Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

24
Calculating and Comparing CO 2 Emissions from the Global Maritime Fleet August 2011 Update due October 2012

Transcript of Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

Page 1: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

Calculating and Comparing CO2

Emissions from the Global Maritime Fleet

August 2011

Update due October 2012

Page 2: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

VISION

“To be the supplier of choice of marine vetting services to

achieve with our customers a safer and cleaner maritime

environment”

MISSION

To enable our customers to reduce their marine risk by

providing comprehensive marine assessments on vessels and

marine suppliers

Page 3: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

Background

Warming of the climate system is now considered to be unequivocal, and evident from observations

of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and

rising global average sea level1. Global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions due to human activities have

grown since pre-industrial times, with an increase of 70% between 1970 and 2004, and most of the

observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is considered very likely

due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations1. Discernible human influences

also extend beyond average temperature to other aspects of climate. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the

most important anthropogenic GHG.

To mitigate forecast destructive climate

change consequent to further global

warming, anthropogenic GHG emissions

must be stabilised and reduced. This is a

global challenge to be addressed by all

countries with consideration of all

significant emission sources. For 2007,

shipping was estimated to have emitted

3.3% of global CO2 emissions, to which

international shipping contributed 2.7%,

or 870 million tonnes2. Although

international shipping is the most carbon

efficient mode of commercial transport,

total emissions are comparable to those of

a major national economy, necessitating

emission reduction3. Moreover, according

to the IMO’s GHG Study2, if unabated,

shipping’s contribution to GHG emissions could reach 18% by 2050.

This emissions breakdown does not divide into all ships equally and considerations such as ship size,

fuel type and engine performance as well as advances in maritime technology mean that some ships

are more efficient than others. Recognising that such vessel specific sustainability information is

dispersed and costly to obtain and coordinate in a systematic manner, RightShip created its GHG

Emissions Rating to make it easy for our customers to consider sustainability within their selection

processes.

1 IPPC, 2007. Climate Change 2007:Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K. and

Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp.

2IMO, 2009. Second IMO GHG Study 2009. International Maritime Organization (IMO) London, UK.

3 ICS, 2009. Shipping, World Trade and the Reduction of CO2 Emissions. International Chamber of Shipping,

London, UK.

Page 4: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

Contents

1. Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 1

2. IMO MEPC EEDI ............................................................................................................................... 2

3. RightShip’s GHG Emissions Rating .................................................................................................. 2

3.1 EVDI™ ...................................................................................................................................... 3

3.1.1 Data Sources ................................................................................................................... 3

3.1.2 Assumptions .................................................................................................................... 4

3.1.3 Ship Types ....................................................................................................................... 5

3.2 GHG Emissions Rating A - G Scale ........................................................................................... 6

3.2.1 GHG Emissions Rating Calculation .................................................................................. 7

3.2.2 Comparing Existing Ship’s CO2 Emissions ....................................................................... 9

3.2.3 RightShip’s GHG Emissions Rating vs EEDI Reference Line ........................................... 11

4. RightShip’s Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating ............................................................................. 12

5. Presentation of Information in SVIS™ ........................................................................................... 14

6. EVDI™ – A Practical Application .................................................................................................... 16

7. RightShip’s Environmental Rating ................................................................................................. 18

7.1 Retrofits and Upgrades ......................................................................................................... 19

8. RightShip – In a Nutshell ............................................................................................................... 20

9. Contact Information ...................................................................................................................... 20

Confidentiality

This report contains information, which is confidential to RightShip Pty Ltd (RightShip) and may not

be reproduced in any form or communicated to any other person, firm or company without the prior

written approval of RightShip.

Page 5: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

1 | P a g e

1. Summary In July 2011, the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Marine Environment Protection

Committee (MEPC) adopted mandatory measures to reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions from

international shipping through amendments to MARPOL Annex VI Regulations. These amendments

include application of the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new ships which will require new

ships to meet a minimum level of energy efficiency.

The IMO MEPC formulated the EEDI, and an Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI), as

measures of a ship’s CO2 emissions. The EEDI is calculated using characteristics of the ship at build,

incorporating parameters that include ship capacity, engine power and fuel consumption.

