IMO activities on control of
GHG emissions from ships
Eivind S. Vagslid
Head, Chemical and Air Pollution Prevention Section
Marine Environment Division - IMO
International Maritime
Organization (IMO)
 The IMO Convention was adopted in 1948
and IMO first met in 1959
 A specialized agency of the UN
 169 Member States
 Develop and maintain a comprehensive
regulatory framework for shipping
 Safety, environment, legal matters,
technical co-operation, security and the
efficiency of shipping
Safe, secure and efficient shipping on cleaner oceans!
Ship emissions one of the last major
ship pollutants to be regulated
Work started at IMO in the late 1980’s
Annex VI adopted in 1997, in force in May 2005,
revised 2005 – 2008
Revised Annex VI in force 1 July 2010
 Prohibits ODS in line with the
Montreal Protocol
 Regulates exhaust gas: NOx &
SOx (PM), and cargo vapours
from tankers (VOC)
 Energy Efficiency or CO2
emissions not covered
Resolution A.963(23)
IMO Policies and Practices Related to the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions from Ships, adopted by Assembly 23 in December 2003
IMO’s GHG Work has three distinct routes: Technical - mainly applicable
to new ships - EEDI,
Operational - applicable to all
ships in operation – SEEMP
and EEOI, and
Market-based Measures
(MBM) – carbon price for
shipping, incentive, may
generate funds.
A.963(23) requests MEPC to:
− develop a work plan with timetable – (technical/operational culminated at
MEPC 59, the work plan for MBIs culminates at MEPC 62 (Assembly 27))
− establishment of GHG baseline and develop CO2
indexing methodology
Second IMO GHG Study 2009
2007 shipping CO2 emissions 870 million tons
Tank
International
Aviation
1,9 %
International
Shipping
2,7 %
Domestic
shipping &
fishing
0,6 %
General Cargo
Other Sectors
11,6 %
Main Activity
Electricity and
Heat Production
35,0 %
Transport
21,7 %
Manufacturing
Industries and
Construction
18,2 %
Bulk
Other Energy
Industries
4,6 %
Unallocated
Autoproducers
3,7 %
Container
RoRo /Vehicle
Ropax
Deep
Ocean
seagoing
ships
Cruise
Regional
Coastwise
ships
Other
0
50
100
150
200
250
CO 2 emissions (million tons / yr)
A1FI
7000
6000
5000
4000
A1B
A1T
A2
B1
B2
Max
Min
3000
2000
2030
2040
2050
A1B
2020
A1FI
2010
A2
0
2000
A1T
1000
B1
 Significant increase predicted – 200 300%
by 2050 in the absence of regulations
 Demand is the primary driver
 Technical and operational efficiency
measures can provide significant
improvements but will not be able to
provide real reductions if demand continues
8000
B2
Future CO2 emissions:
CO2 emissions from ships (million tons CO2 / yr) '
Scenarios for CO2 emissions from International Shipping from
2007 to 2050 in the absence of climate policies
Distribution of the world fleet March 2008
ships above 400 GT
Flag States
Annex I
Number of ships
GT
DW
33.4%
26.1%
22.82%
Non-Annex I
66.6%)
73.9%
77.18%
Lloyd’s Register Fairplay
Article 1(b) of the IMO Convention
Encourage removal of discriminatory
actions …. promote the availability of
shipping without discrimination …… not be
based on measures designed to restrict the
freedom of shipping of all flags ….;
Reduction by Annex I flags only
80%
8,532
8,000
70%
7,042
7,000
60%
5,552
6,000
5,000
52%
50%
4,062
4,000
40%
35%
2,573
3,000
2,000
30%
20%
17%
10%
1,000
0
70%
0%
current
0%
5% reduction
10% reduction 15 % reduction 20% reduction
average emissions per ship
emission reduction
% emission reduction to current
emissions
average emissions per ship (tonnes)
9,000
Potential reductions of CO2 emissions
DESIGN (New ships)
Concept, speed & capability
Hull and superstructure
Power and propulsion
systems
Low-carbon fuels
Renewable energy
Saving of
CO2/tonnemile
2% to 50%+
Combined
2% to 20%
5% to 15%
10% to 50%+
5% to 15%*
1% to 10%
Exhaust gas CO2 reduction
0%
OPERATION (All ships)
Fleet management, logistics
& incentives
Voyage optimization
5% to 50%+
Energy management
1% to 10%
1% to 10%
10% to 50%+
Energy Efficiency Design Index - EEDI
neff
  M nPTI
  neff
 M  nME




