Ereğli Limanı'ndaki Gemi Kaynaklı Emisyonların Analizi ve SOX Emisyonlarının Azaltılmasının Liman Emisyonlarına Katkısının İncelenmesi

Öz

1 Ocak 2020 itibariyle, Uluslararası Denizcilik Örgütü (IMO) tarafından alınan tedbirler kapsamında gemilerin kullandıkları yakıtların kükürt içeriği %3,5'ten %0,5'ye düşürülmüş ve gemiler tarafindan düşük kükürt oranına sahip yakıtlar kullanılmaya başlanmıştır. Bu uygulama ile gemilerden kaynaklanan SOX ve PM emisyonlarının çevre ve insan sağlığı üzerindeki zararlı etkileri azaltılmış olunacaktır. Bu kapsamda, Ereğli limanını ziyaret eden gemilerin emisyonları 2019 yılı için hesaplanmış ve yıllık toplam emisyon SOX için 505 ton, PM için 70 ton, NOX için 1.281 ton, CO2 için 67.639 ton ve VOC için 49 ton olarak bulunmuştur. Limandaki ana kirletici gemi tipleri, genel kargo ve dökme yük gemileri olup, limandaki tüm gemi kaynaklı emisyonların %95'inden sorumludurlar. Gemi emisyonları en çok seyir modunda (%83), ardından liman modunda (%16) üretilmektedir. Liman bölgesindeki kirletici emisyonların oluşturduğu çevresel maliyetin, toplam 41,5 milyon $ olacağı hesaplanmış ve gemi başına çevresel maliyetin ortalama 58.734 $ olacağı öngörülmüştür. Bu çalışmada, 2020 yılından itibaren uygulamaya giren SOX azaltımının, Ereğli limanında PM ve SOX emisyonlarını azaltacağı, insan ve çevre sağlığı için kabul edilebilir seviyelere düşeceği gözlemlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ereğli Limani,Çevre Kirliliği,Liman,Emisyonlar,Sülfür Azaltımı

Analyzing the Shipping Emissions in Port of Ereğli and Examining the Contribution of SOX Emissions Reduction to the Port Emissions

Abstract

As of January 1, 2020, the sulfur content in the fuel will be reduced from 3.5% to 0.50% within the scope of the measures implemented by IMO, and ships will use fuel with this rate of sulfur. With this practice, the harmful effects of SOX and PM emissions from ships on the environment and people will be reduced. The shipping emissions in the port of Ereğli were evaluated based on ship activity-based methods and total emissions generated from ships were 505 t y-1 for SOX, 70 t y-1 for PM, 1.281 t y-1 for NOX, 67.639 t y-1 for CO2, 49 t y-1 for VOC for the year of 2019. General cargo and bulk carrier vessels are the main polluters in the port and they are responsible for 95% of all shipping emissions. Shipping emissions are generally produced at cruising mode (83%), followed by hoteling mode (16%). The environmental cost of the shipping emissions for each pollutant has been predicted as $41,5 million and $58.734 per ship call. In this study, it has been observed that with the implementation of SOX reduction since 2020, PM and SOX emissions will decrease properly and fall to tolerable levels for human and environmental health in the port of Ereğli.

Keywords

• Ereğli port,Environmental pollution,Port,Emissions,Sulphur reduction

Kaynakça

1. Bayırhan, İ, Mersin, K., Tokuşlu, A., Gazioğlu, C. (2019) “Modelling of Ship Originated Exhaust Gas Emissions in the Strait of Istanbul (Bosphorus).” International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics, 6 (3), 238-243. DOI: 10.30897/ijegeo.641397.
2. 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.
3. Buhaug, Ø., Corbett, J.J., Endersen, Ø., Eyring, V., Faber, J., Hanayama, S., Lee, D.S., Lee, D., Lindstad, H., Mjelde, A., Palsson, C., Wanquing, W., Winebrake, J.J., Yoshida, K. (2009) Updated study on greenhouse gas emissions from ships. Second IMO GHG Study. London, UK: International Maritime Organization.
4. Cofala, J., Amann, M., Heyes, C., Klimont, Z., Posch, M., Scho ̈pp, W., Tarasson, L., Jonson, J., Whall, C., Stavrakaki, A. (2007) Final Report: Analysis of Policy Measures to Reduce Ship Emissions in the Context of the Revision of the National Emissions Ceilings Directive. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, p. 74.
5. Cohen, A.J., Anderson, H.R., Ostro, B., Pandey, K.D., Krzyzanowski, M., Ku ̈nzli, N., Gutschmidt, K., Pope, A., Romieu, I., Samet, J.M., Smith, K. (2005) “The global burden of disease due to outdoor air pollution.” J. Toxicol. Environ. Health, Part. A 68, 1301–1307.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Endresen, Ø., Sørgard, E., Sundet, J. K., Dalsøren, S. B., Isaksen, I. S. A., Berglen, T. F., and Gravir, G. (2003) “Emission from international sea transportation and environmental impact.” J. Geophys. Res., 108(D17), 4560, doi:10.1029/2002JD002898, 2003.

9. EMEP/EEA. (2016a) International Maritime Navigation, International Inland Navigation, National Navigation (Shipping), National Fishing, Military (Shipping), and Recreational Boats.
10. EMEP/EEA. (2016b) EMEP/EEA Air Pollutant Emission Inventory Guidebook 2016.
11. Entec. (2002) Quantification of Emissions from Ships Associated with Ship Movements between Ports in the European Community, European Commission, Final Report, Northwich, UK.
12. Entec. (2005) 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
13. Entec. (2007) Ship Emissions Inventory Mediterranean Sea, Final Report for Concawe.
14. Environ International Corporation (EIC). (2012) Port of Oakland, Seaport Air Emissions Inventory, Novato, California November 5, 2013.
15. Ereğli Demir ve Çelik Fab. T. A. Ş. (Erdemir), https://www.erdemir.com.tr/ana-sayfa/ [Accessed 06 Jan 2020].
16. European Environment Agency (EEA). (2013) The Impact of International Shipping on European Air Quality and Climate Forcing. EEA, Copenhagen, p. 88.
17. 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.
18. International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2008) Prevention of air pollution from ships. MEPC 58/23, October 2008, pp.30-40.
19. International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2009) Prevention of air pollution from ships. Second IMO GHG Study 2009. MEPC 59/4/7, April 2009.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. 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
24. Mersin, K., Bayırhan, İ., Gazioğlu, C. (2019) “Review of CO2 Emission and Reducing Methods in Maritime Transportation.” Thermal Sciences, 1-8.
25. 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
26. 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.
27. Song, S. (2014) “Ship emissions inventory, social cost and eco-efficiency in Shanghai Yangshan port.” Atmos. Environ. 82, 288-297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.10.006.
28. 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.
29. Tokuşlu, A. (2019) Analysis of ship-borne air emissions in the Istanbul Strait and presenting its effects, PhD Thesis, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
30. Turkish Directorate General of Coastal Safety (TDGCS), Port Statistics, https://atlantis.udhb.gov.tr/istatistik/istatistik_gemi.aspx, [Accessed 01 Jan 2020].
31. Viana, M., Hammingh, P., Colette, A., Querol, X., Degraeuwe, B., Vlieger, I.D., Aardenne, J.V. (2014) “Impact of maritime transport emissions on coastal air quality in Europe.” Atmos. Environ. 90 (2014)96-105, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.03.046.
32. Wang, C., Corbett, J.J., Firestone, J. (2008) “Modeling energy use and emissions from north American shipping: application of ship traffic, energy and environment model.” Environmental Science & Technology 42 (1), 193–199.
33. 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.