Upload
andy-appan
View
609
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
INV 700 Bn$ PROFIT 2000 Bn$/Yr CER 10 BnT/Yr AUTOMOTIVE, CAR, TRUCK,SHIP,FERRY,VLCC,PP DOUBLE SPEED, 1/3 FUEL for SAME TON-HP 360 KMPL BIKE, 60 KMPL CAR, 30 KMPL TRUCK 600 KMPH RAIL 330, 660 KNOTS SHIP,FERRY,VLCC PP 1/3 FUEL CER 3360 T/Yr/MW VC FUND 10 Mn$
Citation preview
1
July, 2009
Climate Change :A Challenge for Engineers !
2
What is the greenhouse effect?
3
What is causing global warming?
The six greenhouse gases with the highest warming potential are:
•Carbon dioxide - CO2
•Methane - CH4
•Nitrous oxide - N2O
•Hydro fluorocarbons - HFCs
•Per fluorocarbons - PFCs
•Sulphur hexafluoride - SF6
Of these gases, CO2 is by far the most abundant
4
The impact:
- Increased temperature
- Sea level rise due to melting of permanent ice caps and glaciers
-More violent and frequent weather phenomena
4 CLIMATE CHANGE Source: IPCC FAR 2007
5
NASA 2006
Time is running out …
Climate Change is already experienced worldwide
6
ANDY TRANSPORT DESIGNAUTOMOTIVE, RAIL, SHIP, FERRY, VLCC, PPFUEL SAVED 6 Bn$/Day ROYALTY 20 Bn$,10 CENTERS.
CER 12 BnT/Yr…INV CAP 150 … WC 1500…WORK….3500 Bn$/YrDOUBLE SPEED for SAME TON-HP-ENGINE by ANDY BEARING1/3 FUEL for SAME HP Nor Asp by ANDY ROTARY ENGINECOMBINED gets 1/3 FUEL, 1/3 CO2e, 2/3 CER for SAME TON-HPROYALTY 20 Bn$, 10 CENTERSANDY ENGINE ROTARY NO BOILER, NO TURBINE
OD cm 60 70 90 120 150 200 250 900 1150
Thk cm 12 14 18 24 30 40 50 180 230
HP 1200 2400 6000 12000 24,000 60K 120K 6Mn 12Mn
Fuel T/hr 40kg 80kg 0.2 0.4 0.8 2 4 200 400
7
CO2e OIL = 2.9 T/T ; COAL = 2.33 T/TCER = 15,048 – 5,016 = 10,032 MnT/Yr
VEHICLEFUEL MnTT/Day…T/
YrTYPE
NOW CO2e
ANDY CO2e
CERMnT/
Yr
INBn
$
WCBn$
Automotive
3 1080 OIL 3132 1011 2022 30 300
RAIL 2 720 OIL 2088 696 1392 20 200
SHIP 7 2520 F.OIL 7308 2436 4872 70 700
PP 3 1080 COAL 2520 840 1680 30 300
TOTAL 15 5400 MnT 15.048
5,016 10,032
150 1500
FERRY DESIGN NEW DOUBLE SPEEDFuel 4 Lit/hr/1000 CC; HP 120/ 1000 cc ; CO2e T/yr = 16.74* L/hrFare $1/100 km ; Freight $2/100 km /TSSSS SAME SPEED; DSDS DOUBLE SPEED DLDL DOUBLE LOAD
DESIGN Vessel Ton, Speed HP, VolFuel L/hr
Co2e T/Yr
FAREMn$
FuelMn$
NetMn$
CostMn$
NOW Ferry 1000,16 kn,1200,30 L 120 502 1.3 0.86 0.44 2
NORMAL Ferry 1000,330kn,24k,600L 2400 40,176 43.2 8.64 34.5 2
ANDY.SS Ferry 1000,330kn,12k,100L 400 6,696 43.2 1.44 41.4 2
ANDY.DS Ferry 1000,660kn,24k,200L 800 13,392 86.4 2.88 82.8 3
ANDY.DL Ferry 2000,330kn,24k,200L 800 13,392 86.4 2.88 82.8 5
8
* Millions are suffering from ever more violent and frequent hurricanes in Asia and the Americas
• millions are suffering from too much water• millions are suffering from too little water• millions are suffering from poor water
Are things getting worse already?
9
FUEL SAVED 10 MnT/Day… COST 6.48 Bn$/Day
NET INCOME 15.8 Bn$ / Day
VEHICLETYPE
RATE$/T
FUEL MnT/DayNOW......ANDY
FUEL SAVED/DayQty….. VALUE
AUTOMOTIVE OIL 1000 3 1.0 2.0 2000.
RAIL OIL 1000 2 0.66 1.33 1333.
SHIP F.OIL 500 7 2.32 4.68 2340.
PP COAL 200 3 1.0 2.0 400.