RightShip has developed an Existing Vessel Design Index (EVDI™) and a Greenhouse Gas (GHG)

Emissions Rating. Similar to the IMO MEPC’s EEDI, RightShip’s EVDI™ measures a ship’s CO2

emissions, however, unlike the EEDI, the EVDI™ can be applied to existing ships. The GHG Emissions

Rating is a practical measure derived from the EVDI™ that allows relative comparison of a ship’s CO2

emissions to vessels of a similar size and type. Ship types are largely consistent with those used by

IMO MEPC.

The EVDI™ and GHG Emissions Rating calculations and examples of their real-world application are

detailed in this report.

Page 6: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

2 | P a g e

2. IMO MEPC EEDI The Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) was developed to measure the CO2 emission performance of new ships and is calculated from ship design and engine performance data. The intended application of this index was to stimulate innovation and technical development of all elements influencing the energy efficiency of a ship from its design phase. The EEDI is calculated by the following formula4:

in which:

• ME and AE, represent Main Engine(s) and Auxiliary Engine(s);

• P, the power of the engines (kW);

• CF, a conversion factor between fuel consumption and CO2 based on fuel carbon content;

• SFC, the certified specific fuel consumption of the engines (g/kWh);

• Capacity, the deadweight or gross tonnage (tonnes);

• Vref, the ship speed (nm/h); and

• fj, a correction factor to account for ship specific design elements (e.g. ice-class)

3. RightShip’s GHG Emissions Rating RightShip believes the maritime industry needs a systematic and transparent means of comparing

the relative efficiency and sustainability of existing vessels.

The GHG Emissions Rating is an innovative measure that allows comparison of a ship’s CO2 emissions

relative to peer vessels of a similar size and type using a simple A - G scale. Ship types are largely

consistent with those used by IMO MEPC.

4 IMO, 2009. Interim Guidelines on the Method of Calculation of the Energy Efficiency Design Index for New

Ships. Circular MEPC.1/Circ.681. International Maritime Organization, London, UK.

The calculated EEDI is a theoretical measure of the mass of CO2 emitted per unit of transport

work (grams CO2 per tonne nautical mile) for a particular ship design.

Page 7: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

3 | P a g e

3.1 EVDI™ RightShip’s Existing Vessel Design Index (EVDI™) is the core measure used to calculate the RightShip

GHG Emissions Rating and is comparable across all vessels in RightShip’s Ship Vetting Information

System (SVIS™) database.

RightShip has developed the EVDI™ to address the 60,000+ vessels currently in service, which

annually contribute over 1 billion tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere.

The DNV paper that initially proposed the EEDI to IMO’s MEPC suggested that from a technical

perspective it is possible to retrospectively apply the EEDI to existing ships, and IMO has now

documented EEDI benchmarks and reference lines based on the existing fleet and historical data.

3.1.1 Data Sources

EVDI™ values are calculated from vessel performance information and associated data.

The primary sources of this data are:

RightShip’s Ship Vetting Information System (SVIS™),

IHS Fairplay (IHS) database,

Classification societies,

Owner’s data, and

Ship-sourced data.

RightShip understands that the reliability of our calculations directly correlates to the accuracy of

source data used. With this in mind RightShip will continue to verify its base data and source

additional accurate data when the need presents.

RightShip welcome feedback pertaining to any missing/additional/inconsistent information, contact

can be made by way of the SVIS™ portal or via [email protected]

RightShip's EVDI™

• Over 60,000 Existing Ships

IMO MEPC’s EEDI

• New Ships

Similar to the IMO MEPC’s EEDI, RightShip’s EVDI™ measures a ship’s CO2 emissions, however

unlike the EEDI that is applied only to new ships the EVDI™ is designed for application to existing

vessels.

