Download Report WorkShop 2 (Other project deliverable)

Support Action to initiate cooperation between the
Communities of European MARine and MARitime
REsearch and Science
Deliverable No. 3.3.2
Post analysis report on Workshop 2: Impact of Maritime Transport on the
Marine Environment (Physical Impact)
Date: 30th June, 2011
Project EMAR2RES – n.234359
Author :
Atilla Incecik (WEGEMT)
Table of Content
Sum ...................................................................................................................................... 3
1- Project main objectives .................................................................................................. 3
2- Objectives of Task 3.3.1 ................................................................................................. 4
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 4
2.2 Background to Ballast Water Treatment ................................................................................ 5
2.3 Background to Development of New Hull Surfaces ............................................................. 6
3. SUMMARY OF THE FORESIGHT EXERCISE AT THE WORKSHOP ............................. 7
4. Main Recommendations for Joint Marine and Maritime Research Priorities:........... 13
2
Summary
This task aims at post analysing the results of the second workshop on impact of
maritime transport on the marine environment (physical relationships) and at
developing a map highlighting the areas of common interest and/or of possible
synergies focussed on maritime transport. This will provide a holistic assessment of
the current state-of-the-art across sectoral boundaries, addressing the legal, political,
economic and societal drivers across an extended time period compatible with
challenges such as Climate Change and sustainable development of the European
economy. In this context, it will outline potential marine and maritime research and
development activity as well as areas of future research needs, required to facilitate
European development from environmental, industrial and societal perspectives. It
will give insight in the level of detail and complexity (threats, opportunities and
challenges) of the issue of integration of research at stake. It will achieve this by
drawing on the inter-disciplinary expertise assembled during WP3.1 and WP3.2.
1- Project main objectives
EMAR²RES aims to provide a forum for interaction between Europe’s marine
science and maritime transport research communities, so that they can collectively
work towards enhanced capability in marine and maritime research. This is essential
to ensure that Europe’s capability is of internationally acknowledged excellence, and
of sufficient scale and critical mass to facilitate, promote and sustain intellectual
interchange and discourse between those engaged in international research,
fundamental to the principles of the Lisbon Agenda and the European Research
Area.
The objectives of EMAR²RES are summarised as to:





Support interaction between marine scientists and maritime transport
research communities to assist in the creation of the marine component of the
European Research Area (ERA), facilitating the creation of an internal market
and quantifying the existing European marine and maritime research capacity.
Facilitate the networking of marine scientists and maritime transport research
communities in the European Union leading to a more cost effective and
efficient use of Member State resources including scientific personnel,
specialist infrastructures and planned investments.
Contribute to the evolution of a European Marine Research Strategy,
identifying future challenges and opportunities and the priority interdisciplinary
research programmes that need to be put in place to address / benefit from
them.
Provide a basis for the sharing of available resources to address priority
issues which are beyond the capacities of individual Member States.
Progress the inter-awareness between Member State and EU marine and
maritime RTD Programmes, towards collaboration between programmes,
which has been identified as a key objective of the ERA.
3
2- Objectives of Task 3.3.1
1.
Develop far-sighted inter-disciplinary, specific areas of common interest and
/or possible synergies; in conjunction with technologists, environmental
researchers, socio-economic expertise, policy and legal specialists.
2.
Map major drivers, threats, opportunities and challenges onto this.
3.
Map interactions to produce an inter-disciplinary, multi-sectoral and coherent
overview of the domain.
4.
Undertake a gap analysis, based on the above, to provide a holistic
identification of future research needs
2.1 Introduction
The workshop on Impact of Maritime Transport on the Marine Environment (physical
impacts) was held on 29-30 June 2010 in Ostend, Belgium.
