Page 16 - Port of Hamburg Magazine - 02.18

■ GREEN PORT
16 | Port of Hamburg Magazine | June 2018
pheric emission figures, LNG remains a fossil fuel and is especially objectionable when generated by fracking, as in the United States. Besides, we are still in the dark on the actual outcome of methane slip, which is around thirty times more aggressive than CO2. The gain on atmospheric pollutants could in certain circumstances be lost on climate. Trans- port is never good, but simply less bad.
Ralf Nagel: In the medium term, we see LNG as a sensible alternative, especially for substantially re- ducing atmospheric pollutants in ports and near the coast. The technology has long been tested and the international regulatory regime is up-to-date. Nu- merous ships already run on LNG. Many internation- al ports, especially in Asia, are currently installing infrastructure for LNG bunkering.
Hydrogen has not yet progressed any further than pilot projects. There what we need is the already cit- ed technology offensive. Meanwhile, LNG can be a good interim solution. In addition, even CO2-neutral LNG can be produced using with renewable ener- gies – infrastructure on land and on ships can also meet the IMO’s ambitious goals.
The working life of large containerships and cruise vessels extends over several decades. Natural fleet replacement will not suffice for implement- ing the maritime energy transition – there is a de- mand for retrofit solutions involving installation of more eco-friendly propulsion systems. Conversion to lower-sulphur diesel fuel in combination with soot particle filters and SCR catalysators would cut emissions of greenhouse gas and atmospheric pollutant emissions by up to 99 percent. Is any con- tinuous re-equipment of
tend to be a local problem in heavily populated port cities. Here introduction of the stringent 0.1 % cap in the North Sea and the Baltic has already massive- ly reduced sulphur emissions. In addition, stiff rules for ship newbuilds are ensuring a noticeable fall in nitrogen oxides.
Basically, retrofitting of propulsion technology or costly filter systems presents a special problem for shipping. The necessary investments, for in- stance for the conversion of a traditional ship propulsion system to LNG, can exceed the actu- al value of a vessel. In today’s markets, a ship-
Malte Siegert
Head of Environmental Policy at the Hamburg regional association of NABU
the world merchant fleet already apparent?
„Shipping companies really wishing to do more must be assisted with incentive programs. Norway is doing so with the NOx Fund. I ask myself what are we waiting for.“
ping company cannot manage these alone. Here the public sector needs to offer incen- tives and assistance. Very sluggish planning procedures in the ports often hamper the use of new fuels. Lack of such permissions is among the reasons that there are still no LNG bunker barges in German ports. Shipping is naturally adapting itself to the new 2020 sulphur cap.
Malte Siegert: Only a few
shipping companies are
currently doing more than
is legally required, since for
various reasons corporate
social responsibility cer-
tainly plays a part for many
companies. Shipping com-
panies really wishing to
do more must be assisted
with incentive programs.
Norway is doing so with the
NOx Fund. I ask myself what are we waiting for. Those who are inactive need to feel by way of port dues that investment pays. Here too, away from the IMO, there is the chance of a level playing field for European seaports. And as I said, the customer must make a contribution.
As in recent years, we shall also be reducing our CO2 emissions. We are hoping here for assistance from the ports, especially in massively reducing waiting times before entry. Similarly, states are asked for their backing on research & develop- ment, also on the use of new technologies and fuels. Only by acting together shall we able to master this massive task. ■
Ralf Nagel: Greenhouse gases can only be avoid- ed with non-fossil fuels. Air pollutants, by contrast,
© Malte Siegert