欢迎来到51Due,请先 | 注册
关注我们: 51due论文代写二维码 51due论文代写平台微博
英国论文代写,英国essay代写知名品牌微信

更多范文

为您解决留学中生活、学习、工作的困难、疑惑
释放自我

如何实现减排措施How to implement abatement measures--51Due英国论文代写网范文精选

2016-03-09 | 来源:51Due教员组 | 类别:更多范文

51Due作为英国最大的论文代写网,在论文写作方面积累了大量的经验,下面请看精选assignment代写范文:”How to implement abatement measures如何实现减排措施“。这篇论文先介绍了航运减排措施实施的原因,然后阐述的具体的实施措施。实施政策以限制从国际航运业的温室气体排放量,具有成本效益的减排,因此,航运业的减排措施应只可实施的边际成本等于或低于其他部门的边际减排成本。因此,对国际航运的减排措施的实施应着眼于这样的成本效益的措施。

1. Introduction

Implementing policy instruments to limit GHG emissions from international shipping industry should contribute to global, cost-effective emission reductions. Thus, abatement measures in the shipping industry should only be implemented if the marginal costs are equal to or lower than the marginal abatement costs in other sectors.

It is likely that the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol is dependent of the establishing of the flexible mechanisms international emissions trading, JI and CDM. Therefore, there will be an international market for emission allowances and credits, and the price in this market will form the upper limit of what abatement measures that will be cost effective to implement, also in the shipping industry. Therefore, the abatement measure implementation towards international shipping should aim at such cost-effective measures.

When using a bunker fuel charge, a charge equal to the international emission allowance/credit price will automatically ensure global cost effectiveness. Ship owners will implement measures with a marginal cost lower than the current charge. Also emissions trading will ensure cost effective emission reductions from ships. The ship owners will face the international allowance/credit price, which will determine the level of actions they will take to reduce emissions. When technical standards are used as the policy instrument, careful calculations of costs for the different abatement measures will have to be done before the standards are fixed, to ensure the same marginal abatement cost level in the shipping industry as in other sectors.

It is very difficult to predict what the price level in the future emission allowance/credit market will be. A survey of different studies of abatement costs in some key countries and possible prices in future international emission trading markets presented in ECON, 1998, indicate price levels from slightly above zero to almost USD 40/tonne CO2. However, most of the estimates are in the range of USD 5 to USD 13/tonne CO 2. This could form a very uncertain indication of what abatement measures in the shipping industry that would be cost effective to implement.


2. Operational measures

These are measures that can be implemented during the operation of ships to reduce GHG emissions. The discussion in chapter 5 shows that operational measures include the following activities:

• Operation plannning/speed selection: reduced speed/slow steaming may reduce emissions up to 40%.

• Weather routing: 2-4% emissions reduction could be possible

• Optimising operating parameters: include measures like steady power (minimum RPM variations), optimal trim and propeller pitch, minimum ballast, and optimal rudder. 1-5% emissions reduction is possible.

• Reduced time in port: comprises more efficient cargo handling and more efficient anchoring. 1-7% emission reduction could be obtained.

It can be seen from the list that operational planning/reduced speed (see also conclusions from
Chapter 6) and reduced time in port are the measures with the greatest reduction potential.
A bunker fuel charge and emissions trading based on emissions allowances will give incentives to implement all the operational measures mentioned above. What measures the ship owner may choose to implement, will depend on the level of the fuel charge compared to the marginal costs. Those measures with marginal costs lower than the charge will be implemented, others not.


An important question is whether a bunker charge will result in reduced speed. During the early
1980s, reduced speed is reported to have been common, resulting in energy intensity reductions by 10-20% [OECD, 1997]. This practice was motivated partly by high oil prices and partly by over-capacity in the industry. Melissen et. al. 1993 analyses the economics of specific voyages for different types of bulk carrier (a 4,700 nautical mile voyage for an iron ore carrier and a 11,000 nautical mile voyage for an oil tanker). The possible effects on costs of a hypothetical fuel price increase from USD 85/tonne to USD 170/tonne are evaluated. This shows for these voyages that while the overall costs for older oil tankers are 35% lower than the costs for new vessels with a fuel price at USD 85/tonne, the gap is reduced to about 20% when the fuel price is doubled. The fuel price increase results in 30% lower optimum (minimum cost /azdxassignment/ ) operating speed for older vessels, newer vessels minimise their overall costs by operating at maximum speed even at the higher fuel price.

These results indicate possible implications for how a bunker charge might affect GHG emissions from bulk carriers. According to OECD, 1997:

• The remaining steam turbine-powered fleet would be less economical to operate and would probably be operated at lower speeds, resulting in more demand for new vessels with lower energy intensity and higher optimum operating speeds.

• Reduced speed by old vessels and accelerated fleet replacement would lead to reduced energy-intensity.

• Higher transport costs would dampen the growth in demand for maritime transport.

Technical/emission standards are in general not very well suited to implement operational measures to reduce emissions, due to limited control possibilities. Exceptions may be standards for maintenance and possibly also standards to reduce time in port. Requiring a certificate showing that required maintenance have been carried out according to specified technical standards or as a part of fulfilling an emission standard could be checked by port authorities.

Such standards could therefore be implemented. It should be considered whether it is possible to impose standards on ports and/or ship owners for measures for more effective handling of cargo in ports and/or to set some maximum time for time spent in ports.

Emissions credit trading could most likely not be based on operational measures. This view is based on the ongoing discussion on guidelines for the CDM mechanism, where only investments in technical installations where emissions reductions are embedded (for instance fuel switching, investments in more energy efficient equipment etc.) will be accepted. This is due to verification problems for operational measures and a doubt that such measures would be additional i.e. not carried out in the absence of credit trading. A possible exception is maintenance measures that could probably be verified and subject to credit trading. However, the UNFCCC would have to be convinced that these measures would be additional.

更多英国论文代写范文欢迎访问我们主页 www.51Due.net 当然有论文代写、assignment代写、英国作业代写,留学生作业代写,英国留学文书代写需求可以和我们24小时在线客服 QQ:800020041 联系交流
51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有;未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象,51Due保留一切法律追诉权。-J

我们的优势

  • 05年成立,已帮助上万人
  • 24小时专业客服
  • 团队成员都毕业于全球著名高校
  • 保证原创,支持检测

英国站