This workshop is concerned with reducing the physical impact of the maritime
transport on the marine environment. The following areas were covered in this
workshop:


Impact on the Sea.
o Noise genetared from ships, including engines, propellers that has a
potentially detrimental impact on marine life
o Vibration
o Wash (including impact on the seabed and river/canal banks) created
as a result of waves generated by ships movement through the water
o Interaction between hull and the water, i.e. the boundary layer
Operational atmospheric emissions
o Nox
o Sox
o Noise
o CO2
o Particulates
This workhop was atttended by the follwing experts:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Atlar Mehmet (Newcastle University, UK)
Bosshers Johan (MARIN, Netherlands)
Debernardis Enrico (Insean, Italy)
Dekeling Rene (Ministry of Defence, Netherlands)
Godoe Olav Rune (Institute of Marine Research, Norway)
McKeown Eugene (Biospheric, Ireland)
Muller-Schwenn Hans (Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Germany)
Norro Alain (MUMM, Belgium)
Rogers Roland (National Oceanographic Centre, UK)
The vision statement agreed by the all workshop participants which aims to
encapsulate what they wanted to achieve at the workshop was:
The creation of synergies between maritime and marine RTD communities to :
4




establish new scientific knowledge of the physical impacts on the marine
environment of maritime technologies and practices
ensure the sustainability and competitiveness of EU maritime transport
develop the means to obtain good environmental status of the marine
environment using the best available technology
promote socio-economic benefit
2.2 Background to Noise
Noise from commercial shipping operations is increasingly being recognized as a
potential threat to several marine habitats, in particular to whales, seals, and fish.
Scientific data, while not conclusive, suggest that commercial shipping is resulting in
significant increases in the overall underwater sound emissions in many ocean
areas, particularly coastal zones. Incidental noise from commercial shipping occurs
within the range of frequencies that also used by some marine habitat for their
communication which is essential to key life functions such as reproduction and
locating prey. A 100 Hz sound may be detectable after propagating hundreds or
thousands of kilometers whereas a 100 kHz sound may no longer be detectable after
only a few kilometers. There is a strong feeling among different stakeholders in
taking action to minimize or eliminate adverse effects of commercial shipping noise
on marine habitats. USA already submitted consultation document to IMO Noise
and Marine Mammals Information Paper (MEPC 57/INF.4) with a view to
introducing limits introduced underwater noise limits and EU is in preparation of
similar actions.
Considering the increasing size of commercial fleet underwater noise levels will
increase in the future in the current trading routes. In addition it is highly likely that
opening of new routes in the Arctic due to global warming and exploration of oil and
gas in the arctic areas will require us to consider the effect of noise on marine
animals in the arctic regions. In particular the extreme operational conditions in the
arctic, ships need different/novel propulsion systems such as pod propulsion
systems, as well as suitable hull forms. Different propulsion systems as well as hull
forms may create different noise characteristics. Furthermore presence of ice may
change the underwater noise characteristics of the vessel which may be acceptable
in non-ice environments. All these new operational conditions and propulsion
systems and hull forms need to be assessed and any adverse noise conditions need
to be mitigated through design modifications to eliminate the threat to marine
mammals.
However, until recently, underwater noise studies were carried out in connection with
military operations Therefore, very limited data and prediction methods are available
to tackle design issues related to commercial shipping and production of oil and gas
or marine renewable energy. Even the commercial full scale measurement standards
were published in USA only very recently which have many gaps.
5
2.3 Background to Vibration
The main cause of vibration in ships is cavitation on the propeller. Cavitation mainly
occurs due to non-uniform wake field in which the propeller operates. The ways to
reduce vibration are:
 Improve hull-propeller interaction by using bulbous sterns or by moving
propeller out of the wake
 Improve the cavitation behaviour of the propeller in a given wake field by
designing new blade sections to reduce vibration excitation.
2.4 Background to Wash
Wash generated by marine vessels operating in restricted waters requires the
attention of designers due to limitations set for the environmental impact of wave
generation in particular for high-speed craft. The task of reducing wash is the same
as reducing wave resistance. Current research affords are on the optimisation of hull
forms to minimise wash effect on the environment and the investigation of
environmental consequences due to wash.
2.5 Background to Atmospheric Emissions
Maritime transport is responsible for about 2% of CO2, 7-13 % of NOX and 4-6 %
SOX emissions out of the estimated total global atmospheric emissions. Most of the
emissions to the atmosphere come from diesel engines which are at present prime
mover of ships.
