keywords:Green shipping initiatives, Eco ships, Sustainable shipping

1. Introduction

Sustainable transport is recognised as one of the biggest challenges of the 21st century. This report represents an audit of green shipping initiatives based primarily on a desk study. The majority of information is drawn from initiative specific websites but two recent international conferences have also addressed the subject[1]. Interpretation of information gathered has been undertaken with input from a roundtable practitioner discussion held at Warsash Maritime Centre UK (June 2004) and selected expert interviews.

1.1 Background

It is recognised that whilst shipping is relatively safe and clean, compared to other transport modes, the industry does have an impact on the environment. The precautionary principle, sustainable development policies and ideals, greater public concern about global environmental issues and pressure from other sectors all serve to reinforce the need for the industry to ‘keep its house in order’. To a greater extent this has been achieved through the Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) of IMO using legislative instruments, codes and guidance[2]. Pollution prevention is further effected by national legislation and enforcement, and appropriate contingency measures. By identifying key pollution pathways (albeit perhaps the most visible rather than necessarily those having the most impact) legislation has targeted shortcomings in ship design and operation. The latest stipulations include requirements for oily water separators, the double hull mandate, the MARPOL Annex V ban on the discharge of plastic and establishment of a growing network of Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas. Legislation has been supported and enabled by technological advances. In general, therefore, significant progress has been made in terms of effective environmental management, with the consensus of the wider shipping industry, but much of it is reactive and based on a command and control philosophy. Furthermore, shortcomings persist, including inconsistent application of international legislation, flags of convenience whose ships are often manned by substandard crews, patchy enforcement of regulations with insufficient penalties and a legacy of older less seaworthy vessels.

1.2 What are ‘green’ shipping initiatives?

Within the last decade a number of proactive efforts to encourage environmental management improvements within the shipping industry have emerged. These have variously and collectively been referred to as green shipping initiatives. For the purposes of this report they have been treated as distinct from the structured environmental management currently being implemented by many individual ports holdings groups, quality assurance systems (such as ISO 14001) and the rules of vessels’ classification societies. Arguably they have the potential to address environmental impacts associated with shipping for which legislation is new and/or emerging. The initiatives are diverse but can be grouped as follows:

1. Technological investment - Initiatives aimed at reducing or obviating harmful environmental emissions, including the development of ships which under normal conditions have no discharges that will harm the environment and which, under exceptional conditions, incorporate means of environmental protection in the event of collisions or groundings;
2. Economic / PR advantage - Initiatives aimed at conferring an economic/PR advantage to ships and/or companies who conform to preset target-led standards of construction and/or operation; and
3. Awareness raising - Initiatives aimed at raising awareness and encouraging environmental management improvements across the sector.

1.3 Drivers

None of the schemes is compulsory. Advantages of voluntary involvement cited by the proponents of the initiatives echo those advocated for similar environmental management schemes variously being adopted by business generally. More specifically (in theory) these include:

1. Image/PR – leading edge companies will attract ethical business; environmental efficiency is strongly linked with safety; a relationship with environmental regulators is important and corporate sustainability reporting relies on good news and continual progress;
2. Compliance/cost savings – sound environmental management reduces the risk of fines and law suits; specific liability improvements can be recognised by insurers and other service industries; cost savings are possible particularly when attention is given to avoiding/minimising waste and operating efficiency; and
3. Environmental protection – on the basis that the greater public good relies on a healthy environment, ‘green credentials’ are likely to influence subsequent environmental standards.

2. Current Green Shipping Initiatives

Brief details of each of the initiatives identified are given below. These are presented in chronological order within the categories highlighted earlier. It should be noted that some initiatives have spawned others, and in some cases they represent the vanguard of what has become appropriate technology and/or accepted practice.

2.1 Technological investment

Green ships research programme (Norway)

This ground-breaking initiative adopted a scientific approach to identifying and tackling ship generated pollutant sources. In 1991 funding of US$ 22 million, 75% industry and 25% government sourced, was directed at technological research and development to reduce environmental impacts. For example, to achieve target reductions in NOx emissions the programme adopted a three strand approach – adapting and modifying engines, treating exhaust gases, and modifying fuels.

