Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1352-2310/$ - se
doi:10.1016/j.at
�Correspondfax: +329 264
E-mail addr1The Belgian
sea and the exc
traffic separatio
economic zone
Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206
www.elsevier.com/locate/atmosenv
Emissions from international shipping in the Belgian part of theNorth Sea and the Belgian seaports
Pieter De Meyera,�, Frank Maesa, Annemie Volckaertb
aMaritime Institute, Ghent University, Universiteitstraat 6, 9000 Ghent, BelgiumbECOLAS N.V., Ghent, Belgium
Received 29 January 2007; received in revised form 21 June 2007; accepted 27 June 2007
Abstract
The objective of this study is to estimate the atmospheric emissions by international merchant shipping of carbon
dioxide (CO2), sulphur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) during 1 year in the Belgian part of the North Sea,
including the four Belgian seaports: Antwerp, Ghent, Ostend and Zeebrugge. The estimated emissions are based on a
bottom-up, activity-based methodology (Group 1), covering more than 90% of shipping activity, complemented with a
top-down fuel consumption methodology for the remaining activities. In total, an estimate of 1880 kton CO2, 31 kton SO2
and 39 kton NOX is emitted over the period April 2003 until March 2004. Compared to national inventories (2003 data)
this accounts to 1.5% for CO2, 30% for SO2 and 22% for NOX of total emissions of these gases in Belgium. When the CO2
figure is compared with the current estimate of CO2 emissions from international shipping, based on sold bunker fuels
(22 754 kton CO2), the relevance of a detailed and precise emission inventory becomes clear. In the end, the Belgian
estimates are validated by comparing them with Dutch, EU and international emission estimates.
r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: International shipping; Atmospheric emissions; Belgium; Carbon dioxide; Sulphur dioxide; Nitrogen oxides
1. Introduction
This article describes the methodology and resultsfor estimating the atmospheric emissions of inter-national shipping for carbon dioxide (CO2), sulphurdioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) in theBelgian part of the North Sea (BPNS)1 and the four
e front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
mosenv.2007.06.059
ing author. Tel.: +32 9 264 84 41;
69 89.
ess: [email protected] (P. De Meyer).
part of the North Sea consists of the territorial
lusive economic zone, excluding the Noordhinder
n scheme for vessels in transit in the exclusive
without calling at a Belgian port.
sea ports: Antwerp, Ghent, Ostend and Zeebrugge.This exercise has resulted in a model that can beused to produce annual inventories of internationalshipping emissions for Belgium (Maes et al., 2007).The research was done to give a better insight inemission inventories on a national scale, as opposedto most work being done at global or regional level(Endresen et al., 2003; Corbett and Koehler, 2003;Whall et al., 2002; Stavrakaki et al., 2005; Cofalaet al., 2006).
CO2 emissions of international shipping arenot officially reported in national inventories forreporting to the United Nations Framework Con-vention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); they are
.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2An international voyage means a voyage between a port in
one country and a port in another country (SOLAS Convention).3Part of the voyage from the North Sea to the port of Antwerp
passes through the river Scheldt and over Dutch territory. This
part is not taken into account when estimating the emissions.
P. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206 197
just mentioned as information. For the moment,these estimates are based on sold bunker fuels (inBelgium: 22 754 kton CO2—UNFCCC, 2006).While it is reasonable to say that this is not theamount of CO2 being emitted in the BPNS andBelgian ports, no exact figures have been availableuntil now. The figures presented in this articleindicate that the current practice leads to anoverestimation of CO2 shipping emissions.
For SO2 and NOX emissions from marine fuels,the same situation occurs: no specific data forBelgium was available. On an EU level, methods arebeing developed to incorporate SO2 and NOX
emissions into national reporting and inventories(Cofala et al., 2006). Parallel matters are alsodeveloped in the framework of MARPOL AnnexVI and in the field of the NEC (National EmissionsCeilings) Directive (2001/81/EC). Having preciseemission data will contribute to the discussion inthis field and will allow for a science-baseddiscussion on the allocation of emission rights forthese substances.
