WorldCargo
SHIPPING
news
Table 4: Capacity and engine size per mode lines and shippers are not charged emissions per TEU compared to
Mode Capacity Engine Load Mean Mean
for the CO emissions created by East Coast ports, or US$7.50 per
2
(TEU) size factor kW kW
moving cargo. TEU. This charge will be much
(kW) (%) (in use) (TEU)
Utilities that generate power, smaller than vessel charter, canal
Panamax ship 4500 45,000 80 36,000 8 especially in Europe, are currently transit fees, fuel, rail, trucking, ter-
NPX ship* 12,000 90,000 90 81,000 6.75 trading carbon at around $US30 minal handling, and other costs
Stack train** 400 9000 30 2700 6.75
per tonne. In the US, trading is that will be the primary drivers
(west coast) (3 x 4000 hp)
still on a voluntary level and prices of which ports are selected.
Stack train** 400 9000 30 1800 4.5
are in the range of US$3-4 per Although West Coast ports are
(east coast) (2 x 4000 hp)
Truck 1.8*** 300 60 180 100
tonne on the Chicago climate moderately greener than East
exchange. Coast or Gulf ports for the Shang-
Notes: * NPX - New Panamax or Future Panamax vessel. ** Stack
Even if US shippers were hai to Chicago trade, the magni-
trains are assumed to be 2000m long. *** Although this article is
charged US$30/tonne for emis- tude of the difference is unlikely
about a notional 40ft container, AECOM uses a 1.8 TEU benchmark
because around 20% of container truck trips in US are single 20ft
sions, West Coast ports will save to influence the decision on
Figure 1 - the 10 routes analysed; inland from New York is analysed by rail
moves, so the mean TEU being moved behind each truck is 1.8
only about 0.25 tonne of CO which route the cargo takes. a74
2 and by truck. (Source: Aecom)
of locomotives required. As already dramatically less green mode of
noted, two locomotives are typi- transport.
What is the NPX limit?
cal for intermodal trains from the One way to put CO emissions
2
East and Gulf Coasts, while three into perspective is to compare the As previously discussed in World- it will save enormously on lock
are required for transit from the overall CO emissions for our 40ft Cargo News (January 2009, pp23- maintenance costs, due to much
2
West Coast. container to the 10.1 kgs of CO 23), the upper limit for a Future lower pressures on the concrete
2
that are emitted from burning Panamax or New Panamax (NPX) walls and steel mitre lock gates.
Much the same each gallon of diesel (2.64 kgs per containership looks likely to be However, as tug widths vary,
Figure 4 demonstrates that there litre). One TEU of cargo can move around the 13,500 TEU mark. there is a view that somewhat
is not a dramatic improvement in from Shanghai to Chicago via the The new locks will measure wider and longer vessels might be
emissions efficiency with larger West Coast for approximately 110 427m x 55m x 18.3m (allowing for allowed - say 50m beam and 379m
vessels because engine size is fairly gallons of diesel worth of CO 15.3m draft in tropical fresh wa- long, to create one more tier on
2
well correlated with TEU capac- emissions. East Coast ports of en- ter), but ACP has said it will limit deck (20-wide instead of 19-wide)
ity for container vessels. try will add at least 20 gallons vessel size to 366m x 49m x 15.2m. and an extra 40ft bay.
Figure 4 also shows that rail worth of emissions. This will enable ACP to use Given known designs for ul-
transit is approximately equal to tugs instead of very expensive tra-large container vessels, this
vessel transit in terms of CO per Cost of carbon bollard pull locos (as required for would appear to translate roughly
2 Figure 2 - overall emissions with current Panamax vessel. (ibid)
TEU-km, whereas trucks are a At the time of writing, shipping today’s MaxiPanamax ships) and into 13,500 TEU capacity. a74
Figure 3 - emissions with future Panamax vessel, 12,000 TEU assumed. (ibid)
Figure 4 - unit emissions by mode. (ibid)
Long Beach extends
clean fuel incentives
The Port of Long Beach has voluntary programme (April-
agreed to cover more of the costs June 2009).
of switching to clean fuels near As previously reported in
the port. Last July the port be- WorldCargo News, from July this
gan compensating ocean carri- year CARB regulations will re-
ers for the difference between quire all vessel operators to switch
lower cost, dirtier bunkers and to low-sulphur fuels near the
the more expensive, cleaner- California coast. The low take-up
burning, low-sulphur fuels, if of the voluntary programme may
they voluntarily switched over suggest that enforcement prob-
within 20-40 nm of the harbour. lems are looming.
The port is now proposing
to increase the reimbursement LA different stance
for each vessel trip by 50%, to In contrast to its neighbour, the
cover the vessel operators’ cost Port of Los Angeles is not go-
of transitioning to clean fuels. ing to increase the marine fuel
“We have talked to the ves- incentive. Ports spokeswoman
sel operators and we made this Lori Keller said: “Limited data
adjustment to bring more of our were provided by a small
ocean carrier partners into the number of shipping lines that
low-sulfur fuels program,” said did not make clear what their
Richard D Steinke, the port’s uncompensated costs are, and
executive director. therefore how much we should
The port says that some 20 pay. We do not believe that pay-
ocean carriers representing 17% ing more would materially in-
of vessels currently participate crease program participation.”
in the programme. The in- She added, however, that the
creased incentive will apply for Board was “continuing to re-
the final three months of the view its options.” a74
22 March 2009
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40