Mair (1995) summarised key achievements of the programme as:

Reductions of 15-20% for NOx (by engine technology) and 90% for sulphur and 50% for particulate matter (by seawater washing of exhaust gases);

Segregation and crushing of glass as part of reductions in waste volumes; and

Design changes to reduce vapour emission losses from tankers by 30 – 50%.

Ecoship (Sweden)

Another early innovator in green ship design was the Volvo Penta-led Swedish consortium’s small ‘environmentally friendly’ containership – the Ecoship. Initiated in 1995, and taking a life cycle approach, the key elements of this project were:

A new patented hull shape – producing a 10% reduction in hull resistance compared to the then existing conventional designs, with reduced wake formation and consequently less erosion;

Low NOx diesel-electric propulsion – low fuel consumption and lower emissions (15% less power requirement) running on low-sulphur diesel; and

A complete double-hull and closed sewage system.

This project illustrates the integrated nature of environmental improvements. The ecoship design simplified construction, reducing costs, as well as conferring better seagoing performance in heavy seas. Power output is matched to demand by a management system achieving optimum efficiency. Subsequent refinements include highly developed electrical distribution and selective catalytic exhaust converter systems. The diesel-electric propulsion system also optimises cargo space (engines and generators are placed in the bows or on deck). The consortium promoted ecoship as having advantages for the owner, freight purchaser, industry and society as a whole.

TRESHIP(Technologies for Reduced Environmental Impact from Ships) (Norway)

This initiative, co-ordinated by the Norwegian Shipowners Association, was an EC 5th Framework research project intended to scope and identify initiatives for future funding. As one of three thematic areas the project considered ship design and operation, including green ship design to explore the potential for applying fuel cells to ships and designs to significantly reduce emissions and discharges in the event of grounding or collision. For the former prototype demonstration vessels were advocated. For the latter the development of energy absorbing side and bottom structures, ‘collision friendly’ bow structures, and further research into the benefits of ship concepts using lightweight materials.

Super Ecoships (Japan)

Still in the prototype phase this design includes technology that has been in place for some time in the cruise industry, namely gas turbines and contra-rotating podded propulsors driven by electric motors. Environmental benefits are energy efficiency and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. In effect this project represents an investment in technology transfer to domestic transport systems and coastal ships.

Evergreen Post-Panamax Ships (Taiwan)

The Taiwanese company, Evergreen Marine Corporation, are setting up a voluntary initiative targeted at the environmental integrity of large container ships. To that end the Evergreen group have placed an order with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd in Japan for ten post-Panamax ships, the first of which is due for delivery in 2005. These 6,724 TEU vessels will be known as the S-class. The intention is that they are built under the GREENSHIP design concept (from the Evergreen group), which involves the use of a double-hull approach for the oil fuel tanks, perceived as much safer if the ship has a collision or grounding. Rather than at the sides or bottom of the ship, fuel tanks will be located along the transverse bulkhead. The vessels are due to be in service by 2007 and will operate between Europe and the Far East.

Green Scrapping Policy (China and The Netherlands)

An agreement, to take effect from 2003, setting new regulations and guidelines for environmentally acceptable shipbreaking in China. A TradeWinds report [1], identified China as ‘ the preferred [shipbreaking] choice for larger high profile tanker and containership owners, which often accept slightly lower prices in exchange for less pressure from international environmental organisations’. Green scrapping requires appropriate tools and facilities. Some companies, such as P&O Nedlloyd contribute financial and technical support to ensure responsible scrapping.

2.2 Economic / PR advantage

Green Shipping Award (Rotterdam)

The Green Award Foundation was set up in 1994 as an initiative of the Rotterdam Municipal Port Authority and the Dutch Ministry of Transport and Water Management. Independent since 2000, the Foundation has established market incentives that promote quality shipping and is unique in that cost reductions are made at contracting ports for vessels that have achieved this award. There is an annual cost to the ship owner covering application and audit services of approximately 11,000 euros.