For CO2, the results can contribute as a possiblebaseline to future discussions and decisions in caseemissions of marine bunker fuels will be attributedto national parties under the UNFCCC framework.For the moment, IMO is charged by the UNFCCCto develop a system to include emissions from ship’sbunker fuels in national inventories (UNFCCC,1996, 2005; IMO, 2003). For SO2 and NOX theresults contribute to ongoing discussions in theframework of MARPOL Annex VI, the Conventionon Long Rang Transboundary Air Pollutants andthe EU directive on sulphur content of marine fuels(2003/33/EC) and the NEC directive, regulatingnitrogen emissions in the EU.
Often, this kind of research is being done on awider geographical scale. Although, with the fore-casted inclusion of international shipping emissionsin national inventories and the possible impact ofshipping emissions on long range and local airpollution it is a challenge to estimate atmosphericshipping emissions in a precise way.
Because of the limited geographical scope it ispossible to take into account the specific situation ofBelgium and produce more accurate figures. Takinga smaller geographical area allows for further detail,while at the same time some limitations are identi-fied that should be easy to deal with.
This research paper presents estimated emissionsof international shipping for Belgium and identifiessome elements for improvement that will allow
producing a clearer picture in the future. By fine-tuning this model to local circumstances, it can alsobe used for similar exercises in other countries orbroader geographical areas.
1.1. Study area: the Belgian part of the North Sea,
the four sea ports and international shipping
The study area is categorised into areas accordingto primordial criteria for emission calculation.Three areas are specified: (1) the BPNS; (2) portareas, represented by the four largest Belgianseaports and traffic to the ports on Belgian landterritory; and (3) anchorage areas. These areas areshown in Fig. 1. The second phase identifies per areaseveral types of activities, like: (1) cruising;(2) anchoring; (3) manoeuvring; (4) hauling; and(5) mooring.
The total sea area of the BPNS is estimated at3600 square kilometres. The port areas includeGhent and Antwerp (situated inland) and Ostendand Zeebrugge (marked on Fig. 1). Within the routesystem, one anchorage zone is established south ofthe Westhinder Bank, named Westhinder ancho-rage. It is situated near Wandelaar pilot station andreceives vessels waiting to enter the final lap to theirdestination.
The target group is merchant shipping and theemissions are estimated for a 1 year period (April2003–March 2004). The vessels considered arecommercial vessels on international routes2 thatpass the BPNS on their way to visit one of the foursea ports and on their way back into the North Sea,3
complemented with emissions from Belgian fisheryvessels in Belgian territorial sea and exclusiveeconomic zone, and the domestic emissions ofdredgers and tug-boats, as these are active on anational level. Due to the small fleet size of Belgiangovernmental vessels (except tug boats) and thenegligible amount of coasters and the relatedproblem of getting reliable data, these emissionsare exempted.
The group is split into 15 different vessel types (seeTable 1). Emissions of liquid natural gas (LNG)tankers are estimated differently because of thespecific engine characteristics. For some ferries, a
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 1. Belgian part of the North Sea.
P. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206198
different identification system is used. While mostemissions are calculated according to an activity-basedbottom-up approach (Group 1), emissions of dredgersand tugboats (Group 2) are calculated according to atop-down approach. The reason is that dredgers andtugboats are only active within the BPNS, so allexhaust gases of the consumed fuel are emitted in thatarea; while for the other vessels it is more complicatedto determine the precise fuel consumption in theBPNS. That is the reason why an activity-based modelto estimate fuel consumption and related emissionfigures was designed for Group 1.
(footnote continued)
1.2. Registered vessels
Vessels are registered by radar (IVS-SRK4). Dueto the limitations of the radar chain, the covered area
4IVS-SRK stands for the Information Processing System for
the Scheldt Radar Chain. This is a bilateral organisation
for the reference period is limited to the territorialsea, meaning that only vessels visiting one of the foursea ports could be taken into account. This meansthat vessels (and their relative emissions) transitingthe Belgian exclusive economic zone through theNoordhinder TSS, situated North in the BelgianNorth Sea area, could not be included (see Fig. 1).
