ESTIMATING EXHAUST GAS EMISSIONS FROM SHIPS ON PORT OF ZONGULDAK

Abstract

In this study, the ship-borne air emissions in the port of Zonguldak were examined based on ship activity-based methods and total emissions generated from ships were estimated as 820 t y-1 for NOX, 45.700 t y-1 for CO2, 350 t y-1 for SOX, 32 t y-1 for VOC, 44 t y-1 for PM for the year of 2019. General cargo and ro-ro cargo ships are the main polluters in the port and emissions generated from the at-sea mode are higher than the port and maneuvering modes. There are five neighborhoods within 2km from the port of Zonguldak which are at risk of shipping emissions. At least 46,255 people will be exposed to dangerous shipping emissions such as NOX, SOX, PM along with other emissions within 2 km of the port area. The environmental cost of the port emissions for each contaminant has been estimated as $27 million and $43.586 per ship call. All types of emissions in the port region should be observed regularly and measures to decrease the emissions should be implemented.

Keywords

• Zonguldak,Environmental Pollution,Port,Emissions,Environmental Costs

References

1. [1] UNCTAD, 2019. Review of Maritime Transport 2018. New York. October 2018. https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/rmt2018_en.pdf.
2. [2] Corbett, J.J., Winebrake, J.J., Green, E.H., Kasibhatla, P., Eyring, V., Lauer, A., 2007, Mortality from ship emissions: a global assessment, Environmental Science & Technology 41 (24), 8512–8518. doi: 10.1021/es071686z.
3. [3] Eyring, V., Isaksen, I., Berntsen, T., Collins, W., Corbett, J., Endresen, O., Grainger, R., Moldanova, J., Schlager, H., Stevenson, D., 2009, Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: Shipping, Atmospheric Environment 44 (2010) 4735–4771. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.04.059.
4. [4] Deniz, C., Kilic, A., 2009, Estimation and assessment of shipping emissions in the region of Ambarlı Port, Turkey, Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 107-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ep.10373.
5. [5] Saxe, H., Larsen, T., 2004, Air pollution from ships in three Danish ports, Atmos. Environ. 38, 4057-4067.
6. [6] Saraçoglu, H., Deniz, C., Kilic, A., 2013, An investigation on the effects of ship sourced emissions in Izmir port, Turkey, Sci. World J. 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/218324.
7. [7] Lonati, G., Cernuschi, S., Sidi, S., 2010, Air quality impact assessment of at-berth ship emissions: Case-study for the project of a new freight port, Science of the Total Environment 409 (2010) 192–200. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.08.029.
8. [8] Goldsworthy, L., Goldsworthy, B., 2015, Modelling of ship engine exhaust emissions in ports and extensive coastal waters based on terrestrial AIS data; An Australian case study, Environmental Modelling & Software 63 (2015) 45-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.09.009.

9. [9] Popa, C., Filorin, N. 2014, Shipping Air Pollution Assessment. Study Case on Constanta Port, 14th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2014. doi:10.5593/sgem2014/b42/s19.067
10. [10] Lopez-Aparicio, S., Tønnesen, D., Thanh, T.N., Neilson, H., 2015, Shipping emissions in a Nordic port: Assessment of mitigation strategies, Transportation Research Part D 53 (2017) 205–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.04.021.
11. [11] Song, S., 2014, Ship emissions inventory, social cost and eco-efficiency in Shanghai Yangshan port, Atmos. Environ. 82, 288e297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.10.006.
12. [12] Yang, D.Q., Kwan, S.H., Lu, T., Fu, Q.Y., Cheng, J.M., Streets, D.G., Wu, Y.M., Li, J.J., 2007, An emission inventory of marine vessels in Shanghai in 2003, Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 5183-5190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es061979c.
13. [13] Zeydan, O., Yildirim, Y., 2015, Zonguldak Metropoliten Bolgesinde Hava Kalitesi Modellemesi, 6. Ulusal Hava Kirliliği ve Kontrolü Sempozyumu-2015 7-9 Ekim 2015, İzmir.
14. [14] Akyüz, M., Çabuk, H., 2008, Particle-associated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the atmospheric environment of Zonguldak, Turkey, Science of the Total Environment 405 (2008) 62–70. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.07.026
15. [15] Akyüz, M., Çabuk, H., 2009, Meteorological variations of PM2.5/PM10 concentrations and particle-associated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the atmospheric environment of Zonguldak, Turkey, Journal of Hazardous Materials 170 (2009) 13–21. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.05.029
16. [16] Akyüz, M., Çabuk, H., 2010, Gas–particle partitioning and seasonal variation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the atmosphere of Zonguldak, Turkey, Science of the Total Environment 408 (2010) 5550–5558. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.07.063.
17. [17] Tagil, S., Mentese, S., 2012, Zonguldak`ta Hava Kirliligi (PM10 & SO2) ile iliskili olarak Secilmis Solunum Yolu Hastaliklarinin Zamansal ve Mekansal Degisimi, Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt 15 - Sayı 27, Haziran 2012.
18. [18] Yildirim, Y., Bayramoglu, M., 2006, Adaptive neuro-fuzzy based modelling for prediction of air pollution daily levels in city of Zonguldak, Chemosphere 63 (2006) 1575–1582. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2005.08.070
19. [19] Turkish Stone Coal Institution (Turkiye Taskomuru Kurumu), 2019, web page: http://www.taskomuru.gov.tr/, retrieval date: 11.01.2020.
20. [20] Entec, 2005, European Commission, Directorate General Environment Service Contract on Ship Emissions: Assignment, Abatement and Market-based Instruments, Task 1 - Preliminary Assignment of Ship Emissions to European Countries, Final Report, August 2005
21. [21] Entec, 2002, Quantification of Emissions from Ships Associated with Ship Movements between Ports in the European Community, European Commission, Final Report, Northwich, UK.
22. [22] Entec, 2007, Ship Emissions Inventory Mediterranean Sea, Final Report for Concawe.
23. [23] EMEP/EEA, 2016a, International Maritime Navigation, International Inland Navigation, National Navigation (Shipping), National Fishing, Military (Shipping), and Recreational Boats.
24. [24] EMEP/EEA, 2016b, EMEP/EEA Air Pollutant Emission Inventory Guidebook 2016.
25. [25] Turkish Directorate General of Coastal Safety, (TDGCS), 2019, Port Statistics, web page: https://atlantis.udhb.gov.tr/istatistik/istatistik_gemi.aspx, retrieval date: 07.01.2020.
26. [26] Environ International Corporation (EIC), 2012, Port of Oakland, Seaport Air Emissions Inventory, Novato, California November 5, 2013.
27. [27] Tichavska, M., Tovar, B., 2015, Port-city exhaust emission model: An application to cruise and ferry operations in Las Palmas Port, Transportation Research Part A 78 (2015) 347–360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.05.021.
28. [28] Zeydan, O., 2014, Zonguldak Bolgesi PM10 Konsantrasyonu Dagiliminin Modellenmesi, Doktora Tezi, Kocaeli Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitusu.
29. [29] Berechman, J., Tseng, P.H., 2010, Estimating the environmental costs of port related emissions: The case of Kaohsiung, Transportation Research Part D 17 (2012) 35–38. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2011.09.009.
30. [30] Maragkogianni, A., Papaefthimiou, S., 2015, Evaluating the social cost of cruise ships air emissions in major ports of Greece, Transportation Research Part D. 36 (2015), 10-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.02.014
31. [31] Lee, P.T.W., Hu, K.C., Chen, T., 2010, External costs of domestic container transportation: short-sea shipping versus trucking in Taiwan, Transport Reviews 30, 315-335.