Sunteți pe pagina 1din 16
Pathways to Low Carbon Shipping - Abatement Potential Towards 2050 Research and Innovation, Position Paper

Pathways to Low Carbon Shipping - Abatement Potential Towards 2050

Research and Innovation, Position Paper 14 - 2012

Pathways to Low Carbon Shipping - Abatement Potential Towards 2050 Research and Innovation, Position Paper 14
Pathways to Low Carbon Shipping - Abatement Potential Towards 2050 Research and Innovation, Position Paper 14
This is DNV DNV is a global provider of services for managing risk. Established in
This is DNV DNV is a global provider of services for managing risk. Established in
This is DNV
This is
DNV

DNV is a global provider of services for managing risk. Established in 1864, DNV is an independent foundation with the purpose of safeguarding life, property, and the environment. DNV comprises 300 offices in 100 countries with 9,000 employees. Our vision is to create a global impact towards ensuring a safe and sustainable future.

Research and Innovation in

DNV

The objective of strategic research is through new knowledge and services to enable long term innovation and business growth in support of the overall strategy of DNV. Such research is carried out in selected areas that are believed to be of particular significance for DNV in the future. A Position Paper from DNV Research and Innovation is intended to highlight findings from our research programmes.

Contact details:

Prepared by: Eide, M., Chryssakis, C., Alvik, S., Endresen, Ø. Contact: Magnus.strandmyr.eide@dnv.com

Summary

In 2009, DNV published Pathways to Low Carbon Shipping that demonstrated a cost-effective potential for reducing CO 2 emissions by 15 % on the existing world shipping fleet and by 30 % on of the predicted global fleet in 2030. In this latest study, DNV has used a new probabilistic model to analyse pathways towards 2050.

In addition to those measures analysed in the 2009 study, the potential uptake of a wide range of alternative fuels is modelled. The results demonstrate that with uptake of operational and technical measures, as well as biofuels and LNG, the cost-effective CO 2 reduction potential in 2050 is around 50 % of baseline emissions, indicating stabilisation of emissions from world shipping at present levels.

The results show LNG could be important part of the fuel mix in 2050 based on cost-effectiveness considerations. However, this study shows that for shipping to provide a substantial contribution to a 2°C pathway, a regulatory or financial incentive for biofuel is one alterative, but that nuclear power in large ships could also cut emissions drastically in a cost-effective way.

is one alterative, but that nuclear power in large ships could also cut emissions drastically in
is one alterative, but that nuclear power in large ships could also cut emissions drastically in

Introduction

In June 2009, DNV published the first version of Pathways to Low Carbon Shipping 1 , which considers possible approaches for reducing CO 2 emissions from the world shipping fleet. The main finding was that, on the existing fleet, shipping has the potential to cut CO 2 emissions by up to 15 % in a cost-effective way. Extending the perspective into the future, the second Pathways study 2 , published in December 2009, demonstrated a cost-effective potential for cutting emissions in the fleet by 30 % in year 2030 by applying 24 technical and operational measures, as well as liquefied natural gas (LNG).

Since 2009, DNV has not only moved the Pathways results into the academic literature 3,4, but has also worked to demonstrate the practical applications of many CO 2 reduction options in concrete concept designs, such as the Triality and the Quantum, and on-board a sailing vessel in the Fellowship project. Additionally, DNV has recently presented results on probable technology uptake towards 2020 5,6, covering additional technologies such as scrubbers for SOx reduction and hybrid propulsion.

In this third Pathways study, our perspective is directed towards 2050, and we apply a probabilistic Monte Carlo modelling approach to provide a better handling of uncertainty in future CO 2 estimates and the cost-effective abatement potentials. The work builds on a long line of DNV contributions to the scientific foundation for understanding past, present, and future emissions from shipping and their impacts 7 . In addition to the 24 measures from the earlier Pathways studies, we also simulate the uptake of a wider range of alternative marine fuels for new ships up to 2050; biofuels, LNG, and nuclear. For discussion of the likelihood of achieving such potentials, see Box below.

The new DNV Pathways model allows us to assess how new energy market realities and climate change incentives might

impact the likelihood of a transition away from the current marine fuel mix that is dominated by Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) and Marine Diesel Oil (MGO).

