IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i11p2739-d364877.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maritime Transport in a Life Cycle Perspective: How Fuels, Vessel Types, and Operational Profiles Influence Energy Demand and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Author

Listed:
  • Grusche J. Seithe

    (DNV-GL Group Technology and Research, Maritime Transport, Veritasveien 1, 1363 Høvik, Norway)

  • Alexandra Bonou

    (Laboratory Of Heterogeneous Mixtures and Combustion Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Polytechnioupoli-Zografou Heroon Polytechniou 9, 15780 Athens, Greece)

  • Dimitrios Giannopoulos

    (Laboratory Of Heterogeneous Mixtures and Combustion Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Polytechnioupoli-Zografou Heroon Polytechniou 9, 15780 Athens, Greece)

  • Chariklia A. Georgopoulou

    (DNV-GL Maritime R&D and Advisory, South East Europe and Middle East, 5 Aitolikou Str., 18545 Piraeus, Greece)

  • Maria Founti

    (Laboratory Of Heterogeneous Mixtures and Combustion Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Polytechnioupoli-Zografou Heroon Polytechniou 9, 15780 Athens, Greece)

Abstract

A “Well-to-Propeller” Life Cycle Assessment of maritime transport was performed with a European geographical focus. Four typical types of vessels with specific operational profiles were assessed: a container vessel and a tanker (both with 2-stroke engines), a passenger roll-on/roll-off (Ro-Pax) and a cruise vessel (both with 4-stroke engines). All main engines were dual fuel operated with Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) or Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). Alternative onshore and offshore fuel supply chains were considered. Primary energy use and greenhouse gas emissions were assessed. Raw material extraction was found to be the most impactful life cycle stage (~90% of total energy use). Regarding greenhouse gases, liquefaction was the key issue. When transitioning from HFO to LNG, the systems were mainly influenced by a reduction in cargo capacity due to bunkering requirements and methane slip, which depends on the fuel supply chain (onshore has 64% more slip than offshore) and the engine type (4-stroke engines have 20% more slip than 2-stroke engines). The combination of alternative fuel supply chains and specific operational profiles allowed for a complete system assessment. The results demonstrated that multiple opposing drivers affect the environmental performance of maritime transport, a useful insight towards establishing emission abatement strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Grusche J. Seithe & Alexandra Bonou & Dimitrios Giannopoulos & Chariklia A. Georgopoulou & Maria Founti, 2020. "Maritime Transport in a Life Cycle Perspective: How Fuels, Vessel Types, and Operational Profiles Influence Energy Demand and Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:11:p:2739-:d:364877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/11/2739/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/11/2739/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomson, Heather & Corbett, James J. & Winebrake, James J., 2015. "Natural gas as a marine fuel," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 153-167.
    2. Bengtsson, Selma & Fridell, Erik & Andersson, Karin, 2012. "Environmental assessment of two pathways towards the use of biofuels in shipping," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 451-463.
    3. Bonou, Alexandra & Laurent, Alexis & Olsen, Stig I., 2016. "Life cycle assessment of onshore and offshore wind energy-from theory to application," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 327-337.
    4. Schönsteiner, Karl & Massier, Tobias & Hamacher, Thomas, 2016. "Sustainable transport by use of alternative marine and aviation fuels—A well-to-tank analysis to assess interactions with Singapore's energy system," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 853-871.
    5. Mansouri, S. Afshin & Lee, Habin & Aluko, Oluwakayode, 2015. "Multi-objective decision support to enhance environmental sustainability in maritime shipping: A review and future directions," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 3-18.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elena Katysheva, 2023. "Analysis of the Interconnected Development Potential of the Oil, Gas and Transport Industries in the Russian Arctic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Tomas Gil-Lopez & Amparo Verdu-Vazquez, 2021. "Environmental Analysis of the Use of Liquefied Natural Gas in Maritime Transport within the Port Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    3. Andres Laasma & Riina Otsason & Ulla Tapaninen & Olli-Pekka Hilmola, 2022. "Evaluation of Alternative Fuels for Coastal Ferries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Nestor Goicoechea & Luis María Abadie, 2021. "Optimal Slow Steaming Speed for Container Ships under the EU Emission Trading System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-25, November.
    5. Tomasz Neumann, 2021. "Comparative Analysis of Long-Distance Transportation with the Example of Sea and Rail Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-13, March.
