A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Costs and benefits of low-sulphur fuel standard for Baltic Sea shipping
The maximum allowable fuel sulphur content for shipping in the Baltic Sea dropped from 1%S to 0.1%S in 1 January 2015. We provide a cost-benefit analysis of the sulphur reduction policy in the Baltic Sea Sulphur Emission Control Area (SECA). We calculated the abatement costs based on shipowners' optimal decision-making in choosing between low-sulphur fuel and a sulphur scrubber, and the benefits were modelled through a high-resolution impact pathway analysis, which took into account the formation and dispersion of the emissions, and considered the positive health impacts resulting from lowered ambient PM^sub 2.5^ concentrations. Our basic result indicates that for the Baltic Sea only, the latest sulphur regulation is not cost-effective. The expected annual cost is roughly E465 M and benefit 2200 saved Disability Adjusted Life-Years (DALYs) or monetized E105 M. Based on our sensitivity analysis, the benefits yet have a potential to exceed the costs. The analysis neither takes into account the acidifying impact of sulphur nor the impact North Sea shipping has on the cost-benefit ratio. Lastly, a similar approach is found highly recommendable to study the implications of the upcoming Tier III NO^sub x^ standard for shipping. [web URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479716307277]
Costs and benefits of low-sulphur fuel standard for Baltic Sea shipping
The maximum allowable fuel sulphur content for shipping in the Baltic Sea dropped from 1%S to 0.1%S in 1 January 2015. We provide a cost-benefit analysis of the sulphur reduction policy in the Baltic Sea Sulphur Emission Control Area (SECA). We calculated the abatement costs based on shipowners' optimal decision-making in choosing between low-sulphur fuel and a sulphur scrubber, and the benefits were modelled through a high-resolution impact pathway analysis, which took into account the formation and dispersion of the emissions, and considered the positive health impacts resulting from lowered ambient PM^sub 2.5^ concentrations. Our basic result indicates that for the Baltic Sea only, the latest sulphur regulation is not cost-effective. The expected annual cost is roughly E465 M and benefit 2200 saved Disability Adjusted Life-Years (DALYs) or monetized E105 M. Based on our sensitivity analysis, the benefits yet have a potential to exceed the costs. The analysis neither takes into account the acidifying impact of sulphur nor the impact North Sea shipping has on the cost-benefit ratio. Lastly, a similar approach is found highly recommendable to study the implications of the upcoming Tier III NO^sub x^ standard for shipping. [web URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479716307277]
Costs and benefits of low-sulphur fuel standard for Baltic Sea shipping
Antturi, Jim (author) / Hänninen, Otto / Jalkanen, Jukka-Pekka / Johansson, Lasse / Prank, Marje / Sofiev, Mikhail / Ollikainen, Markku
2016
Article (Journal)
English
BKL:
43.00
Sub-standard shipping and the human costs of piracy
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2011
Nutrient Reductions to the Baltic Sea: Ecology, Costs and Benefits (ev970137)
| Online Contents | 1997
The economic and environmental costs and benefits of the renewable fuel standard
| DOAJ | 2021
Taylor & Francis Verlag | 1985
Cement trade and shipping: low shipping costs and high volumes ahead
British Library Online Contents | 2001