Such an energy transition has previously only been studied to a limited extent for the shipping sector. For other sectors, including the transport sector in general 8 , studies have suggested that alternative fuels may challenge the

dominance of oil in the first half of this century. History has shown that the maritime sector can be quick to adopt new fuels, should the right incentives be in place; in the age of the steamships, in the short decade between 1914 and 1922, the percentage of vessels using oil rather than coal in their boilers increased from 3 % to 24 % 9 . As in the 1920’ies the main driver for such a shift today is fuel price and energy efficiency. However, additional drivers such as regulation on SOx and CO 2 are now influencing the decision process. However, in this study, the fuel price and energy efficiency is governing the uptake of technologies and fuels towards

2050.

In this study we particularly focus on:

Pathways towards 2050 (Figure 1)

Abatement potential in 2050 (Figure 2)

Contribution of alternative fuels and other measures on CO 2 abatement potential in 2050, and associated variability due to fuel price uncertainties (Figure 3)

Energy mix in 2050, based on 200 individual model runs and associated variability due to fuel price uncertainties (Figure 4)

The results are produced by the DNV Pathways model, building on DNV’s own foresight and technology outlook, as well as experience gained from energy efficiency studies that DNV has undertaken with individual ship-owners.

The DNV Pathways Model

The updaTed dnV Pathways model facilitates assessment of future emissions’ pathways considering individual ships in the world fleet. Of the 24 different measures analysed, 16 are considered technical measures and 8 are operational. The 4 most relevant alternative fuel types for ships in the period 2012-2050 have been modelled. In the modelling, an average CO 2 reduction relative to HFO or MDO has been assumed 10 :

Each of these segments has been modelled separately with regard to:

operational assumptions

the applicability and reduction potential of each measure

the cost of each measure and fuel option

the year when available measures and fuels are phased in, and maximum uptake rate

LNG;

20 % reduction

Biofuels;

50 % reduction

As our model covers 59 different segments, the cost

Nuclear;

100 % reduction

and reduction effects of the different measures vary

when only technical issues are considered, and with no

The baseline pathways are calculated taking into account

These reductions are for tank-to-propeller emissions, except for biofuels where we use well-to-propeller estimates 11 . The contribution of well-to-tank emissions for the other fuels is not expected to significantly affect the results of this work.

In the model, the measures and fuels are applied to the world shipping fleet in order to investigate the future abatement potentials. In the DNV Pathways model, which is rooted in the second IMO GHG 12 study, the world fleet has been divided into 59 segments. These 59 segments represent the major ship types that constitute the world fleet 13 , such as Suezmax tankers.

significantly from one segment to another. The measures are only included for the ship types for which they are applicable. Also, a technical maximum uptake rate is applied for each segment. This rate reflects the potential

consideration of political developments, non-technical barriers, and social acceptance. See also box below.

world fleet growth until 2050, simulating scrapping and building of ships from year to year. This baseline provides reference levels for assessing the effect of abatement measures. A range of baselines are developed, using both high- and low growth rates 14 , through a Monte Carlo approach in which repeated random sampling of input values is used to compute our results.

What is a realistic reduction potential?

This study has estimated the potential reduction in the world fleet’s CO 2 emissions, if a set of available measures and alternative fuels are implemented. The aim of the study has been to identify the maximum obtainable cost-effective emission reduction potential in 2050.

It is difficult to predict the uptake of these measures and fuels towards 2050. In addition to cost issues, there are many other barriers to uptake. These are related to issues such as technical complexity and training, and also to industry practice and internal company organisational issues. Recent research 15 into barriers indicates that technical measures appear to have higher barriers than operational measures. Less mature technologies also appear to be more difficult to implement. Funding of more large scale demonstration projects could speed up the uptake.

In view of the known barriers to uptake, it is realised that the abatement potentials do not directly reflect emission

reductions that are realistic. In other words, the aim of this study is NOT to produce likely or expected developments for CO 2 emissions, but rather to prove what could be achieved by implementing known technology.