    6. Alice Bittante & Henrik Saxén, 2020. "Design of Small LNG Supply Chain by Multi-Period Optimization," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-19, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xing, Hui & Spence, Stephen & Chen, Hua, 2020. "A comprehensive review on countermeasures for CO2 emissions from ships," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    2. Kirsi Spoof-Tuomi & Seppo Niemi, 2020. "Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Fuel Choices for Short Sea Shipping," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Yifan Wang & Laurence A. Wright, 2021. "A Comparative Review of Alternative Fuels for the Maritime Sector: Economic, Technology, and Policy Challenges for Clean Energy Implementation," World, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-26, October.
    4. Wang, Tingsong & Cheng, Peiyue & Zhen, Lu, 2023. "Green development of the maritime industry: Overview, perspectives, and future research opportunities," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    5. ben Brahim, Till & Wiese, Frauke & Münster, Marie, 2019. "Pathways to climate-neutral shipping: A Danish case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. Elizabeth Lindstad & Henning Borgen & Gunnar S. Eskeland & Christopher Paalson & Harilaos Psaraftis & Osman Turan, 2019. "The Need to Amend IMO’s EEDI to Include a Threshold for Performance in Waves (Realistic Sea Conditions) to Achieve the Desired GHG Reductions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Bilgili, Levent, 2021. "Comparative assessment of alternative marine fuels in life cycle perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    8. Andreas von Döllen & YoungSeok Hwang & Stephan Schlüter, 2021. "The Future Is Colorful—An Analysis of the CO 2 Bow Wave and Why Green Hydrogen Cannot Do It Alone," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-20, September.
    9. Park, Hyunjun & Lee, Sanghuk & Jeong, Jinyeong & Chang, Daejun, 2018. "Design of the compressor-assisted LNG fuel gas supply system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 1017-1027.
    10. Van Chien Pham & Jae-Hyuk Choi & Beom-Seok Rho & Jun-Soo Kim & Kyunam Park & Sang-Kyun Park & Van Vang Le & Won-Ju Lee, 2021. "A Numerical Study on the Combustion Process and Emission Characteristics of a Natural Gas-Diesel Dual-Fuel Marine Engine at Full Load," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-28, March.
    11. Sun, Zhen & You, Xianhui, 2024. "Life cycle carbon footprint accounting of an offshore wind farm in Southeast China—Simplified models and carbon benchmarks for typhoons," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 355(C).
    12. Niklas Andersen & Ola Eriksson & Karl Hillman & Marita Wallhagen, 2016. "Wind Turbines’ End-of-Life: Quantification and Characterisation of Future Waste Materials on a National Level," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-24, November.
    13. Li, Jinying & Li, Sisi & Wu, Fan, 2020. "Research on carbon emission reduction benefit of wind power project based on life cycle assessment theory," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 456-468.
    14. Rasoulinezhad, Ehsan & Taghizadeh-Hesary, Farhad & Yoshino, Naoyuki & Sarker, Tapan, 2019. "Russian Federation–East Asia Liquefied Natural Gas Trade Patterns and Regional Energy Security," ADBI Working Papers 965, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    15. Sofia Dahlgren & Jonas Ammenberg, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Public Transport, Part II—Applying a Multi-Criteria Assessment Method to Compare Different Bus Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-30, January.
    16. Kian-Guan Lim & Michelle Lim, 2020. "Financial performance of shipping firms that increase LNG carriers and the support of eco-innovation," Journal of Shipping and Trade, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-25, December.
    17. De Luca Peña, Laura Vittoria & Taelman, Sue Ellen & Bas, Bilge & Staes, Jan & Mertens, Jan & Clavreul, Julie & Préat, Nils & Dewulf, Jo, 2024. "Monetized (socio-)environmental handprint and footprint of an offshore windfarm in the Belgian Continental Shelf: An assessment of local, regional and global impacts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 353(PA).
    18. Zhang, Xiaoyue & Huang, Guohe & Liu, Lirong & Li, Kailong, 2022. "Development of a stochastic multistage lifecycle programming model for electric power system planning – A case study for the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    19. Ali Najmi & Taha H. Rashidi & Alireza Abbasi & S. Travis Waller, 2017. "Reviewing the transport domain: an evolutionary bibliometrics and network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 843-865, February.
    20. Rueda-Bayona, Juan Gabriel & Cabello Eras, Juan Jose & Chaparro, Tatiana R., 2022. "Impacts generated by the materials used in offshore wind technology on Human Health, Natural Environment and Resources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PA).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:11:p:2739-:d:364877. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.