TOTAL 15 5.0 10 MnT 6073 Mn$.TOTAL INV 150+1500= 1650 Bn$…REPAID in 100 DaysCDM 10*25 = 300 ; WORK 3500; FUEL 6 Bn$/YrNET = 300 + 3500 + 2160 = 5960 Bn$/Yr…..RoI = 361 %REPAID in 5960/360= 16.5 Bn$/Day; 1650/16.5= 100Days
10
What is the world community doing?
First step: Adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1992.
- Aimed at stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases to avoid “dangerous anthropogenic interference” with the climate system.
Second step: Adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997
- Commits developed countries (Annex I Parties) to reduce their overall emissions by an average of 5.2% below 1990 levels between 2008-2012.
11
What is the world community doing?(continued)
Third step: The Bali Conference in 2007- Adopted the Bali Action Plan to meet the immediate challenges of climate change, namely; adaptation, mitigation, technology transfer and financing.
Fourth step: The Copenhagen Conference in 2009
- Expected to adopt more drastic reductions effective from 2012, through a “post-Kyoto” treaty.
12
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (FAR)
# 1ºC to 2C increase in temperature above 1990 levels will place many unique and threatened systems, including many biodiversity hotspots, at significant risk.
# A global mean temperature increase of more that 2C will lead to increasing risk of species extinction and climate havoc
# The CO2 concentration must not exceed 450 ppm to keep the global warming within 2C above 1990 level by 2100
To avoid this, CO2 emissions must peak within 10 –15 years maximum
What is the consensus view of the world’s most eminent
scientists?
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
Years Before Present(B.P. -- 1950)
CO
2 C
on
cen
tra
tio
n (
pp
mv)
Current(2001)
0100,000200,000300,000400,000
Increasing CO2
concentration
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
2005
Expected in 2100
Source: IPCC FAR 2007
To put it graphically….
14
So, to what extent is shipping to blame?At present, CO2 emissions from
international shipping amount to less that 3% of the total world’s emissions from all sources.
A very modest contribution, but in recent years it has been targeted by the media with the perception that, collectively, ships emit as much CO2 as some individual industrialized countries,
Often ignoring some facts …
15
e.g. that Shipping:
• Carries 90%+ of world trade:– Raw materials and
commodities– Finished goods– Foodstuffs– Fuel
• Underpins global economy and is essential for sustainable development
• Is safe, secure and the most environmentally- friendly and fuel-efficient of all modes of transport
16
CO2 emissions by different Transport modes
To illustrate this…
17
Are we merely reacting to the press?
IMO’s determination to address climate change comes from a deep and genuine concern for the environment and the future of the planet
As a former British Prime Minister put it, we have no right to “live at the expense of future generations”
Governments, industry as a whole and each and everyone of us individually have a duty of care towards the environment
So, shipping is expected to contribute, however modestly, to the wider efforts being made to arrest global warming
18
Has UNO taken any action already?
IMO has been working on this issue for more than ten years
1991: Resolution A.719(17) – Recognized the need of establishing a policy on prevention of air pollution from ships 1997: MARPOL Conference: Resolution 8 – CO2 emissions from ships2000: IMO Study on Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships2003: Assembly resolution A.963(23) – IMO Policies and practices related to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from ships 2005: MEPC/Circ.471 – Interim Guidelines for voluntary ship CO2 Emission Indexing for use in trials 2005: MEPC 55 – Work plan to identify and develop the mechanisms needed to achieve the limitation or reduction of CO2 emissions from international shipping 2007: MEPC 56 – Timeframe and Terms of Reference for updating the 2000 IMO Study on Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships2008: MEPC 57 – Fundamental principles underlying IMO policies on GHG emissions from ships2008: June - Intersessional meeting of the Working Group on GHG emissions from ships in Oslo
19
Where are we now?
Regulatory package for all ships nearing completion.
In accordance with the approved Work Plan, MEPC 58 is expected to agree to the following:
Technical measures:
-New Ship CO2 Design Index
Operational measures:
-Revised CO2 Operational Index and associated guidelines
-Guidance on best practices for the fuel-efficient operation of Ships
MEPC 58 to continue developing market-based measures.
20
In a bit more detail…
The new ship CO2 Design Index:
# A formula that will enable ship designers and builders to design and construct ships of the future for maximum efficiency and thus, minimum GHG emissions# A baseline will limit the level of emissions according to ship type, size, speed, power, design etc.