Furthermore, the objective of this study is to assess the reduction potential for the fleet, i.e., the potential for implementing technical and operational measures, as well as alternative fuels. IMO has already mandated the introduction of new energy efficiency standards for new ships, chiefly the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI 16 ), and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP). Inclusion of market-based instruments (MBI) is being debated. As such policy options are not, in themselves, ways of reducing emissions, but rather means of tapping into the abatement potential’s inherent physical measures, they are not included in this study, and our baseline emissions are calculated without considering the impact of policy.

The fuel uptake on new ships to the fleet is then determined on a yearly basis towards 2050. The uptake rates of alternative fuels are determined by the cost of the alternative relative to HFO/MDO. The high uncertainty in fuel price projections is accounted for by using a Monte Carlo approach. Hence, time series for fuel costs of HFO/ MDO, LNG, biofuel and nuclear are drawn from their respective probability distributions (based on forecasts reported by the International Energy Agency and the US Energy Information Administration and others 17,18 ). For each segment, in each model realization, and in every year, the most cost-effective fuel is selected (HFO/

MDO is selected by default if alternative fuels are not cost effective).

Lastly, having determined the fuel for each ship in each model run, the model assesses the cost-effectiveness of technical and operational abatement measures individually for each ship in the fleet. Measures that are cost-effective (i.e., have a marginal cost below USD 0/t CO 2 ) are then applied to the ships. In the model, the uptake of alternative fuels on existing ships has not been included, nor have new ships been allowed to convert to alternative fuels after their year of build.

Results

In The FoLLoWInG, we investigate the different pathways, or emission development trajectories, towards 2050 produced by the model. We then examine the emission reduction potential in the year 2050 more closely, also studying variability in the individual model realizations.

The results from the second Pathways study demonstrated that emissions in 2030 could be stabilised at present levels using only cost-effective technical and operational measures. The emission trajectories shown in Figure 1 demonstrate that this level of emissions can be sustained, and even lowered, towards 2030, if the uptake of cost- effective alternative fuels is included. The results show that there are large cost-effective potentials for CO 2 reduction.

As shown in the previous Pathways study, this potential is achieved by a wide range of cost-effective measures, some of which are easily implemented, i.e., they can be considered to be low-hanging fruit.

Following the trajectories into 2050, Figure 1 shows that while the baseline pathways will result in our emissions doubling by 2050, we could keep the emissions stable, applying only cost-effective measures and fuels, even without including the controversial nuclear option in the mix. However, if we are to reduce the emissions considerably from today’s level, nuclear can be a significant contributor, as shown in Figure 1.

2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 CO 2 emissions (Mt)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
CO 2 emissions (Mt)

Figure 1: Baseline emissions (grey) vs. emissions including cost-effective uptake of alternative fuels. Blue sector shows potentials including uptake of nuclear, biofuel and LNG, as well as technical and operational measures. The yellow sector shows the same potential, but excludes nuclear. The achievable emission levels are illustrated, displaying the maximum, minimum, 25% and 75% percentiles of 200 model realizations; the dark shaded area covers the central 50% of the model runs.

Additional reductions can also be achieved without nuclear. However, this requires progressingwe beyond cost-effective solutions. Focusing on the potentials in 2050, Figure 2 shows what could be achieved by inclusion of more costly fuels or measures, allowing for all alternative fuels or only some of them.

Figure 2 (left yellow bar) shows that with cost-effective uptake of measures, as well as LNG and biofuels, the CO 2 emissions in 2050 lie between a lower bound of 46 % of baseline, and an upper bound of 68 % of baseline emissions. Furthermore, half the model realization emissions occur in the narrow band between 50 % and 57 % of baseline. Allowing for more expensive measures by increasing the uptake criterion lowers the emissions further, although not significantly.

However, in order to limit global temperature increases to 2°C, stabilizing emissions at present levels will be insufficient. For this target to be achieved, global emissions in 2050 must be lowered to 40 % of present levels or below 19 . In this context, shipping emissions alone, if left unabated, would represent at least 10 % of total global emissions in 2050. Even if shipping emissions in 2050 were halved, as seen in Figure 1, the relative share of global emissions contributed by shipping would still be double today’s figure. Thus, if emission levels from shipping in 2050 are to be consistent with a global 2°C stabilization target, then reductions beyond those which can be cost- effectively achieved by measures, LNG and biofuels will be necessary. Figure 2 shows that this is achievable by at least two pathways; either through allowing nuclear power, or by providing financial incentives for biofuel.