Page 8: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

4 | P a g e

3.1.2 Assumptions

Where ship specific data are not available, for example: specific fuel consumption, the values used in

the EVDI™ calculation are based on the same assumptions used in the IMO GHG Study2 and/or

detailed in IMO Circulars on calculation of the energy efficiency measure4. RightShip’s approach also

utilises the same data set recognised by IMO MEPC in their establishment of an EEDI reference line

for new ships. Assumptions are shown below:

• Specific Fuel Consumption (Main Engine), SFCME:

Engine Age MCRME (kW) SFCME (g/kWh)

Pre-1983

> 15,000 205

5,000 to 15,000 215

< 5,000 225

1984-2000

> 15,000 185

5,000 to 15,000 195

< 5,000 205

2001-2007

> 15,000 175

5,000 to 15,000 185

< 5,000 195

• Specific Fuel Consumption (Auxiliary Engine), SFCAE:

Engine Age MCRAE > 800 kW MCRAE < 800 kW

Any 220 g/kWh 230 g/kWh

• Power (Main Engine), PME: = 0.75 MCRME

• Power (Auxiliary Engine), PAE:

MCRME > 10,000 kW < 10,000 kW

PAE =(0.025*MCRME)+250 0.05*MCRME

• Ship Speed, Vref: = Design Speed

Capacity:

o 100% deadweight, for bulk carriers, tankers, gas tankers, ro-ro cargo and

general cargo ships

o 70% deadweight, for containerships

o 100% gross tonnage for passenger and ro-ro passenger ships

• CO2 Conversion Factors, CF:

Fuel Type Carbon Content CF

(t-CO2/t-Fuel)

Diesel/Gas Oil (DGO) 0.875 3.206

Light Fuel Oil (LFO) 0.86 3.15104

Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) 0.85 3.1144

Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG)

Propane 0.819 3.000

Butane 0.827 3.030

Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) 0.75 2.750

Page 9: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

5 | P a g e

3.1.3 Ship Types

The categories of ship used for the derivation of comparative GHG Emissions Ratings largely follow

those in the IMO document MEPC 61/WP.105 as follows:

01 Bulker

02 Chemical Tanker

03 Container

04 Crude & Products Tanker (inc OBO)

05 Cruise

06 General Cargo

07 LNG Tanker

08 LPG Tanker

09 Refrigerated Cargo Ship

10 Vehicle

11 Ferry Pax Only

12 Ro Ro Cargo Ship : weight carrier

LNG and Passenger Vessels: The EEDI, as presently constructed, is not designed or intended for

application to LNG and passenger vessels which have diesel-electric, turbine, and other non-

conventional means of propulsion. It is anticipated that the IMO will develop refined parameters,

formulas, and reference baselines for these ships in the near future. Accordingly, any attempted

evaluation of this type of ship using the EVDI™ should be understood to be outside of the effective

purpose of the index.

Ice Class Vessels: Ice-class vessels have design and structural features that increase their estimated

EVDI™ relative to similarly-sized conventional vessels. Until suitable correction factors can be

developed and applied, the EVDI™ for ice-class vessels is likely to overstate the actual CO2 output.

The separation of gas and chemical tankers: The EEDI currently combines the performance of Gas

Tankers into a single reference line. Based on the bimodal distribution of the underlying data,

RightShip believes a better statistical comparison can be achieved by analysing LNG and LPG Tankers

separately. Chemical tankers are similarly considered separately from other tankers (Crude &

Products) to acknowledge different design characteristics.

5 IMO, 2010. Report of the Working Group on Energy Efficiency Measures for Ships. Annex 2. Guidelines for

calculation of reference lines for use with the Energy Efficiency Design Index. Paper MEPC 61/WP.10 Annex 2.

International Maritime Organization, London, UK.

Page 10: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

6 | P a g e

3.2 GHG Emissions Rating A - G Scale A vessel’s GHG Emissions Rating is presented using the standard European A – G scale. The

efficiency is rated from A through G, the most efficient being A, the least efficient being G.

Figure 1: GHG Emissions Rating A - G Scale

The vessel’s position on the scale reflects their EVDI™ value relative to vessels of similar size and

type and based on their EVDI™ Size Score as follows:

Figure 2: EVDI™ Size Score Group

The GHG Emissions Rating Size Group: A - G, are based on the EVDI™ Size Score, which indicates the

number of standard deviations a vessel varies from the average for similar sized vessels of the same

ship type.