1.2.1. LNG vessels
In the BPNS two LNG vessels are frequentlysailing to Zeebrugge. During the study period, thosetwo vessels performed 99 voyages.
These LNG vessels use their cargo boil off(natural gas) instead of traditional marine fuel typesfor propulsion purposes. This implies that LNG
responsible for the operation and maintenance of the radar
installation covering the Scheldt estuary. This also covers the
Belgian part of the North Sea under consideration.
ARTICLE IN PRESSP. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206 199
vessels consume a ‘clean’ fuel with regards toemissions of NOX and SO2. During the 53rdMaritime Environment Protection Committee meet-ing (IMO, 2005b) of IMO, Admiral Robert C.North (Marshall Islands) presented emission calcu-lations of one LNG tanker and 30 oil tankers basedon the actual fuel they consumed and on actualvoyage data. Among other results, the data showsthat the use of boil off on LNG tankers gives a veryhigh CO2 index: three to four times higher than oiltankers with combustion engines for propulsion(IMO, 2005a).Taking this into account, emissions ofLNG tankers are estimated with the standardactivity-based model for gas carriers, as presentedin this paper, with the end results for CO2 emissionsmultiplied by a factor 3.5 and setting the NOX andSO2 emissions to zero.
1.2.2. Ferries
Because the ferry lines sailing to and from Ostendare not registered in IVS-SRK, the number ofvoyages and sailing time are calculated according tothe time tables from the ferry operators. As theseare regular voyages, the data are considered to beaccurate and relevant for use. Ferries are, dependingon their use, classified under RoRo or RoRo cargo.
1.3. The activity-based model (Group 1)
The estimated emissions are calculated accordingto the following formula: E ¼ At� IP�LF/CF�EF. This is an expansion and a more specificinterpretation of the basic formula: energy use(At� IP�LF/CF)� emission factor.
Emissions [E (g)] are estimated by multiplying theactivity time [At (h)] by the installed engine power[IP (kW)] and the load factor [LF (%)], divided by acorrection factor [CF] and finally multiplied by aspecific emission factor [EF (g kWh�1)] for each ofthe exhaust gasses and different activities. Theemission factors are taken from ENTEC (Whallet al., 2002). Assumptions on engine and fuel typeare this way the same as ENTEC has applied in its2002 study (Whall et al., 2002).
Considering the specificity of the vessel types andactivity, emissions are estimated separately foractivities at sea (sailing/at anchor) and in port (atberth/manoeuvring/hauling) per vessel type. At theend, the figures are presented in kton.
The only parameter that stays constant, for bothsea and port operations is the installed enginepower. For the model, average installed engine
power per vessel type is determined via a rando-mised sample of one hundred vessels per vessel type,both for main as for auxiliary engines (AEs). Therandomised method and the number of one hundredvessels is considered to represent a realistic averageengine power figure. Where for main engines (MEs)Lloyd’s Register of Ships covers 98% of the vessels,for AEs this was only 19% on average. Therefore,the installed auxiliary power was extrapolated fromthe data for auxiliary generators (48% coverage inthe Register of Ships). The power of the auxiliarygenerators is estimated on an average of 83% of theAE power and this way the average installedauxiliary power per vessel type is determined.
The load factor and correction factor are used toadjust the ENTEC emission factors to the specificsituation in the BPNS and the ports. The load factorcompensates for the specific activity of the vessel.This implies that the main or AEs are not alwaysrunning on optimal capacity (80% maximumcontinuous rate (MCR)). For the ME the loadfactor will depend on the specific activity. For theAE, load factors vary per vessel type: containervessels use AEs for powering refrigerated contain-ers, while RoRo vessels use more auxiliary powerfor venting the cargo bay. The load factors arementioned in Table 4. These figures have beencompared to the ones used by ENTEC (Whall et al.,2002) and adjusted according to expert’s advice(pilots, harbour masters, Antwerp Maritime Acad-emy). The correction factor compensates for the lossof efficiency at reduced load: for 2-stroke enginesthis is considered at 8% (0.92), for 4-stroke enginesthis is 12% (0.88). While the relationship betweenload and efficiency is not exactly linear, to facilitatethe model these factors are applied in a linear wayupon expert advice (Cappoen, 2006). The emissionfactors are taken from the ENTEC study (Whallet al., 2002), as these are the most recent anddetailed figures available.