Allowing nuclear power as an option lowers the emissions in a cost-effective manner to 15 % of baseline in the most extreme case (lower bound in the figure), although most of the model realizations give emissions of around 30 % of baseline. At higher marginal cost, even lower emissions levels are achievable.

Figure 2 (green bars) also shows that when only biofuel is allowed as the alternative to HFO/MDO, the emissions can still be lowered substantially if higher marginal costs are accepted. At a marginal cost threshold of USD 100/t CO 2 , the model shows a lower bound on the emissions below 30 % of baseline, i.e., reduction in emissions by 70 %. This indicates that with suitable regulatory and financial incentives (e.g. CO 2 pricing), biofuel can be a significant contributor to CO 2 reductions in shipping, almost matching the reductions achieved by allowing nuclear.

100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30
100 %
90
%
80
%
70
%
60
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
20
%
10
%
0 %
0
50
100
0
50
100
0
50
100
Biofuel
Biofuel and LNG
Nuclear, Biofuel and LNG
Emissions relative to baseline (%)

Figure 2: CO 2 emissions relative to baseline for the world shipping fleet in 2050, allowing for various alternative fuels. For each allowed fuel option, the uptake criterion is set at 0, 50 and 100 USD/t CO 2 . The emission levels are displaying for the maximum, minimum, 25 % and 75 % percentiles of 200 model realizations. The colour areas cover the middle 50 % of the model runs. The left-hand yellow bar and the left-hand blue bar in this graph are also shown in Figure 1 (for 2050).

Key Challenges for the Alternative Fuels 20

LNG Strict regulations on NOx and SOx emissions, combined with a more competitive gas price, will drive the uptake of gas as a marine fuel. One challenge for shipping is that LNG tanks typically require 2 to 3 times more space than a fuel oil tank. Since natural gas must be stored either liquefied or compressed, these storage tanks are also more expensive. Based on recent experience, the new-build cost of LNG-fuelled ships is between 10 and 15 % higher than for equivalent diesel-fuelled ships. Although LNG bunkering infrastructure is currently very limited, a significant increase in the number of bunkering terminals is expected in the coming decades, especially within ECAs (Emission Control Areas).

Biofuel The most promising biofuels for ships are biodiesel and crude plant oil. Biodiesel is most suitable for replacing marine distillate, and plant oil is suitable for replacing residual fuels. In principle, existing diesel engines can run on biofuel blends. Challenges with biofuel include fuel instability,

corrosion, susceptibility to microbial growth, and poor cold flow properties. Although these technical challenges can be resolved, widespread use of biofuel in shipping will depend on price, other incentives, and availability in sufficient volumes. Breakthroughs in production methods, enabling use of previously untapped feedstock and avoiding competition with food production, are expected.

Nuclear Nuclear power plants have no greenhouse gas emissions during operation and are especially well-suited to ships with slowly varying power demands. Although several hundred nuclear-powered navy vessels exist, few nuclear-powered merchant ships have been built. Commercial nuclear ships would have to run on low enriched uranium, and land-based prototypes offer a compact reactor (comparable to large marine diesel engines). The main barriers to nuclear shipping are related to uncontrolled proliferation of nuclear material, decommissioning and storage of radioactive waste, the significant investment costs, and societal acceptance.

Variability between the individual model realizations lying between the upper and lower bounds shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2 was studied for 2050. Figure 3 shows the CO 2 emissions relative to the respective baseline emissions for all the 200 individual model realizations, with uptake criterion USD 0/t CO 2 , and biofuels and LNG included as alternatives to the oil-based fuels. Also shown is the percentage of reductions achieved by new fuels (dark bars), while the light bars illustrate the percentage reductions achieved by technical and operational reduction measures in addition to any fuel impact. The model realizations with the highest emission reduction are on the left (lower

bound in Figures 1 and 2), where use of alternative fuels is responsible for approximately one third of the reductions.

