IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2019i1p165-d301541.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impacts of the Increasingly Strict Sulfur Limit on Compliance Option Choices: The Case Study of Chinese SECA

Author

Listed:
  • Lixian Fan

    (School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

  • Bingmei Gu

    (School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

Abstract

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has proposed several environmental regulations on controlling SO x and NO x emissions from ships in coastal areas. Under the framework of IMO, some areas have established strict emission control areas (ECAs) to reduce emissions, which mainly contain Europe and North America. To further strengthen the control and supervision over air pollutants from shipping activities, the Sulfur cap regulation of 0.5% by mass will come into effect on 1 January, 2020 globally, when all the sailing vessels on the high sea should use fuels with sulfur content less than 0.5%. This limit is stricter for the global recognized sulfur emission control areas (SECAs), where it was 0.1% since 1 January 2015. However, Chinese local SECA lags behind the globally recognized SECAs, where the 0.5% Sulfur cap was implemented from 2016 and it has to be strengthened along with the global sulfur cap 2020. These increasingly stringent emission regulations have huge effects on shipping operators. The current study discusses the potential impacts of the stricter sulfur cap on operators’ compliance option choices, where fuel-switching and scrubber system are analyzed under different sulfur limits. Meanwhile, the slow steaming practice is incorporated into the fuel-switching option by considering speed differentiation in different sulfur limit areas. This study develops a cost-minimizing model using NPV (net present value) method. It analyzes the optimal option within vessels’ lifespan considering the tradeoff between the initial investment and future operational cost for newbuilding vessels based on a case study. In addition, emissions of CO 2 and SO x are compared under different compliance options in different sulfur cap scenarios. Our results find that the scrubber system is a suitable option to comply with the 0.5% global sulfur limit, and a higher efficiency of sulfur abatement can be attained by the scrubber system option. However, it emits more carbon emissions due to higher energy consumption used by the scrubber system. In addition, the effects of additional vessels deployed in the cycle on the compliance choices are also demonstrated in the analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Lixian Fan & Bingmei Gu, 2019. "Impacts of the Increasingly Strict Sulfur Limit on Compliance Option Choices: The Case Study of Chinese SECA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:165-:d:301541
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/165/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/165/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jingbo Yin & Lixian Fan & Zhongzhen Yang & Kevin X. Li, 2014. "Slow steaming of liner trade: its economic and environmental impacts," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 149-158, March.
    2. Ronald A. Halim & Lucie Kirstein & Olaf Merk & Luis M. Martinez, 2018. "Decarbonization Pathways for International Maritime Transport: A Model-Based Policy Impact Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-30, June.
    3. Wang, Kun & Fu, Xiaowen & Luo, Meifeng, 2015. "Modeling the impacts of alternative emission trading schemes on international shipping," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 35-49.
    4. Yoo, Byeong-Yong, 2017. "Economic assessment of liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a marine fuel for CO2 carriers compared to marine gas oil (MGO)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 772-780.
    5. Koesler, Simon & Achtnicht, Martin & Köhler, Jonathan, 2015. "Course set for a cap? A case study among ship operators on a maritime ETS," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 20-30.
    6. Yuen, Kum Fai & Li, Kevin X. & Xu, Gangyan & Wang, Xueqin & Wong, Yiik Diew, 2019. "A taxonomy of resources for sustainable shipping management: Their interrelationships and effects on business performance," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 316-332.
    7. Zis, Thalis P.V., 2019. "Prospects of cold ironing as an emissions reduction option," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 82-95.
    8. Yuen, Kum Fai & Wang, Xueqin & Wong, Yiik Diew & Zhou, Qingji, 2018. "The effect of sustainable shipping practices on shippers’ loyalty: The mediating role of perceived value, trust and transaction cost," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 123-135.
    9. Onder Canbulat & Murat Aymelek & Osman Turan & Evangelos Boulougouris, 2019. "An application of BBNs on the integrated energy efficiency of ship–port interface: a dry bulk shipping case," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(7), pages 845-865, October.
    10. Bert Van Wee & Sabine Roeser, 2013. "Ethical Theories and the Cost--Benefit Analysis-Based Ex Ante Evaluation of Transport Policies and Plans," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(6), pages 743-760, November.
    11. James J. Winebrake & James J. Corbett & Fatima Umar & Daniel Yuska, 2019. "Pollution Tradeoffs for Conventional and Natural Gas-Based Marine Fuels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    12. Yang Lin & Longzhong Yan & Ying-Ming Wang, 2019. "Performance Evaluation and Investment Analysis for Container Port Sustainable Development in China: An Inverse DEA Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-13, August.
    13. Gu, Yewen & Wallace, Stein W., 2017. "Scrubber: a potentially overestimated compliance method for the Emission Control Areas - The importance of involving a ship's sailing pattern in the evaluation," Discussion Papers 2017/13, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    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. Bai, Xiwen & Hou, Yao & Yang, Dong, 2021. "Choose clean energy or green technology? Empirical evidence from global ships," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Riccardo Giusti & Daniele Manerba & Roberto Tadei, 2021. "Smart Steaming: A New Flexible Paradigm for Synchromodal Logistics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, April.