1.3.1. Fishery
For emissions by fishery vessels the sameapproach was applied (Goerlandt, 2006).
1.4. Group 2 top-down approach
For dredgers and tugboats in operational condi-tion (dredging or towing) the fuel consumption datafrom operators and contractors is used. Fuelconsumption multiplied with a specific emissionfactor results in a figure for emissions of that specific
ARTICLE IN PRESSP. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206200
gas (see Table 2). When dredgers or tugboats aresailing in non-operational condition, they areregistered by IVS-SRK and are considered asGroup 1. This implies that for non-operationalconditions, again, the bottom-up approach isapplied.
1.5. Emissions at sea
1.5.1. Sailing
Activity times (At) for sailing at sea are calculatedby adding the distance of the separate routesegments together and by multiplying this figurewith an average speed value per vessel type. Theaverage speed values are taken from the ENTECstudy (Table 3). See Fig. 1 for the different routesegments that make up the shipping lanes thatvessels follow to navigate safely in the BPNS. Theselanes are fixed lanes and allow to accuratelydetermine the distance from entering the BPNS toone of the four sea ports. This data also allowsplotting the dispersion of emissions for NOX,SO2 and CO2 in the BPNS, resulting in ageographical distribution of the different emissions(see Figs. 2–4).
Per vessel type, the number of individual vesselpassages is extracted from the IVS-SRK databasefor each route segment and multiplied with theaverage speed value.
1.5.2. Anchorage
For the anchorage zone (Westhinder) in theBPNS, the anchorage times are taken from IVS-SRK and the emission estimates are calculatedusing the same emission and load factors as foractivities at berth. The results are added to the seaemissions (Table 5).
1.6. Port emissions
For port emissions different load factors (LF) areapplied depending on the relevant activity. In port,there are three different activities of which theformer two are comparable: hauling, manoeuvringand being at berth. Because of the limited qualityand availability of port data from the portauthorities only average hauling, manoeuvring andberthing time per vessel type is determined. Averageactivity times are more functional for the model asthey can be considered to be relevant for some time;this way, these average times can be used forconsecutive years. It seems appropriate to do this
every 5 years. Average times also compensate forpossible errors in the database registration, bycompensating for extreme high or low values. Thisis done for each individual port because of theirdifferent designs.
The data is retrieved from the port databases andfor Antwerp and Ghent complemented with datafrom IVS-SRK. Times are calculated, based onthree sample months (November, January andApril) and afterwards extrapolated for a whole year.
1.6.1. Manoeuvring– hauling
Manoeuvring is considered as entering or leavingthe port, while hauling is considered as moving thevessel inside the port from one berth to another.
Despite the similarity between manoeuvring andhauling times, they have initially been consideredseparately because not every ship that manoeuvresinto port will also haul to a different quay. Further,both activities have the same characteristics: theyuse variable engine loads and for both activitiesemissions factors for manoeuvring activities areapplied as taken from the ENTEC study (Whall etal., 2002). This will be important and allowsdetermining an average hauling time per vesseltype, even if not all vessels haul. In total, haulingonly corresponds with 7.4% of total manoeuvringtime. For the final calculations, manoeuvring andhauling times are summed up.
1.6.2. At berth
At berth, most vessels switch off the ME exceptfor oil tankers and RoPax vessels. This is because oiltankers use MEs to power discharge and loadingpumps; RoPax vessels use extra power to ventilateand keep general electrical services running whilepassengers and cargo are embarking/disembarking.