To the right (upper bound in Figures 1 and 2), can be observed several realizations where the CO 2 cuts are accomplished by technical and operational measures alone; i.e., there is no uptake of alternative fuels. The variability in the results is due to various combinations of fuel prices, leading to different decisions with regards to uptake of alternative fuels and of CO 2 abatement measures.

100 % 100% 90 % 90% 80 % 80% 70 % 70% 60 % 60%
100 %
100%
90
%
90%
80
%
80%
70
%
70%
60
%
60%
50
%
50%
40
%
40%
30
%
30%
20
%
20%
10
%
10%
0 %
0%
Percentage of CO 2 reduction
1
9
17
25
33
41
49
57
65
73
81
89
97
105
113
121
129
137
145
153
161
169
177
185
193
CO 2 emissions relative to baseline

Part of CO 2 reduction due to Alternative fuels (left axis) 2 reduction due to Alternative fuels (left axis)

Part of CO 2 reduction due to operational and technical measures (left axis) 2 reduction due to operational and technical measures (left axis)

due to operational and technical measures (left axis) CO 2 emissions relative to baseline (right axis)

CO 2 emissions relative to baseline (right axis)

Figure 3: CO 2 emissions relative to baseline for 200 individual runs in 2050 (blue line). Share of total reduction from baseline achieved by new fuels (dark bars). Share of total reduction from baseline achieved by technical and operational reduction measures (light bars). The uptake criterion is USD 0/t, with only biofuels and LNG allowed as alternatives to HFO/MDO. This corresponds to the yellow results in Figure 1. The 200 realizations have been ranged by decreasing absolute levels of emission reductions, ordered from left to right.

While Figure 3 shows the CO 2 reductions achieved by use of alternative fuels in 2050, it does not provide information on the fuel mix. Figure 4 (left) shows the number of ships in 2050 using HFO/MDO, biofuels, and LNG for each of the 200 model realizations, while Figure 4 (right) shows the energy use from HFO/MDO, biofuels and LNG. It can be seen that the number of ships using LNG and biofuels is always larger than the share of energy attributable to the same fuels, indicating that HFO will often remain the fuel of choice for large ships. It should also be noted that the model realizations can generally be divided into two major groups: those dominated by HFO/MDO and those dominated by LNG. Extensive use of biofuel is more

Number of ships using HFO/MDO, LNG and Biofuel

% of total fleet size 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 %
% of total fleet size
100 %
90
%
80
%
70
%
60
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
20
%
10
%
0 %
HFO/MDO
LNG
Biofuel
1
20
39
58
77
96
115
134
153
172
191

occasional, and is applied mostly on smaller vessels where biofuel outperforms MDO.

Figure 4 demonstrates how randomness in fuel prices translates to very different images of fuel mix and technology uptake in the future fleet. In sum, Figure 4 shows clearly the viability and effect of biofuel is highly uncertain due to the high uncertainty in oil and gas prices. It also shows that LNG will likely play an important part in the 2050 energy mix for shipping.

Energy use from HFO/MDO, LNG and Biofuel

% of total energy use 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 %
% of total energy use
100 %
90
%
80
%
70
%
60
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
20
%
10
%
0 %
HFO/MDO
LNG
Biofuel
1
24
47
70
93
116
139
162
185

Figure 4: Number of ships in 2050 using HFO/MDO, biofuel and LNG (Left, in % of total number of ships) and energy use from HFO/MDO, biofuels and LNG (Right, in % of total energy use). The uptake criterion is USD 0/t CO 2 , with only biofuels and LNG allowed as alternatives to HFO/MDO. This corresponds to the yellow results in Figure 1. The 200 realizations have been ranged by increasing absolute levels of energy use from HFO/MDO, ordered from left to right.

Discussion

In addITIon To the measures included in this study, it is assumed that other measures, mostly less cost-efficient, will be developed. Examples are maritime carbon capture and storage (MCCS), as well as use of hydrogen as an energy carrier (from renewables), ballast-free ships, hybrid ships, extreme speed reductions, and low temperature waste heat recovery. Several alternative fuels 21 have also been omitted from this study. Furthermore, DNV foresees that many new measures will emerge in the next decades, and some of these may also have a significant effect before 2050. Inclusion of such measures could produce alternative pathways, not covered by this study. It is also recognised that game changes for the industry could occur, e.g., widespread, cheap extraction of unconventional oil and gas, or breakthroughs in biofuel production technologies. Should such developments occur, the accuracy of our projections might be challenged.

