Cleaner shipping should be driven by port optimization, says PortXChange

Cleaner shipping should be driven by port optimization and not the currently favored slow steaming strategy to reduce ship emissions and comply with the IMO’s CII regulation.

That’s what PortXChange says, a spin-off from the Port of Rotterdam Authority for optimizing port calls.

PortXChange highlighted recent findings from SSY and Clarksons suggesting that fuel economy assumptions at the low end of vessel speed have been overstated compared to real-world evidence, and said they “challenge assumptions supported by the Regulation of the International Maritime Organization on the Carbon Intensity Indicator”. .

“Go below 9/10 knots and you could actually have the opposite effect and increase emissions per ton-mile,” Roar Adland, research director at Simpson Spence & Young (SSY), said last month.

Instead, PortXChange promotes the optimization of port calls to reduce emissions from ships. Since ships have to keep their generators running while alongside or in queues, it is believed that overall CO2 emissions can be significantly reduced2 Emissions could be caused by increasing the speed of port operations.

PortXChange has had its own successes in Rotterdam, achieving a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions and a 15% reduction in NOx emissions from ships in port with its PortXChange Synchronizer tool. This is an advanced scheduling system that coordinates port services, including bunkering, offloading and ship services, to shorten each port call.

PortXChange also promotes the benefits of optimizing arrival times. According to some studies, the benefits of “smart steaming” enabled by digitalization could add up to a whopping 24% of ship emissions. The practice refers to the idea of ​​dynamically slowing down or accelerating ships as they approach a port in order to optimize their arrival time and avoid queues.

“As the industry grapples with these complexities, there is an urgent need for holistic approaches that span the entire supply chain, with ports playing a critical role in achieving emissions reduction targets,” said PortXChange.

In fact, the use of slow-steaming in recent weeks arguably had less to do with a desire to reduce carbon emissions2 emissions than by attempts to soak up excess capacity created by a ship-ordering spree during the pandemic at a time of sharply falling demand.

Meanwhile, experts have raised concerns that CII will have a negative impact on feeder traffic, which is critical to any effort to reduce carbon emissions in transportation.

Xeneta Chief Analyst Peter Sand recently said that unduly penalizing feeder vessels, which thanks to the CII are increasingly being overlooked at shipyards, will result in some ports “… becoming less connected and potentially moving some shippers to inland transport from hubs rather than from.” feeders.” …much less efficient than container shipping.”

Related Articles

Back to top button