If the distribution of log transformed EVDI™ Size Scores exactly fitted a normal distribution, the score

ranges would match fixed percentiles of the data set, for example:

<-2 = 0 to 2.5%, <-1 = 2.5 to 16%, <-0.5 = 16 to 32%, <0.5 = 32 to 68%, <1.0 = 68 to 84%, <2.0 = 84 to

97.5% and >2.0 = 97.5 to 100%

However each vessel size group is a subset of the entire ship type group and consequently

percentages within a subset size group will have some variability from these percentages. The size

groups are discussed in detail at 3.2.2

Page 11: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

7 | P a g e

3.2.1 GHG Emissions Rating Calculation

To produce an A - G Rating, EVDI™ values are converted using a logarithmic calculation - due to a

strongly skewed distribution of raw data, to permit correct and normalised statistical comparison.

The transformed value allows calculation of a z score which is the metric that determines the GHG

Emissions Rating.

The reasoning is best described by example: The frequency of occurrence of EVDI™ values for bulk

carriers is presented in Figure 3. The distribution of values for all ships does not fit a normal bell-

shaped curve, with the average of all values not central to the distribution. Direct comparison of

individual ship values to the average value would therefore have a bias against above average ships.

This is the case for both the overall ship type and the ship size group within the ship type.

Figure 3: Frequency distribution of EVDI™ values for all bulk carriers in the SVIS™ database and two dwt

banding examples.

EVDI™ Log EVDI™ Z Score

(Size & Type)

EVDI™ Size

Score

GHG Emissions

Rating

Page 12: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

8 | P a g e

Applying a logarithmic transformation to the calculated EVDI™ values normalises the frequency

distribution for both the overall ship type and ship size groups within the ship type (Figure 4). This

enables individual ship values to be compared accurately to the average for ship type or ship size

group within the ship type.

Figure 4: Frequency distribution of logarithmic (ln) transformed EVDI™ values for all bulk carriers in the SVIS™ database and two dwt banding examples.

A z-score is a standard measure of the variation of an individual value from the average, and is

calculated by dividing the difference between the ship value and the overall average for the type or

size within the type by the standard deviation for the type or size within the type.

z score = –

Where:

• yi is the ship ln EVDI™ value,

• ŷ is the average of ln EVDI™ values for the type or size group within the type

• s is the standard deviation of the ln EVDI™ value distribution for the type or size group

within the type

The method for comparing an individual ship’s EVDI™ value to the ship type or size group within

the ship type, and to derive the EVDI™ Size Score reported in the RightShip GHG Emissions

Rating, is based on calculating a statistical z-score.

Page 13: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

9 | P a g e

Because the z score is a standardized value that represents the value of the variable from a normal

distribution with a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one. Z scores can therefore be

compared across data sets with different value scores and ranges.

For the purpose of the RightShip GHG Emissions Rating, the negative z score is used; i.e. the sign,

positive or negative, of the calculated z score is reversed. This is done because the z score calculation

will give positive numbers for values above the average (high EVDI™) and negative numbers for

values below the average (low EVDI™). Because low EVDI™ values represent better energy efficiency,

assigning a positive value to the score is considered to better represent good performance.

The GHG Emissions Rating will almost always use a different dataset for each vessel’s relative

calculation and as older vessels are scrapped and new vessels are commissioned, relative

performance naturally adjusts and vessels continue to do better and worse than the average.

3.2.2 Comparing Existing Ship’s CO2 Emissions

As mentioned throughout section 3 the RightShip GHG Emissions Rating methodology differentiates

between vessel type and size. The major ship types that the rating applies to are shown below:

Ship Type Basis of Size

Range

Size Rating

Range (Vessels)

Approximate

Number of Ships

Bulker DWT 200 11,300

Chemical Tanker DWT 50 700

Container TEU 200 5,300

Crude & Products Tanker (inc OBO) DWT 200 10,300

Cruise GT 50 600

General Cargo DWT 100 11,700

LNG Tanker CBM 50 400

LPG Tanker CBM 50 1,200

Refrigerated Cargo Ship DWT 50 1000

Vehicle DWT 50 800

The Size Rating Range (Vessels) column shows the number of vessels by Ship Type included in the

EVDI™ Size Score calculation. The number of ships chosen for comparison is based on the quantity of

ships of the type in the SVIS™ database and their size distribution.