# To be made mandatory, probably under MARPOL Annex VI
21
In a bit more detail…
The CO2 Operational Index:
# Intended to measure the operational efficiency of an existing ship
# It allows efficiency comparisons between similar ships on similar routes and enables the operator to introduce further efficiency measures
# With its associated Guidelines, it is meant to be voluntary in nature
22
In a bit more detail…
The Guidance on Best Practices:
# Will provide existing ship operators with practical advice as to the technical and operational means at their disposal to make their ships more efficient
# Being developed in close collaboration with the shipping industry
# Meant to be voluntary in nature# Conceived as an efficiency management tool for ship operators
23
Examples of efficiency measures:Technical:
-Improved fuel consumption – Hull and engines
-More efficient propellers and rudders
-Shore power – “cold ironing”
-Wind power
-Alternative fuels
Operational:
-Energy management
-Vessel speed reduction
-Improved routeing & less waiting
-Enhanced fleet management
24
Will these reductions be enough?
They probably would if demand for international shipping stopped growing. BUT…
-World trade is likely to keep increasing, even during a global economic crisis
-Emerging economies, such as China, India, Brazil and others generate a growing need for shipping
-Many developing countries depend on sea transport for food and basic commodities
So, the reductions achieved by applying technical and operational measures may be offset by an increase in shipping activity over time.
That’s why we may need market-based measures
25
Market-based measures?
Basically, these are economic mechanisms that enable those who emit more CO2 than an established limit or “cap” to buy “credits” earned by those who emit less than the limit. There are two main modalities being considered for shipping:
-Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)
-Fuel Levy
This subject is very complex and merits a dedicated presentation. Perhaps next year.
The introduction of these measures may necessitate a self-standing treaty instrument, along the lines of the IOPC Fund Convention
26
Are there any serious obstacles?
We hope there will not be major problems in regulating the technical or operational measures. However, a number of countries continue invoking the UNFCCC’s principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities”
They argue that industrialized countries (Annex I Parties) should be the ones to take action in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from any source
This principle is applied to shipping under article 2.2 of the Kyoto Protocol, which states that “The Parties included in Annex I shall pursue limitation or reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol from aviation and marine bunker fuels, working trough ICAO and IMO, respectively.”
27
This seems fair; what is the problem?
The principle is fair if applied to land-based industries subject to national controls, such as power generation, cement production or land transport.
However, if applied to shipping, the effect would be that ships flagged in Annex I (industrialized) countries (25% of the world fleet) would be obliged to reduce their emissions, whereas ships flagged in non-industrialized countries (the vast majority of the world fleet) would not.
This is contrary to the spirit of all IMO Conventions, which apply equally to all ships, regardless of flag.
Any such regime would eliminate the “level playing field” principle and would introduce unfair competition and flag hopping.
28
Is there a solution in sight?
The Secretary-General, while emphasizing the need to keep IMO Membership united, is spearheading a high-level campaign, advocating the following two principles:
-Any IMO regulatory regime should be applicable to all ships engaged in international trade, regardless of flag
-The development and enactment of such a regulatory regime should be the responsibility of IMO, not the UNFCCC
Administrations are being provided with sound arguments, both procedural and legal.
29
How can this work in practice?e.g. by separating the technical/operational measures from the market-based measures, such that:
Technical / Operational measures
-Mandatory provisions (CO2 Design Index) may be adopted under MARPOL Annex VI at MEPC 59
-Non-mandatory provisions (CO2 Operational Index and Best Practices) may be adopted by MEPC resolution
-Both of these would apply to all ships.
Market-based measures
-Continue developing an acceptable global mechanism (Emission Trading Scheme/Fuel Levy/Hybrid)
-Applicable to all ships but revenues to be used with common but differentiated responsibilities in mind.
30
Finally, will UNFCCC accept the plan?
Hopefully…But it has to be adopted by IMO Members first!
The Secretary-General intends to present a position paper to the Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC (COP 15) to be held in Copenhagen in December 2009
In the post-Kyoto instrument to be adopted by COP 15, ideally, there should be an article merely stating that:
“The Parties shall pursue limitation or reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol from marine bunker fuels, working through IMO.”
With no IMO regime in place, regional and unilateral action may proliferate (EU; USA; Japan; Australia)
31
Summing up•If shipping is to have a positive impact on climate change, it needs a global regime developed and enacted by IMO and applied to all ships engaged in international trade, giving due consideration to the needs of developing countries
•IMO will continue to work hard, in co-operation with the industry, the UNFCCC Secretariat and other relevant UN organizations, to achieve that noble objective
32
Thank you for your attention!
Venture Cap Fund us $
M A APPAN M E, Mb 9109840463337Vehicle Bearin
g Engine Both
Automotive RD,FD
200,000
200,000
400,000
Rail 1000T 600 kph
3 Mn 2 Mn 5 Mn
Ship 1000 T, 330 kn
3 Mn 2 Mn 5 Mn
Ferry 500 T, 660 kn
3 Mn 2 Mn 5 Mn
VLCC 10kT, 330 kn
16 Mn 4 Mn 20 Mn
Total 25.2 Mn
10.2 Mn
35.4 Mn