  fj   PME (i ) CFME (i )  SFCME (i )   PAE  CFAE  SFCAE     fj   PPTI (i )   feff (i )  PAEeff (i ) CFAE  SFCAE     feff (i )  Peff (i )  CFME  SFCME 



  j 1 i 1
  i 1
i 1


 j 1  i 1



fi  CapacityVref  fw
Requires a minimum efficiency level (grams CO2/tonne-mile)
Will stimulate continued technology development
Complex formula to accommodate most ship types and sizes
Enables comparison of ships able to move the same cargo
10% reduction for ships built between 2015 – 2020
20% reduction for ships built between 2020 – 2025
30% reduction for ships built between 2025 – 2030
9
Ship type
Cut-off limit
Estimated
CO2
emissions
(tonnes)
Contribution
ratio from
same ship
type
Contribution
ratio to total
CO2 emissions
Bulk carrier
10,000 DWT
175,520,816
98.52%
15.70%
Gas tanker
2,000 DWT
46,871,129
98.50%
4.19%
Tanker
4,000 DWT
213,145,106
95.72%
19.06%
Container ship
10,000 DWT
254,812,434
96.54%
26.07%
General cargo ship
(Including combination 3,000 DWT
carrier)
87,274,101
90.00%
7.80%
Refrigerated cargo
carrier
18,767,755
97.64%
1.68%
796,391,341
96.11%
71.22%
Total coverage
3,000 DWT
---
190 – 240 million tonnes CO2 reduced annually
compared with BAU by 2030
Estimated CO2 emission reduction [mill tonnes].
300
Annual tonnes CO2 reduced
250
200
150
100
50
2013
2015
2020
A1B
2025
B2
2030
Ship Energy Efficiency
Management Plan - SEEMP
Onboard management tool to include:
 Improved voyage planning (Weather routeing/Just in time)
 Speed and power optimization
 Optimized ship handling (ballast/trim/use of rudder and autopilot)
 Improved fleet management
 Improved cargo handling
 Energy management
12
Energy Efficiency Operational
Indicator - EEOI
 An efficiency indicator for all ships (new
and existing) obtained from fuel
consumption, voyage (miles) and cargo
data (tonnes)
Actual Fuel
Consumption
Index
Fuel Consumption in Operation
=
Cargo Onboard x (Distance traveled)
EEDI and SEEMP Effects
Scenario: A1B Low uptake
4000
EEDI 10%
SEEMP 11%
Technical measures
3500
Operational measures
Alternative fuels
3000
Mt CO2
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
EEDI and SEEMP Effects
Scenario: A1B Optimistic
4000
Technical measures
3500
Operational measures
EEDI 39%
Alternative fuels
3000
Mt CO2
2500
SEEMP 28%
2000
1500
1000
MBM
500
0
2010
2015
2020
2025
203
0
2035
2040
2045
2050
MEPC 61 – 27 September to 1 October
Further progress made on all three elements of IMO’s GHG work
Technical and operational measures
Intersessional meeting on energy efficiency measures (June/July 2010)
Regulatory text on EEDI and SEEMP finalized
Adoption by MEPC 62 (July 2010)?
In force 1 January 2013?
Market-based measures
Report by MBM Expert Group
Intersessional meeting in March/April 2011
The Bali Plan of Action
•Emissions from international
shipping not covered separately but under
“Mitigation” in the Bali Plan of Action.
• The negotiations under the Bali Action Plan,
should culminate at COP 15 (December 2009).
• The mandate was extended to December 2010
with a view to the adoption of a post-2012 regime.
• BAP is considering how all types of emissions will
be treated in the future, including ship emissions.
• Will ship emissions still be left to IMO?
• UNFCCC 2-tracks: AWG-KP and AWG-LCA
17
Shipping under UNFCCC
Consultations in Copenhagen and throughout
2010 were constructive and fruitful but have not
lead to a single agreed text as there are three
challenging obstacles:
• Should a reduction target be set for international shipping, and if so,
what should the target be and should it be set by UNFCCC or IMO?
• Should the new UNFCCC treaty state how revenues from a marketbased instrument under IMO should be distributed and used (climate
change purposes in developing countries)?
• How should the balance between the basics principles under the
two conventions be expressed in the new treaty text (UNFCCC and
its fundamental CBDR principle, and on the other hand, the IMO
constitutive Convention with its non discriminatory approach)?
Thank you for your
attention!
For more information please see:
www.imo.org
19