The Green Award Initiative is seen as a pioneer in the field of promoting a maritime, environmental and safety conscious culture and has been the inspiration for later similar initiatives including the Qualship 21 initiative of the United States Coast Guard. Eligibility is limited to high quality operators, rewarding them for compliance with international and national legislation, the achievement of specific requirements for the crew and management, and attainment of requirements for the technical equipment of vessels [3].

Incentives include a percentage discount off port fees at 45 participating ports in The Netherlands, Lithuania, Spain, Portugal, South Africa, Germany and on the Shetland Islands. Additional discounts are received variously from pilot organisations, tug boat companies, chandlery services, port reception facilities and line handling. The awards distinguish the vessels that have achieved them and confer environmental recognition with customers, service providers and ports. The promoters hope that other ports and related industries will recognise this award. Currently there are about 165 vessels that are certified, belonging to over 30 ship owners. Inspection and certification is applicable for crude oil tankers, product tankers and bulk carriers with a minimum deadweight of 20,000 tons (Greenaward, 2004). Increasingly double-hulled vessels are dominating the Green Award fleet.[3] Favourable publicity often accompanies vessel qualification into what is perceived as an ‘exclusive’ club [5].

Blue Angel (Germany)

Launched in 2002, this development of an integrated and internationally applicable incentive scheme for quality shipping represents the German version of the Green Award. The German Federal Environment Agency adopted a list of quality shipping criteria to give a rating for environmentally friendly ships, promoted as a Quality Shipping Initiative qualifying vessels are accredited with a Blue Angel ‘Label’. Like the Green Award the criteria include not only ship specification and equipment but also company operation and personnel management. The project has been a collaborative effort with representative input from ‘the ship owners association (VDR), a labour union (ver.di), the German Ship Safety and Accident Prevention Administration (See-BG Schiffsicherheitsabteilung), the classification society Germanischer Lloyd (GL), the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF), the Federal Environment Agency (UBA) and GAUSS’ [2].

The scheme is available to seagoing vessels of all types and trades. Currently it stands as a benchmark for marketing purposes. In future Blue Angel hopes to offer recognition of green construction and financial incentives in addition to the 7% discount on all GAUSS fees for advanced training courses.

Qualship 21 (USA)

Qualship 21 is the United States Coast Guard initiative to eliminate substandard shipping and to provide ‘targeting schemes’ [4]to identify poor quality vessels. Under the initiative it is felt that quality vessels should not be subject to the same annual inspection as sub-standard vessels have to undergo. A quality vessel is associated with a well-run company; has been classed with an organisation that has a good track record; is registered with a Flag state with a superior Port state control record; and has an outstanding Port state control record in US waters.

The initiative applies to non-US (i.e. foreign-flagged vessels) ships, with an aspiration to develop a similar initiative for the US flagged fleet. Qualship 21 distinguishes between different types of ships – namely freight, tank and passenger vessels. Approved vessels receive an initial 2-year certificate entitling them to a less rigorous inspection regime. Benefits can be summarised as:

Freight ships – limited Port state control oversight (biannual examinations);

Tank ships – annual examinations retained but discretion to reduce the scope of mid-period examinations; and

Passenger ships – use as a marketing tool only

Unlike the Green Award, no reduction in fees is currently offered by Qualship 21, although discussions are ongoing with the American Association of Port Authorities. Transgressions result in revoking of a vessel’s designation.

Voluntary class notations and certification

Both Det Norske Veritas (DNV) and Lloyd’s Register (LR) have initiated schemeswhereby the classification society will give approval when environmental quality measures (i.e. achievement of zero discharge for a number of the pollution components) are built into the vessel’s design . DNV have two environmental protection class notations, namely:

1. Clean Design – prepared for ships trading in coastal waters (in particular cruiseship and ferry new builds); and
2. Clean - prepared primarily for ships engaged in deep sea trading

Lloyds Register’s Environmental Protection notation recognises ships’ compliance with LR’s provisional rules for Environmental Protection (originally published in 1998). It applies to both new builds and operational vessels.