For the typical GHG Emissions Rating calculation, the size comparison is to the 50, 100 or 200 ships

within the type that are closest in capacity (dwt, gt, teu or cbm) to the individual ship, for example:

For vessel types in the 100 Size Rating Range, the 50 ships with capacity closest to, but less than the

ship, and the 50 ships with capacity closest to but greater than the ship.

Where there are insufficient quantity of vessels to allow for an even split of vessels (near to the

upper and lower ends of the group) the Size Rating Range (Vessels) is adjusted to best approximate a

like-for-like comparison, for example: The second largest bulk carrier would be compared to the 199

bulk carriers immediately smaller and the 1 larger bulk carrier to determine its GHG Emissions

Rating.

Page 14: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

10 | P a g e

Scattergrams of the calculated EVDI™ Size Scores for each of these ship types against capacity (dwt,

gt, cbm or teu) show the EVDI™ Size Score/capacity relationship to be best represented by a power

regression line, as recognised by IMO MEPC in their establishment of an EEDI “reference line” for

new ships.

Detailed analysis of the EVDI™ Size Scores across RightShip’s SVIS™ database has shown the method

used to develop a comparative rating of EVDI™ Size Scores as a component of the RightShip GHG

Emissions Rating, is applicable across the different ship types. The method therefore provides a

statistically valid means of comparing the energy efficiency of existing ships.

Notwithstanding a vessel’s individual size, speed and year of build it is possible to demonstrate that

certain vessels simply perform better and it is important that such sustainability is factored in to the

selection process. By using appropriate mathematical techniques, a meaningful comparison between

vessels can be achieved and as shown by Figures 5 and 6 below, newer vessels do not always

perform as well as their existing peers. Again both positive and negative ratings are evident across

the full range of data under consideration.

Figure 5: Scattergram of EVDI™ Size Scores for Bulk Carriers between 50,000 and 55,000 dwt.

Page 15: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

11 | P a g e

Figure 6: Scattergram of EVDI™ Size Scores for Bulk Carriers between 175,000 and 200,000 dwt.

3.2.3 RightShip’s GHG Emissions Rating vs EEDI Reference Line

The IMO’s MEPC has calculated EEDI reference lines which denote the maximum allowable EEDI

values that new ships constructed can have in order to be issued an International Energy Efficiency

Certificate.

RightShip’s GHG Emissions Rating empowers SVIS™ users to find vessels that exceed the benefits of

the reference line and consequently maximise sustainability, efficiency and economic benefits. The

diagram below shows EVDI™ values associated to A – G Ratings for Bulk Carriers > 2,000 dwt and the

EEDI reference line (Y = 961.79x-0.477) as specified in MEPC 62/6/4

Figure 7: EVDI™ related to A – G Ratings and IMO’s MEPC Reference Line for Bulk Carriers > 2,000 dwt.

Page 16: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

12 | P a g e

4. RightShip’s Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating RightShip realised that in addition to the GHG Emissions Rating for vessels, a more holistic measure

needed to exist, to provide insight into the vessels efficiency compared to all ships within the ship

type.

The Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating for an individual ship is calculated by the addition of two

scores: the z score determined relative to the ship type and size group, added to the z score

determined relative to the overall ship type.

Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating = -z score Size & Type + -z score Type

The incorporation of the two components is considered important because it considers both the

efficiency of the ship relative to other ships of the same type and similar size, and the efficiency

within the ship type overall.

By design, the EVDI™ generally returns lower numbers, indicating better efficiency, for larger

capacity ships, because the amount of CO2 emitted per unit of transport drops as ship size increases.

This is because the engine power/fuel consumption and cargo capacity do not increase as a 1:1 ratio.

Although in most situations comparisons will be between ships of similar size, it is important to also

reflect the varying efficiency between different sizes residing within a ship type.

