An Overview on the Readiness Level of the Turkish Maritime Industry for Decarbonization in Shipping

Abstract

Decarbonization is under spotlights for shipping as with many other transportation units. However, the readiness and awareness of the Turkish maritime industry is a common uncertainty. To reveal and show the current progress of the industry, a survey has been carried out. Participants from different companies with different education levels and experiences have been joined and answered the questionnaire which aims to clarify the past, present, and future of the maritime industry. The results of the survey show that the Turkish maritime industry is not fully ready at the company level, however, they perform better at the individual level. Furthermore, the industry may require additional regulation and technical support from maritime stakeholders such as chambers, related government departments, and non-governmental organizations.

Keywords

• Marine Alternative Fuels
• Maritime Industry
• Shipping
• Decarbonization

References

1. A.P. Moller-Maersk. (2018). Sustainability Report. A.P. Moller-Maersk: Copenhagen, Denmark.
2. Anonymous. (2022a). International Chamber of Shipping. Shipping and World Trade. Retrieved from: http://www.marisec.org/shippingfacts/worldtrade/index/php
3. Anonymous. (2022b). International Maritime Organization (IMO). IMO Data Collection System. Retrieved from: http://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/environment/pollutionprevention/airpollution/pages/data-collection-system.aspx
4. Balcombe, P., Brierley, J., Lewis, C., Skatvedt, L., Speirs, J., Hawkes, A., & Staffell, I. (2019). How to decarbonise international shipping: options for fuels, technologies and policies. Energy Conversion and Management, 182, 72-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.12.080
5. de Kat, J. O. (2020). MEPC 75 Outcomes and Industry Implications. American Bureau of Shipping, 8 December 2020, Copenhagen.
6. Dere, C., & Deniz, C. (2019a). Energy efficiency based operation of compressed air system on ships to reduce fuel consumption and CO2 emission. The International Journal of Maritime Engineering, 161(Part A2), https://doi.org/10.5750/ijme.v161iA2.1088
7. Dere, C., & Deniz, C. (2019b). Load optimization of central cooling system pumps of a container ship for the slow steaming conditions to enhance the energy efficiency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 222, 206-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clepro.2019.03.030
8. Dere, C., & Deniz, C. (2020). Effect analysis on energy efficiency enhancement of controlled cylinder liner temperatures in marine diesel engines with model based approach. Energy Conversion and Management, 220, 113015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113015

9. Fan, Y. V., Perry, S., Klemes, J. J., & Lee, C. T. (2018). A review on air emissions assessment: transportation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 194, 673-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clepro.2018.05.151
10. Halim, R. A., Kirstein, L., Merk, O., & Martinez, L. M. (2018). Decarbonization pathways for international maritime transport: a model-based policy impact assessment. Sustainability, 10, 2243. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072243
11. Inal, O. B., & Deniz, C. (2021). Emission analysis of LNG fuelled molten carbonate fuel cell system for a chemical tanker ship: a case study. Marine Science and Technology Bulletin, 10(2), 118-133. https://doi.org/10.33714/masteb.827195
12. Inal, O.B., & Deniz, C. (2020). Assessment of fuel cell types for ships: based on multi-criteria decision analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 265, 121734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121734
13. International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT). (2018). The International Maritime Organization’s initial greenhouse gas strategy.
14. International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2011). Resolution MEPC.203(62), Annex 19, Adopted on 15 July 2011. Amendments to the annex of the protocol of 1997 to amend the international convention of pollution from ships, 1973, as modified by the protocol of 1978 relating thereto (inclusion on energy efficiency for ships in MARPOL Annex VI).
15. International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2015). Third IMO Greenhouse Gas Study 2014.
16. International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2018). Adoption of the initial IMO strategy on reduction of GHG emissions from ships and existing IMO activity related to reducing GHG emissions in the shipping sector. Note by the International Maritime Organization to the UNFCCC Talanoa Dialogue.
17. International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2020). Forth IMO Greenhouse Gas Study 2020. Koustoumpardis, K. (2019). Decarbonisation of Maritime Transport – How does maritime industry lead the way towards decarbonisation? Greek shipowners’ perspective. [M.Sc. Thesis. University of Gothenburg].
18. Lister, J., Poulsen, R. T., & Ponte, S. (2015). Orchestrating transnational environmental governance in maritime shipping. Global Environmental Change, 34, 185-195. https://doi.org/j.gloenvcha.2015.06.011
19. Olmer, N., Comer, B., Roy, B., Mao, X., & Rutherford, D. (2017). Greenhouse gas emissions from global shipping, 2013-2015. Retrieved from https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Global-shipping-GHG-emissions-2013-2015_ICCT-Report_17102017_vF.pdf
20. Psaraftis, H. N., & Kontovas, C. A. (2021). Decarbonization of maritime transport: is there light at the end of the tunnel? Sustainability, 13, 237. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010237
21. Serra, P., & Fancello, G. (2020). Towards the IMO’s GHG goals: a critical overview of the perspectives and challenges of the main options for decarbonizing international shipping. Sustainability, 12, 3220. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083220
22. Shell & Deloitte. (2020). Decarbonising shipping: All hands on deck: Industry perspectives. Retrieved from https://www.shell.com/promos/energy-and-innovation/decarbonising-shipping-all-hands-on-deck/_jcr_content.stream/1594141914406/b4878c899602611f78d36655ebff06307e49d0f8/decarbonising-shipping-report.pdf
23. Sofia, D., Gioiella, F., Lotrecchiano, N., & Giuliano, A. (2020). Cost-benefit analysis to support decarbonization scenario for 2030: A case study in Italy. Energy Policy, 137, 111137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111137
24. Sovacool, B. K., Noel, L., Kester, J., & de Rubens, G. Z. (2018). Reviewing Nordic transport challenges and climate policy priorities: expert perceptions of decarbonisation in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden. Energy, 165, 532-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.09.110
25. Suner, M., & Yalcin, E. (2017). Ship emissions and human health relationship: A theoretical and numerical investigation in Asyaport. In Karakoç T., Colpan C., & Şöhret Y. (Eds.), Advances in Sustainable Aviation. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67134-5_14
26. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2020). Review of Maritime Transport 2020.
27. US Energy Information Administration (USEIA). (2016). International Energy Outlook 2016.
28. Yalcin, E., & Suner, M. (2020). The changing role of diesel oil-gasoil-LPG and hydrogen based fuels in human health risk: a numerical investigation in ferry ship operations. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 45, 3660-3669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.02.238
29. Zincir, B., & Deniz, C. (2016). Investigation of effect of alternative marine fuels on energy efficiency operational indicator (EEOI). Proceedings of The Second Global Conference on Innovation in Marine Technology and the Future of Maritime Transportation, Turkey, pp. 713-719.
30. Zincir, B., Deniz, C., & Tunér, M. (2019). Investigation of environmental, operational and economic performance of methanol partially premixed combustion at slow speed operation of a marine engine. Journal of Cleaner Production, 235, 1006-1019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clepro.2019.07.044