In the end, time values are put into the formulatogether with the installed power, emission, loadand correction factors to result in estimated portemissions for each activity and brought together toresult in total port emissions.
2. Results
Adding Group 1 sea and port emissions togetherwith Group 2 emissions results in total estimatedatmospheric emissions in the BPNS and the Belgianseaports. The sea emissions have also been plottedover the BPNS (Figs. 2–4, Tables 2, 5–7).
Ro/Ro cargo, container and Ro/Ro vessels arethe main contributors: together they represent more
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 2. NOX emission dispersion in the Belgian part of the North Sea.
P. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206 201
than 60% of the atmospheric emissions (62%for CO2; 62% for SO2 and 66% for NOX). Thehigh share of emissions by container vessels isremarkable despite only representing 14% ofall entries in the IVS-SRK system as opposed toRo/Ro cargo vessels at 26%; this is due to thehigh installed power levels of container vessels.On the other hand general cargo vessels representabout 26% of all entries but produce onlyabout 8% of all emissions; this ship type largelyconsists of smaller and less powerful vessels (seeTables 1 and 7). Clearly, installed engine poweris a primordial factor influencing the emissions ofvessel types.
When comparing sea and port emissions, theshare of port emissions seems to be relatively high(38% for NOX, 47% for SO2 and 46% for CO2 oftotal emissions) (Table 5).
The fact that only vessels calling on Belgian portsare included in the estimations and that they onlyhave to cross a small part of the BPNS to arrivein port, explains the high contribution of portemissions.
3. Conclusions/discussion/recommendations
This research has faced the challenge of estimat-ing atmospheric emissions for a precise geographical
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 3. SO2 emissions dispersion in the Belgian part of the North Sea.
P. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206202
area: the BPNS. By using a bottom-up activity-based model, the results are more realistic andjustifiable than the rough estimates that are basedupon sold bunker fuels. This was an interestingexercise as this has never been done before forBelgium.
During the research some difficulties were en-countered in relation to obtaining reliable dataand determining precise emission factors. Some ofthese problems (e.g. geographical coverage, ship’sregistration) will be solved automatically in thefuture by using AIS data, others need to be tackledas soon as possible (e.g. emission factors, speed
values). This will allow fine tuning the currentmethodology and coming up with even more preciseestimations.
With total CO2 emissions for Belgium in 2003 of126 331 kton (Anon., 2006) the estimate of shippingemissions (1 880 kton) accounts for about 1.5% oftotal Belgian CO2 emissions. If this figure iscompared to the official 2003 estimate, based onsold bunker fuels in Belgium (22 754 kton CO2—18%) (UNFCCC, 2006) the significance of a moredetailed and precise estimation method becomesclear. SO2 estimates from shipping account for 30%of total emissions (101 kton) in 2003, while NOX
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 4. CO2 emissions dispersion in the Belgian part of the North Sea.
P. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206 203
emissions represent 22% compared to total emis-sions (174 kton, expressed in NO2) in 2003 (Anon.,2004).
As a result of the current limitation of the radarVTS (IVS-SRK) the research was limited to theBPNS. From July 2006 onwards, an automaticidentification system (AIS)5 is installed to addition-ally track vessels in transit in the Noordhindertraffic separation scheme.
5As required by the SOLAS Convention.
Further fine tuning of the emission factors couldalso allow for more reliable estimations to bereached. In this study, the ENTEC (Whall et al.,2002/Stavrakaki et al., 2005) emission factors wereapplied. The problem is that these do not allowdifferentiating for main and AEs. More exactemission factors should be taken into accountfor future estimations. The same is valid for exactspeed values per vessel instead of average speedvalues.