EVDI™ Log EVDI™ z Score (Size & Type) +

z Score (Type)

Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating

The Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating was developed to address this need and offers users the

capability to compare and understand a vessel’s efficiency across the entire ship type.

Page 17: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

13 | P a g e

Using the EVDI™ calculations for bulk carriers as an example, Figure 8 shows a scattergram of EVDI™

Size Scores against dwt, Figure 9 shows EVDI™ Type values against dwt, and Figure 10 shows GHG

Emissions Ratings against dwt.

Figure 8: Scattergram of the EVDI™ Size Scores against a ship’s dwt for all bulk carriers in SVIS™

Figure 9: Scattergram of the EVDI™ Type value against a ship’s dwt for all bulk carriers in SVIS™

Page 18: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

14 | P a g e

Figure 10: Scattergram of the Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating, against a ship’s dwt for all bulk carriers in SVIS™

What the 3 charts above show:

For the GHG Emissions Ratings (Figure 8), there is a relatively even spread of scores above

and below zero across all sizes, whereas

For the overall ship type values (Figure 9), most small ships (< 50,000 dwt) have negative

ratings and all large ships (> 100,000 dwt) have a positive rating, and

Combining the two into Size & Type GHG Emissions Ratings (Figure 10) results in a more

even distribution. There are still more small ships with a negative rating and more large

ships with a positive rating, but with positive and negative ratings evident across almost the

full size range.

5. Presentation of Information in SVIS™ Within SVIS™, the Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating is presented in a summary table showing the

value of the rating and an accompanying graphic (Figure 11).

A detailed table is also provided which displays data used in calculating, the EVDI™ Size Score and

accompanying GHG Emissions Rating graphic, and hyperlinks (in blue) to the top five rated peer

vessels based on EVDI™ Size Score (Figure 12). The top rated peers enables the user to identify the

relative performance differential between any given vessel and the most efficient in its peer group.

Page 19: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

15 | P a g e

Figure 11: Example of the Size & Type GHG Emissions Rating snapshot for an individual ship in SVIS™.

Figure 12: Example of the GHG Emissions Rating data table for an individual ship in SVIS™.

Page 20: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

16 | P a g e

6. EVDI™ – A Practical Application

The following page shows 3 tables, common among each are the vessels selected and their 170,000

to 175,000 dwt range and the 11,023 nautical mile voyage as illustrated above in (Figure 13).

Although complications regarding ballast leg measurement and confusion around who should be

responsible for vessel emissions exist, these simple examples highlight the potential environmental,

sustainability and efficiency benefits, and economic savings accessible through informed selection.

Actual emissions for a voyage will vary from this theoretical calculation due to the fuel consumption

and consequent emissions varying with voyage characteristics such as actual speed, cargo load and

weather conditions.

EVDI™ is an estimated measure of the CO2 emitted per tonne nautical mile travelled.

Therefore a vessel’s theoretical footprint is the EVDI™ multiplied by both the distance travelled

and tonnes carried: CO2 footprint = EVDI™ x nautical miles travelled x tonnes carried

11,023 nautical miles

Figure 13: Possible voyage plan from Vitoria, Brazil to Qingdao, China.

Page 21: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

17 | P a g e

CO2 emitted for the 11,023 nautical mile journey:

The cost of CO2 using USD23.00, the approx price of carbon proposed by the Australian Government:

GHG Emissions Rating

DWT EVDI™ USD Cost of CO2 USD Variation

from Mean % USD Variation

from Mean

A 170,164 2.39 $102,928 -$29,270 -22%

B 172,964 2.63 $115,309 -$16,889 -13%

C 172,964 2.75 $120,598 -$11,600 -9%

D 171,516 2.94 $128,036 -$4,162 -3%

E 171,681 3.15 $137,228 $5,031 4%

F 170,000 3.42 $147,431 $15,233 12%

G 174,285 3.93 $173,855 $41,657 32%

The August 2011 price of fuel / tonne USD650 listed at www.bunkerindex.com (Singapore IFO 380):

