A Priority Analysis on Emission Reduction Strategies in Foreland and Hinterland of Ports

Abstract

Maritime transportation is responsible for a considerable extent of the world’s total air emissions. For this reason, IMO regulations have started to control emissions coming from ships. Especially in the wake of IMO 2020 rules first being applied, ship owners pay much more attention to emissions released. In contrast, the regulations do not involve the other actors within maritime transportation, so for instance, ports have not focused significantly on emissions while operating. However, emissions produced by port operations have directly threatened human health due to the ports’ proximity to cities. Recently, various acts were created to mitigate these emissions. Although these acts were beneficial, strategies to alleviate emissions from shipping should be stricter to achieve the United Nations’ 2030 and 2050 targets for emission reduction. In this study, strategies to reduce air emissions produced by ports were identified, categorized, and prioritized. Strategies to prevent both in-port and hinterland emissions were evaluated for the first time. The findings of the study (based on expert evaluations) were presented, and implications related to these findings were interpreted. Finally, some suggestions for further studies related to port emissions were proposed.

Keywords

• emissions
• Hinterland emissions
• Emission Reduction Strategies
• Fuzzy AHP

References

1. Adamo, F., Andria, G., Cavone, G., De Capua, C., Lanzolla, A. M. L., Morello, R., & Spadavecchia, M. (2014). Estimation of ship emissions in the port of Taranto. Measurement, 47, 982-988. google scholar
2. Alamoush, A. S., Ballini, F., & Ölçer, A. I. (2020). Ports’ technical and operational measures to reduce greenhouse gas emission and improve energy efficiency: A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 160, 111508. google scholar
3. Aregall, M. G., Bergqvist, R., & Monios, J. (2019). Port-driven measures for incentivizing sustainable hinterland transport. In Green Ports (pp. 193-210). Elsevier. google scholar
4. Aregall, M. G., Bergqvist, R., & Monios, J. (2018). A global review of the hinterland dimension of green port strategies. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 59, 23-34. google scholar
5. Balbaa, A., Swief, R. A., & El-Amary, N. H. (2019). Smart Integration Based on Hybrid Particle Swarm Optimization Technique for Carbon Dioxide Emission Reduction in Eco-Ports. Sustainability, 11(8), 1-16. google scholar
6. Berechman, J., & Tseng, P. H. (2012). Estimating the environmental costs of port related emissions: The case of Kaohsiung. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 17(1), 35-38. google scholar
7. Bergqvist, R., 2015. Hinterland logistics and global supply chains. In: Song, D.-W., Panayides, P. (Eds.), Maritime Logistics - A Guide to Contemporary Shipping and Port Management, second ed., Kogan, pp. 67-88. google scholar
8. Buckley, J. J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy sets and systems, 17(3), 233-247. google scholar

9. Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European journal of operational research, 95(3), 649-655. google scholar
10. Chang, Y. T., Song, Y., & Roh, Y. (2013). Assessing greenhouse gas emissions from port vessel operations at the Port of Incheon. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 25, 1-4. google scholar
11. Demirel, H., Balin, A., Çelik, E., & Alarçin, F. (2018). A fuzzy AHP and ELECTRE method for selecting stabilizing device in ship industry. Brodogradnja: Teorija i praksa brodogradnje i pomorske tehnike, 69(3), 61-77. google scholar
12. Deniz, C., & Kilic, A. (2010). Estimation and assessment of shipping emissions in the region of Ambarlı Port, Turkey. Environmental progress & sustainable energy, 29(1), 107-115. google scholar
13. Gritsenko, D., & Yliskylâ-Peuralahti, J. (2013). Governing shipping externalities: Baltic ports in the process of SOx emission reduction. Maritime Studies, 12(1), 1-21. google scholar
14. Jiang, Y. P., & Fan, Z. P. (2002). A practical ranking method for reciprocal judgment matrix with triangular fuzzy numbers. Systems Engineering, 20(2), 89-92. google scholar
15. Jonathan, Y. C. E., & Kader, S. B. A. (2018). Prospect of Emission Reduction Standard for Sustainable Port Equipment Electrification. International Journal of Engineering, 31(8), 1347-1355. google scholar
16. Lâttilâ, L., Henttu, V., & Hilmola, O. P. (2013). Hinterland operations of seaports do matter: Dry port usage effects on transportation costs and CO2 emissions. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 55, 23-42. google scholar
17. Li, W., Hilmola, O. P., & Panova, Y. (2019). Container Sea Ports and Dry Ports: Future CO2 Emission Reduction Potential in China. Sustainability, 11(6), 1515. google scholar
18. Liu, P., Liu, C., Du, J., & Mu, D. (2019). A system dynamics model for emissions projection of hinterland transportation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 218, 591-600. google scholar
19. Liu, P., Wang, C., Xie, J., Mu, D., & Lim, M. K. (2021). Towards green port-hinterland transportation: Coordinating railway and road infrastructure in Shandong Province, China. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 94, 102806. google scholar
20. Martmez-Moya, J., Vazquez-Paja, B., & Maldonado, J. A. G. (2019). Energy efficiency and CO2 emissions of port container terminal equipment: Evidence from the Port of Valencia. Energy Policy, 131, 312-319. google scholar
21. Mollaoğlu, M., Bucak, U., & Demirel, H. (2019). A Quantitative Analysis of the Factors That May Cause Occupational Accidents at Ports. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 7(4), 294-303. google scholar
22. Norsworthy, M., & Craft, E. (2013). Emissions reduction analysis of voluntary clean truck programs at US ports. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 22, 23-27. google scholar
23. Saaty, T. L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGrawHill, New York, 1980. google scholar
24. Sciberras, E. A., Zahawi, B., Atkinson, D. J., Juando, A., & Sarasquete, A. (2016). Cold ironing and onshore generation for airborne emission reductions in ports. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 230(1), 67-82. google scholar
25. Sifakis, N., & Tsoutsos, T. (2020). Planning zero-emissions ports through the nearly zero energy port concept. Journal of Cleaner Production, 125448. google scholar
26. Tao, X., & Wu, Q. (2021). Energy consumption and CO2 emissions in hinterland container transport. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279, 1-13. google scholar
27. Tao, X., Wu, Q., & Zhu, L. (2017). Mitigation potential of CO2 emissions from modal shift induced by subsidy in hinterland container transport. Energy Policy, 101, 265-273. google scholar
28. Tichavska, M., & Tovar, B. (2015). Environmental cost and eco-efficiency from vessel emissions in Las Palmas Port. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 83, 126-140. google scholar
29. Tichavska, M., Tovar, B., Gritsenko, D., Johansson, L., & Jalkanen, J. P. (2019). Air emissions from ships in port: Does regulation make a difference? Transport Policy, 75, 128-140. google scholar
30. Tzannatos, E. (2010). Cost assessment of ship emission reduction methods at berth: the case of the Port of Piraeus, Greece. Maritime Policy & Management, 37(4), 427-445. google scholar
31. Tzannatos, E. (2010). Ship emissions and their externalities for the port of Piraeus-Greece. Atmospheric Environment, 44(3), 400-407. google scholar
32. Van Laarhoven, P. J., & Pedrycz, W. (1983). A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy sets and Systems, 11(1-3), 229-241. google scholar
33. Winnes, H., Styhre, L., & Fridell, E. (2015). Reducing GHG emissions from ships in port areas. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 17, 73-82. google scholar