It is also interesting to put the Belgium emissionestimates into an international perspective. First,
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 1
Calls on the Belgian sea ports and travelled sea distance per vessel types
Vessel type # of calls % of total Travelled sea distance (M) % of total
Oil tankers 1045 3.61 48 394.51 2.54
Chemical tankers 2398 8.28 131 968.80 6.94
Gas carriers 1019 3.52 78 942.04 4.15
Ro/Ro cargo 7660 26.44 653 018.70 34.33
Dry bulk carriers 1094 3.78 94 623.81 4.97
General cargo 7683 26.52 359 372.70 18.89
Containers 3810 13.15 263 223.20 13.84
Passenger 64 0.22 3944.81 0.21
RoPax 3228 11.14 173 824.60 9.14
Reefers 825 2.85 67 820.10 3.57
Other dry cargo 49 0.17 20 852.16 1.10
LNG 99 0.34 6379.56 0.34
Fishery n.a. – n.a. –
Tugboats n.a. – n.a. –
Dredgers n.a. – n.a. –
Total 28 974 100 1 902 365.02 100
n.a.: not available.
Table 2
Group 2 total estimated atmospheric emissions in the BPNS,
including the seaports (kton year�1)
Vessel type NOX SO2 CO2
Tugboats 0.655 0.696 43.392
Dredgers 0.961 1.059 62.392
Total 1.646 1.755 105.784
Table 3
Speed values and installed engine power (ME-AE) per vessel type
Vessel type Average
speed @ sea
(Kn)a
Average
installed ME
power (kW)b
Average
installed AE
power (kW)b
Oil tankers 14.0 7390 1810
Chemical
tankers
13.7 3959 1502
Gas carriers 16.8 4534 1880
Ro/Ro cargo 15.4 10140 2257
Dry bulk
carriers
14.3 8830 1964
General
cargo
12.3 3097 1024
Containers 19.3 23376 4768
Passenger 20.8 18628 3320
RoPax 15.3 15056 4760
Reefers 16.9 10150 3888
Other dry
cargo
13.5 3824 1003
LNG 16.8 4534 1880
aSource: Whall et al., 2002.bSource: Llyod’s Register of Ships.
P. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206204
the Dutch estimated emissions (Hulskotte et al.,2003a–c) result in 4801 kton CO2, 68 kton SO2
and 118 kton NOX for the year 2000–2001;these are the total emissions of internationalshipping at sea, manoeuvring and at berthin port. When considering that the Belgian emis-sions only represent emissions in the BPNS andtaking the much larger sea area of the Dutch part ofthe North Sea into account, the comparison isreasonable.
When comparing with ENTEC figures (Stavrakakiet al., 2005) it is important to only look at seaemissions, as ENTEC does not take port emissionsinto account (Table 5).
Our estimates for Belgium emissions at seaaccount for 1009 kton CO2, 16 kton SO2 and24 kton NOX (for 2003–2004) and the ENTECfigures for 2000 are: 990 kton (CO2), 13 kton (SO2)and 20 kton (NOX). This is all within expectablelimits even when taking the different referenceperiods into account.
Finally, a comparison with international figuresby Eyring et al. (2005), who estimates globalinternational sea emissions for CO2 in 2001 atabout 812 630 kton allows for an appreciation of theBelgian emissions in an international context. Inthis comparison, again, only sea emissions are takeninto account. Taking the total European CO2
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 4
Load factors per vessel type (ME ¼ main engine/AE ¼ auxiliary engine) and activity
Vessel type @ Sea @ Anchor Manoeuvring @ Berth
ME (%) AE (%) ME (%) AE (%) ME (%) AE (%) ME (%) AE (%)
Oil tankers 80 30 5 30 20 40 20 60
Chemical tankers 80 30 5 30 20 40 0 60
Gas carriers 80 60 5 60 20 70 0 70
Ro/Ro cargo 80 30 5 30 20 40 0 70
Dry bulk carriers 80 30 5 30 20 40 0 10
General cargo 80 30 5 30 20 40 0 10
Containers 80 50 5 50 20 60 0 20
Passenger 80 70 5 70 20 75 0 60
RoPax 80 70 5 70 20 75 10 70
Reefers 80 60 5 60 20 70 0 10
Other dry cargo 80 30 5 30 20 40 0 10
LNG 80 60 5 60 20 70 0 70