GHG Emissions Rating

DWT Power (Kw) USD Price of

fuel for voyage USD Variation

from Mean % USD Variation

from Mean

A 170,164 12,400 $1,134,120 -$342,787 -23%

B 172,964 16,044 $1,387,498 -$89,410 -6%

C 172,964 15,404 $1,332,150 -$144,757 -10%

D 171,516 16,861 $1,412,400 -$64,508 -4%

E 171,681 18,736 $1,517,494 $40,587 3%

F 170,000 18,661 $1,630,174 $153,267 10%

G 174,285 19,670 $1,924,516 $447,608 30%

GHG Emissions Rating

DWT EVDI™ CO2 Tonne Variation from

Mean Variation from

Mean %

A 170,164 2.39 4,475 -1,272 -22%

B 172,964 2.63 5,013 -734 -13%

C 172,964 2.75 5,243 -504 -9%

D 171,516 2.94 5,567 -181 -3%

E 171,681 3.15 5,966 218 4%

F 170,000 3.42 6,410 662 12%

G 174,285 3.93 7,559 1,811 32%

Page 22: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

18 | P a g e

7. RightShip’s Environmental Rating The RightShip Environmental Rating provides a

comprehensive assessment of a vessel’s environmental

and sustainability credentials. It is independent to

RightShip’s Risk Rating, the GHG Emissions Rating and the

EVDI™. The Environmental Rating was developed to

complement these RightShip measures and to give users

the capability of making a more holistic vessel selection.

The environmental rating is accessed through SVIS™ and

has a similar look and feel to the RightShip Risk Rating.

The data that contributes to the Environmental Rating computation is displayed on the same screen

as the rating itself. A selection of this data is shown below:

Figure 15: Some of the data that contributes to the Environmental Rating.

The environmental rating is based on analysis of data including pollution incidents, ISO14001,

MARPOL deficiencies and affiliations with RightShip partners including AUSMEPA, Green Award and

class societies’ environmental certification/programs.

Figure 14: Environmental Rating.

Page 23: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

19 | P a g e

7.1 Retrofits and Upgrades Vessels that acquire eco-efficiency technologies and or measures such as: Hull surface coating, fixed

sails and exhaust gas cleaning systems (scrubbers), are eligible for recognition from RightShip. The

efficiency retrofits and or upgrades are documented as part of the SVIS™ Environmental Rating page,

as shown:

Figure 16: Display of a vessel’s efficiency retrofits and or upgrades.

Approved enhancement measures will have a plus + sign adjoined to their GHG Emissions Rating.

Shown for the D rated vessel below:

Figure 17: A plus + sign is adjoined to a vessel’s GHG Emissions Rating for recognised retrofits and or upgrades.

RightShip believe it is important to acknowledge and reward owners who have invested capital and

systems to operate above compliance and the plus + notation goes a long way in this regard.

Page 24: Calculating and Comparing CO2 Emissions From Ships - Aug 2011

20 | P a g e

8. RightShip – In a Nutshell

RightShip is committed to achieving with our customers a safer and cleaner maritime environment.

RightShip’s major services are:

Online vetting through our proprietary web-based Ship Vetting Information System (SVIS™),

Physical inspections of ships worldwide,

Vessel environmental performance assessments,

Hosting and supporting clients’ own in-house vetting system, and

Advice on vetting policy and processes.

9. Contact Information Warwick Norman Chief Executive Officer Suite 1308 530 Lt Collins Street Melbourne Vic 3000 Australia +61 3 8686 5741 (office) +61 419 582 855 (mobile) [email protected]

Eric Clarke Vice President – Americas Suite 300, 2600 South Shore Boulevard League City Texas 77573 United States of America +1 (281) 245 3381 (office) +1 (850) 624 6315 (mobile) [email protected]

David Peel European Manager Floor 15 30, St Mary Axe London EC3A 8BF United Kingdom +44 207 868 1621 (office) +44 778 5921582 (mobile) [email protected]

Wayne Blumenthal Commercial & Strategic Manager Suite 1308 530 Lt Collins Street Melbourne Vic 3000 Australia +61 3 8686 5747 (office) +61 402 288 187 (mobile) [email protected]