It should also be noted that this study calculates the cost- effectiveness of the measures and alternative fuels relative to the default fuels uses today; primarily HFO. With the upcoming fuel sulphur limits, it may well be that the default fuel for many ships will switch to the more expensive MDO. This would improve the relative cost effectiveness of the measures and alternative fuels, and increase the uptake compared to the results presented herein.

Lastly, the results presented in this study are primarily of relevance in a policy context. However, the model can be set up to assess in detail the potential pathways for individual ships or smaller fleets, making it a valuable modelling framework also for ship owners.

Conclusions

In ThIs ThIrd Pathways study, DNV has analysed the

Our baseline pathways show that current CO 2 emissions

The

results also show variation between individual model

projected fleet towards 2050. The long time horizon introduces large uncertainties, e.g., in the price and

realizations. The cost-effective CO 2 reductions that could be achieved by LNG and biofuels are, at best, one third of

effect of measures, the rate of uptake of new technologies

the

total reductions. In some realizations, all reductions

and fuels, the fleet growth estimates. Additionally, only

are

achieved by technical and operational measures,

measures that are currently known can be included. In order to assess the potential for alternative marine fuels and to handle some of the uncertainties, this study uses a probabilistic approach.

will double by 2050 if measures are not introduced.

i.e., alternative fuels are not applied. Investigating the

variability in fuel mix between realizations, the results show that the number of ships on LNG and biofuel is always larger than the share of energy attributable to the same fuels. This indicates that HFO will often remain the fuel of choice for large ships. However, the results indicate that LNG will likely play an important part in the 2050 energy

This corresponds well with the limited number of other

mix

for shipping.

published scenarios 22,23,24. By inclusion of LNG and biofuels, as well as technical and operational measures, the emission levels in 2050 could be kept, cost-effectively,

While this study does not propose likely or expected developments for CO 2 emissions in the fleet, it does

around 50 % below baseline. These results re-affirm that

demonstrate what could be achieved towards 2050 by using

there are a range of cost-effective measures available to

the

currently known technologies. However, in order to

shipping, and indicate many low-hanging fruits that could help to stabilise emissions at present levels.

capitalise on these potentials, ship-owners, technology developers and regulators must take action.

However, limiting global temperature increases to 2°C will require more than stabilising emissions at present levels. For this target to be achieved, global emissions in 2050 must be reduced to 40 % of present levels or below. In this context, shipping emissions alone, if left unabated, would represent at least 10 % of total global emissions in 2050. If shipping should be required to follow a 2°C pathway, our results show that sufficient reductions are achievable by at least two pathways. The first is to allow for nuclear power; our results show that by following this pathway, the cost-effective potential in 2050 increases drastically, with emissions approaching one third of present levels. The second pathway is to provide substantial regulatory or financial incentives for biofuels.

Endnotes

1 Pathways to Low Carbon Shipping, DNV Memo to the IMO Secretary General, 9 th June 2009.

2 Pathways to low carbon shipping - Abatement potential towards 2030. DNV memo released at COP15, December 2009.

3 Eide et al. (2011) Future cost scenarios for reduction of ship CO 2 emissions. Maritime Policy & Management.

4 Hoffman et al. (2012) Effect of proposed CO 2 emission reduction scenarios on capital expenditure, Maritime policy & Management

5 DNV 2011, Technology Outlook 2020.

6 DNV 2012, Shipping 2020. http://www.dnv.com/press_area/press_

releases/2012/dnv_reveals_technology_uptake_towards_2020.asp

7 Dalsøren, S., et al., (2009). Update on emissions and environmental impacts from the international fleet. The contribution from major ship types and ports. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9,2171-2194, 2009.

- Endresen, et al. (2007), A historical reconstruction of ships fuel consumption and emissions, Journal of Geophysical Research, 112, D12301, doi:

10.1029/2006JD007630.