Table 5
Group 1 estimated atmospheric emissions in the Belgian part of
the North Sea (kton year�1)
Vessel type NOX SO2 CO2
Oil tankers 0.447 0.351 20.660
Chemical tankers 0.805 0.537 31.655
Gas carriers 0.298 0.434 28.773
Ro/Ro cargo 7.390 5.305 312.172
Dry bulk carriers 1.276 0.756 44.495
General cargo 1.708 1.142 67.466
Containers 8.008 4.896 288.745
Passenger 0.078 0.069 4.115
RoPax 2.449 1.804 126.307
Reefers 1.013 0.623 36.752
Other dry cargo 0.076 0.089 5.214
LNG 0 0 17.854
Fishery 0.191 0.013 10.500
Tugboats 0.018 0.014 0.868
Dredgers 0.274 0.222 13.097
Total 24.030 16.255 1008.672
Table 6
Group 1 estimated atmospheric emissions in the Belgian seaports
(kton year�1)
Vessel type NOX SO2 CO2
Oil tankers 1.247 1.320 77.771
Chemical tankers 1.465 1.333 78.233
Gas carriers 0.411 0.738 48.662
Ro/Ro cargo 3.362 3.205 188.444
Dry bulk carriers 0.562 0.475 27.945
General cargo 1.274 1.163 68.741
Containers 2.815 2.425 142.665
Passenger 0.025 0.028 1.652
RoPax 1.512 1.503 100.629
Reefers 0.564 0.488 28.808
Other dry cargo 0.007 0.009 0.528
LNG 0 0 1.580
Fishery 0 0 0
Total 13.244 12.687 765.658
P. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206 205
emissions at sea from ENTEC (Stavrakaki et al.,2005) of 120 640 kton and the relative share ofBelgian sea emissions in European emissions(0.83%), the Belgian sea emissions account forabout 0.12% of the global figure, which wouldresults in 975 kton CO2. This figure is in linewith the assumptions made here (1009 kton CO2).For SO2 the Belgian share of worldwide SO2
shipping emissions should be 0.20%, resulting in24 kton SO2 and for NOX the Belgian share shouldaccount for 0.17%, leading to 36 kton NOX. Both
figures give an overestimation of about 50%,compared to presented results (16 kton SO2 and24 kton NOX). While the results seem to indicatean underestimation compared to worldwide figures,the results are within acceptable limits and confirmthe trend.
When using this model for other geographicallocations some factors will need to be adapted tothe specific circumstances. This means that loadfactors need to be adjusted and when taking portactivities into account, separate calculations will benecessary for determining specific average portactivity times.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 7
Total estimated atmospheric emissions in the Belgian part of the
North Sea and the Belgian seaports (kton year�1) (Groups 1 and
2)
Vessel type NOX SO2 CO2
Oil tankers 1.693 1.671 98.431
Chemical tankers 2.270 1.870 109.888
Gas carriers 0.709 1.172 77.436
Ro/Ro cargo 10.752 8.511 500.615
Dry bulk carriers 1.838 1.231 72.441
General cargo 2.981 2.304 136.206
Containers 10.823 7.321 431.410
Passenger 0.103 0.097 5.767
RoPax 3.961 3.307 226.936
Reefers 1.577 1.111 65.560
Other dry cargo 0.083 0.098 5.742
LNG 0 0 19.434
Fishery 0.191 0.013 10.500
Tugboats 0.673 0.710 44.260
Dredgers 1.236 1.281 75.489
Total 38.890 30.697 1880.115
P. De Meyer et al. / Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 196–206206
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by the BelgianScience Policy (BELSPO) and has been executedtogether with Jesse Coene (Maritime Institute), Dr.Bart De Wachter and Ir. Dirk Leroy (ECOLASN.V.) and Prof. Dr. Jean-Pascal Van Ypersele deStrihou (UCL-ASTR). Further, the authors wish tothank the valuable contributions that have beenreceived from a user-committee that was set up inthe framework of the BELSPO project and from theadvice from seafarers, pilots and the AntwerpMaritime Academy. Special thanks go out to ir.Leo Cappoen.