    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. Suneet Singh & Ashish Dwivedi & Saurabh Pratap, 2023. "Sustainable Maritime Freight Transportation: Current Status and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-23, April.
    2. Sheng, Dian & Li, Zhi-Chun & Fu, Xiaowen & Gillen, David, 2017. "Modeling the effects of unilateral and uniform emission regulations under shipping company and port competition," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 99-114.
    3. Monios, Jason & Ng, Adolf K.Y., 2021. "Competing institutional logics and institutional erosion in environmental governance of maritime transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Dai, Lei & Hu, Hao & Wang, Zhaojing, 2020. "Is Shore Side Electricity greener? An environmental analysis and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    5. Gu, Yewen & Wallace, Stein W. & Wang, Xin, 2018. "Can an Emission Trading Scheme really reduce CO2 emissions in the short term? Evidence from a maritime fleet composition and deployment model," Discussion Papers 2018/10, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    6. Fan, Lixian & Gu, Bingmei & Luo, Meifeng, 2020. "A cost-benefit analysis of fuel-switching vs. hybrid scrubber installation: A container route through the Chinese SECA case," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 336-344.
    7. Patrizia Serra & Gianfranco Fancello, 2020. "Towards the IMO’s GHG Goals: A Critical Overview of the Perspectives and Challenges of the Main Options for Decarbonizing International Shipping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-32, April.
    8. 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).
    9. Xiaofang Wu & Luoping Zhang & Huan Feng, 2019. "Green Strategic Planning Approach for International Shipping Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27, December.
    10. Vinicius Andrade dos Santos & Patrícia Pereira da Silva & Luís Manuel Ventura Serrano, 2022. "The Maritime Sector and Its Problematic Decarbonization: A Systematic Review of the Contribution of Alternative Fuels," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-30, May.
    11. Govindan, Kannan & Rajeev, A. & Padhi, Sidhartha S. & Pati, Rupesh K., 2020. "Supply chain sustainability and performance of firms: A meta-analysis of the literature," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    12. Zhang, Yilin & Zhang, Anming & Wang, Kun & Zheng, Shiyuan & Yang, Hangjun & Hong, Junjie, 2023. "Impact of CR Express and intermodal freight transport competition on China-Europe Route: Emission and welfare implications," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    13. Davide Borelli & Francesco Devia & Corrado Schenone & Federico Silenzi & Luca A. Tagliafico, 2021. "Dynamic Modelling of LNG Powered Combined Energy Systems in Port Areas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, June.
    14. Olympia Nisiforou & Louisa Marie Shakou & Afroditi Magou & Alexandros G. Charalambides, 2022. "A Roadmap towards the Decarbonization of Shipping: A Participatory Approach in Cyprus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-27, February.
    15. Sotiria Lagouvardou & Harilaos N. Psaraftis & Thalis Zis, 2020. "A Literature Survey on Market-Based Measures for the Decarbonization of Shipping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, May.
    16. Dai, Wayne Lei & Fu, Xiaowen & Yip, Tsz Leung & Hu, Hao & Wang, Kun, 2018. "Emission charge and liner shipping network configuration – An economic investigation of the Asia-Europe route," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 291-305.
    17. I. Mallidis & S. Despoudi & R. Dekker & E. Iakovou & D. Vlachos, 2020. "The impact of sulphur limit fuel regulations on maritime supply chain network design," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 677-695, November.
    18. Bilgili, Levent, 2023. "A systematic review on the acceptance of alternative marine fuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    19. Mariarosaria Lombardi & Giuseppe Maffia & Caterina Tricase, 2019. "Sustainable Bulk-Packaging System for Sugar Shipping: Case Study of the Enterprise Leader in Europe," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, November.
    20. Nuanphromsakul, Kajohnjak & Szczepańska-Woszczyna, Katarzyna & Kot, Sebastian & Chaveesuk, Singha & Chaiyasoonthorn, Wornchanok, 2022. "Sustainability of Rubber Farmers Cooperatives: Empirical Evaluation of Determining Factors," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 14(4), December.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:165-:d:301541. 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.