- Endresen, et al., (2003). Emission from international sea transportation and environmental impact, Journal of Geophysical Research, 108 (D17), 4560,

doi:10.1029/2002JD002898.

- Endresen, Ø., et al., (2004). Substantiation of a lower estimate for the bunker inventory: Comment on „Updated emissions from ocean shipping” by James J. Corbett and Horst W. Koehler, Journal of Geophysical Research, 109, D23302, doi: 10.1029/2004JD004853.

- Endresen, Ø., et al., (2005). Improved modeling of ship SO 2 emissions – A fuel based approach, Atmospheric Environment, 39, pp. 3621-3628.

- Endresen, Ø., et al., (2008), The environmental impacts of increased international maritime shipping, past trends and future perspectives. OECD/ITF Global Forum on Transport and Environ. in a Globalising World, Guadalajara, Mexico. Also published in OECD (2010), Globalisation, Transport and the Environ., ISBN 978926407919-9.

- Eide, M. et al., (2009). Future CO 2 emissions: Outlook and challenges for the shipping industry. Proceedings of the 10 th International Marine Design Conference (IMDC), Trondheim, Norway.

- Eide, M.S., et al., (2009). Cost-effectiveness assessment of CO 2 reducing measures in shipping. Maritime Policy & Management, 36:4,367 — 384

- Longva, T., et al., (2010). A cost–benefit approach for determining a required CO 2 index level for future ship design. Maritime Policy & Management, VOL. 37, NO. 2, 129–143.

- Eide, M. et al (2012). Reducing CO 2 from shipping–Do non-CO 2 effects matter? Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 12, 1–49, 2012.

8 IPCC, Chapter 5. IEA, Energy Technology Perspectives 2008, Chapter 15, Transport.

9 Endresen, Ø., et al. (2008) The environmental impacts of increased international maritime shipping, past trends and future perspectives. OECD conference, Mexico.

10 DNV report 2012-0719 “Lifecycle Assessment of Alternative Fuels for Maritime Applications”.

11 DNV 2012-0719, “Lifecycle Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Alternative Fuels for Maritime Applications”

12 Buhaug et al. (2009), Second IMO GHG Study 2009. International Maritime Organization (IMO).

13 This study considers both the international and domestic fleet, but service vessels (tugs, work boats etc.) and fishing vessels are excluded. 88% of CO 2 emissions are covered by this fleet.

14 The assumed fleet build rates can vary (with uniform distribution) within a range of ±10%, compared to the baseline estimates by Eide et al. (2011). The baseline estimates include a very moderate fleet growth towards 2020 due to overcapacity, and a “return to normal” in the following decades.

15 DNV report 2010-1800 “Identifying and Overcoming Barriers to the Implementation of Emission Reduction Measures in Shipping”.

16 Experience from recent newbuilding projects suggest that the EEDI has already impacted on the design of ships. This is because the ships being built today will compete with the ships to be built in 5, 10 or 15 years, and hence ships today must meet future standards to remain competitive.

17 DNV report 2011-1663 “Maritime Fuel Price Projections to 2035”.

18 DNV Report 2010-0324 “Nuclear Powered Ships – a feasibility study”.

19 UNEP (2011). Bridging the emissions Gap – A UNEP Synthesis Report.

20 DNV 2011, Technology Outlook 2020

21 DNV report 2011-1449 “Alternative Fuels for Maritime Applications”.

22 Eyring et al. (2005), Emissions from international shipping: 2. Impact of future technologies on scenarios until 2050. Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, D17306.

23 Buhaug et al. (2009), Second IMO GHG Study 2009. International Maritime Organization (IMO).

24 Eide et al. (2007), Ship emissions of the future. Report for EC QUANTIFY Project, DNV.

Design, layout and print production: Erik Tanche Nilssen AS, 12/2012 Printed on environmentally friendly paper.

AS, 12/2012 Printed on environmentally friendly paper. Det Norske Veritas NO-1322 Høvik, Norway Tel: +47 67

Det Norske Veritas NO-1322 Høvik, Norway Tel: +47 67 57 99 00

www.dnv.com

Printed on environmentally friendly paper. Det Norske Veritas NO-1322 Høvik, Norway Tel: +47 67 57 99