References
Anon., 2004. Lozingen in de lucht 1990–2004. Vlaamse Mili-
eumaatschappij (VMM), Aalst. 196pp+annexes.
Anon., 2006. Belgium’s Fourth National Communication under
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change. Federal Public Service Health, Food Chain Safety
and Environment. Brussels, 138pp.
Cappoen, L., 2006. Senior advisor, Exmar N.V., Expert advice.
Cofala, J., Amann, M., Heyes, Ch., Klimont, Z., Posch, M.,
Schopp, W., Tarasson, L., Jonson, J.E., Whall, Ch.,
Stavrakaki, A., 2006. Analysis of policy measures to reduce
ship emissions in the context of the revision of the National
Emissions Ceiling Directive. Interim report for the European
Commission (DG Environment).
Corbett, J.J., Koehler, H.W., 2003. Updated emissions from
ocean shipping. Journal of Geophysical Research 108 (D20),
4650.
Endresen, O., Sorgard, E., Sundet, J.K., Dalsoren, S.B., Isaksen,
I.S.A., Berglen, T.F., Gravir, G., 2003. Emission from sea
transportation and environmental impact. Journal of Geo-
physical Research 108, 4650.
Eyring, V., Kohler, H.W., Van Aardenne, J., Lauer, A., 2005.
Emissions from international shipping: 1. The last 50 years.
Journal of Geophysical Research 110, D17305.
Goerlandt, J., 2006. The Belgian fishing fleet’s emissions of CO2,
SOx, NOx and other substances. University of Antwerp,
Ghent University—Master in Maritime Science Programme.
Hulskotte, J., Bolt, E., Broekhuizen, D., 2003a. EMS-protocol
Verbrandingsemissies door stilliggende zeeschepen in havens.
RWS, Rotterdam, 21pp.
Hulskotte, J., Bolt, E., Broekhuizen, D., 2003b. EMS-protocol
Emissies door verbrandingsmotoren van zeeschepen op het
Nederlands continentaal plat. RWS, Rotterdam, 23pp.
Hulskotte, J., Bolt, E., Broekhuizen, D., 2003c. EMS-protocol
Emmissies door verbrandingsmotoren van varende en man-
oeuvrerende zeeschepen op het Nederlands grondgebied.
RWS, Rotterdam, 42pp.
IMO, 2003. Policies and practices related to the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions from ships (resolution A.963(23)).
IMO, 2005a. Interim guidelines for voluntary ship CO2 emission
indexing for use in trials (MEPC/Circ.471).
IMO, 2005b. Report of the one-day technical workshop on GHG
indexing scheme held at IMO headquarters (MEPC 53/WP.3).
Maes, F., Coene, J., Goerlandt, F., De Meyer, P., Volckaert, A.,
Le Roy, D., Van Ypersele, J.P., Marbaix, Ph., 2007.
‘Emissions from CO2, SO2 and NOx from ships—ECOSO-
NOS’. Research in the framework of the BELSPO Global
Change, Ecosystems and Biodiversity—SPSD II, Brussels.
Stavrakaki, A., De Jong, E., Hugi, C., Whall, C., Will, M.,
Ritchie, A., McIntyre, A., 2005. Ship emissions: assignement,
abatement and market-based instruments. Final Report for
the European Commission, DG Environment.
UNFCCC, 1996. Allocation and control of international bunker
fuels (SBSTA/1996/9/Add.1, Add.2).
UNFCCC, 2005. Information on greenhouse gas emissions from
international aviation and maritime transport, SBSTA/2005/
INF.2.
UNFCCC, 2006. Common Reporting Format for Belgium—data
for 2003. (Available on: /http://unfccc.int/national_reports/
annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/
items/3734.phpS).
Whall, C., Cooper, D., Archer, K., Twigger, L., Thurston, N.,
Ockwell, D., McIntyre, A., Ritchie, A., 2002. Quantification
of emissions from ships associated with ship movements
between ports in the European Community. Final Report for
the European Commission, DG Environment.
