Sulphur oxide emissions:
A challenge for shipping

	Friendly “Mariella”. Viking Line has been running all of its vessels on low-sulphur bunker oil for approximately ten years. PHOTO: PÄR-HENRIK SJÖSTRÖM

Damage to the environment
If costs for the damage to health and environment caused by national and international shipping to and from Sweden are taken as a starting point, the result is quite different, says Henrik Swahn, Senior adviser at the Swedish Maritime Administration.
Calculations show that nitric oxide (NOx) emissions from such transport costs SEK 750 million (EUR 82.8 million) per annum, carbon dioxide emissions SEK 574 million (EUR 63.4 million) and sulphur oxide (SOx) emissions SEK 125 million (EUR 13.8 million) per annum.
In 1998, Sweden introduced environmentally differentiated fairway dues. The aim was to lower the SOx and NOx emissions from vessels by 70–75 per cent by the beginning of the 21 century.
These environmentally differentiated fairway dues give discounts for cargo vessels using bunker oil containing less than one per cent sulphur and passenger ferries containing less than 0.5 per cent.
– Evaluations have been carried out, and up until now these emissions have been reduced by a few dozen per cent, which is quite good after all, says Henrik Swahn.
The Swedish NGO secretariat on acid rain is a non-profit organisation which was founded 20 years ago. It is run by five Swedish environmental organisations with the chief purpose of promoting awareness of the problems associated with air pollution and to bring about a reduction in the emission of air pollutants.
Christer Ågren, Director of the secretariat in Göteborg, says the information on emissions is much better nowadays:
– It was not until the end of the 1980s that people became aware of the fact that the shipping industry had a part in NOx and SOx emissions.

A clear emission trend
Today the trend is clear. Sulphur oxide emissions from land-based sources within Europe are steadily decreasing while emissions from international shipping around Europe – i.e. the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, the north-eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean – are growing.
Christer Ågren says Sweden is the country which stands out from the rest:
– Sweden started to tackle the problems with emissions from shipping faster than any other country. Some shipping companies had already started to use low-sulphur oil at the beginning of the 1990s. At the same time, Sweden put pressure on IMO to bring about international rules.

	“Östrand”. SCA Transforest runs all three of its vessels on low-sulphur oil.

“The only way forward”
In the mid 1990s, Swedish shipping companies and ports began a national co-operation with the Swedish Maritime Administration. This led to the introduction of the environmentally differentiated fairway and port dues mentioned above.
– Someone has to be the forerunner and point out the direction. That’s the only way forward, says Christer Ågren. Even if it is good to work internationally, we shouldn’t wait for things to happen elsewhere. What we have done in Sweden is influencing others – things are happening within the EU.
Lenah Soldan, Managing Director of the low-sulphur oil-producing Shell company Sannes AB, says that it is easy for the Swedes to feel superior when we have refineries producing low-sulphur bunker oil.
– It is not that easy to get hold of the low-sulphur oil, she claims, and questions whether there would really be enough if everyone was forced to change from high to low-sulphur oil by law.
She does not believe that reduced port dues have any effect on what kind of oil is used.
– It is not a big enough incentive to change from high-sulphur to low-sulphur bunker oil.

Obstacle of swapping
Lenah Soldan sees yet another obstacle when it comes to swapping to low-sulphur oil – the prejudice among, for example, chief engineers.
– Some believe that low-sulphur oil is rubbish, that it is a bad lubricant. It is the job of the oil companies to show that there is no major difference and that low-sulphur oil demands only small adjustments.
In 1998, the Port of Stockholm introduced differentiated port dues based partly on the sulphur content in the oil used by calling vessels and partly on the level of emission control regarding nitric oxide.
– It is easy to set a good example when you have got customers who are willing to make the investments required, says Christel Wiman, Managing Director at the Ports of Stockholm Group, partly addressing her flattery to Kaj Jansson, Technical Manager at Viking Line, which has been running all of their vessels on low-sulphur bunker oil for approximately ten years.
Christel Wiman believes that one way towards reduced emissions from ships is to confront the charterers, saying: “You have high environmental demands on the production of your products – but what about your transports?”

Must take responsibility
Lenah Soldan is of the same opinion. The charterers must take responsibility for the amount of sulphur in the oil.
– To change from high to low-sulphur oil costs, however, it does not cost as much as we make ourselves believe, she continues.
– But for the countries on the eastern side of the Baltic Sea, for example, paying for the more expensive low-sulphur oil is a problem, Christel Wiman says.
Bunker oil containing one per cent sulphur costs approximately USD 15 extra per ton in northern Europe. Up until now the average cost in Rotterdam for ordinary heavy fuel oil during 2002 has been USD 135/ton.

1,000 tons a year
In 1996, the Swedish forest industry started discussions on how to take an offensive attitude towards environmental questions, says Rolf Johannesson, Managing Director of SCA Transforest AB. The year after, the forest company Assi Domän decided to change to low-sulphur oil. The rest of the industry soon followed.
In January 1998, SCA Transforest had converted all three of its vessels to low-sulphur bunker oil. The reduction in sulphur oxide emissions amounts to 70 per cent, or about 1,000 tons a year.
The Swedish Shipowners’ Association (SSA) works to create opportunities for the reduction of sulphur emissions. It is a long-term activity which involves arousing public opinion and creating a demand among charterers for the use of low-sulphur oil, despite its higher cost.
SSA is working for a ban on high-sulphur oil and many of SSA’s members have already changed to low-sulphur oil.
Approximately ten per cent of the sum that shipowners have to pay to swap to low-sulphur oil is covered by the discounts given through environmentally differented port and fairway dues.
– But environmentally differentiated dues are not enough, says Bertil Arvidsson. We must introduce a system that “pays” for every reduction. A system that gives incentives to aim at zero emissions.
One possibility is the emission trading system, proposed by SSA. This is a financial incentive in which SOx and NOx reductions give the shipowner a credit which can be sold on the emission market. The probable buyers are 1,000 land-based European industries which the EU has ordered to reduce emissions. Credits are distributed only for reductions below IMO’s strictest rules – i.e. a sulphur content of 1.5 per cent.
– It is 13 times cheaper to reduce one ton of sulphur oxide emissions from a vessel compared to the average cost for a land-based industry within the European Union, says Bertil Arvidsson.
Christer Ågren, however, thinks that the trading system has its weak points. It calls for a change in existing EU legislation for land-based industry.
– This will take at least ten years to implement, he says.
At the time of writing approximately 1,300 vessels are NOx certified, allowing them reduced fairway dues. This is equivalent to about 80 per cent of the calls at Swedish ports.
Bertil Arvidsson’s wish for the future is more research and development on alternative sources of energy for the shipping industry, e.g. sun-generated hydrogen gas.
When it comes to reducing sulphur oxide emissions, Rolf Johannesson hopes for more rigorous laws within the European Union.
– We won’t get any further without legislation and deadlines, he says.

//Anna Ljunggren

Footnote: Currency rate used EUR 1 = SEK 9.06

Back to SSG 10, November 15

Latest update 18-10-2006 8:49

All material © Scandinavian Shipping Gazette.

Scandinavian Shipping Gazette | www.shipgaz.com | info@shipgaz.com | webmaster | Contact us | Cookie information