Current research and development affords focus to reduce CO2 emissions by
improving new hull designs, retrofitting existing vessels with devices to reduce drag
and or propulsion efficiency as well as optimising the engines for fuel efficiency,
developing alternative fuels from renewable resources.
NOx emissions are of great concern. Technically NOx emissions can be reduced
significantly but this will lead to increased fuel consumption and CO 2 emissions.
Emissions of SOx are directly related to sulphur content in the fuel oil. Globally ships
are required to lover the sulphur content to about 0.5 % by 2020 or to fit the ships
with exhaust gas cleaning devices or to use other technological devices to limit the
sulphur emissions.
6
3. SUMMARY OF THE FORESIGHT EXERCISE AT THE WORKSHOP
3.1 NOISE
Fields
Scenario 3
Challenges
Opportunities
KEY actions
« REALISTIC »
Common
Research priorities
(worldwide)
ENVIRONMENT
Holistic recommendations
to politicians re. Noise;
GES criteria
- Reduce noise
-
-
- Define impacts (on different
timescales with appropriate
actions to mitigate/reduce
them).
- implementing noise
monitoring systems
Realise a book on
agreed standards
(definitions)
Complement MSFD gaps
Marine Data on acoustics
needed to fix thresholds
and define the impacts of
MT on Marine
Environment
- Use the Risk Assessment
framework in line with the
MSFD.
Use data from ocean
observatories and
industry
Common
understanding on
the phenomena
/approach on
“impacts of noise”
-
Better use “terrestrial”
knowledge on acoustics
and sounds
Establish a framework to
assess the “Noise budget”
from a “marine point of
view”
7
Establish a
framework to
assess the “Noise
budget” from a
“marine point of
view”
Comparability studies:
noise signature and the
environmental impacts
Pressure waves Vs noise is
a new type of new
research (check)
-
INDUSTRY
Increase in maritime
transport: therefore we
should decrease noise
underwater
Map the maritime
transport in EU;
- implement noise
monitoring systems
Realise a book on
agreed standards
(definitions)
-
- Define impacts (on different
timescales with appropriate
actions to mitigate/reduce
them)
Inventory, state of the art
(gaps and knowledge) to
set up a proper scientific
framework;
- Differentiation of noise
impacts depending on
ocean bathymetry (deep
Sea, shelf sea etc)
- Define quality of “noise”
for future management
programs
8
Common
understanding on
the
phenomena/appro
ach on “impacts of
noise”
- Qualify Noise signature
according to the type of
commercial
vessels/maritime activity
(gravel extraction)
- new technological
designs: propellers, reduce
wash characteristics
- pipelines
Hazard identification
- Qualify Noise signature
according to the type of
commercial
vessels/maritime activity
(gravel extraction)
Exposure assessment
Establish “Noise budget”
from a marine point of
view
9
Pressure waves Vs noise is
a new type of new
research (check)
Map the maritime
transport in EU
- Differentiation of noise
impacts depending on
ocean bathymetry (deep
Sea, shelf sea etc)
Effect assessment
Marine Data on acoustics
needed to fix thresholds
and define the impacts of
MT on Marine Envt
-
Better use “terrestrial”
knowledge on acoustics
and sounds
10
Risk characterization
Holistic recommendations
to politicians re. Noise
Management/ mitigation
- new technological
designs: propellers, reduce
wash characteristics
SOCIETAL
Cost benefit analysis in
mitigating/non mitigating the
impacts of Maritime Transport
-
Imbalance: Increased Shipping
operations and minimisation of
environmental impacts
11
Political impact
decisions
Consumer role in
influencing
shipping
operations
Clear definition of
“noise and noise
impacts” to best
inform Society;
3.2 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS
Fields
ENVIRONMENT
Scenario 3
Challenges
WS participants to list
key features which best
define the field
KEY actions &
« REALISTIC »
Common
(worldwide)
Research priorities
Atmospheric Chemists /chemical oceanographers and
meteorologists to work at air/sea interface
Reduce emissions
WS participants to list
key features which best
define this field
INDUSTRY
Opportunities
NOx/SOx discharges’ impacts on the marine
environment: new RTD opportunities
Large ship
emissions mapped
Local regulations for
emissions; what is
the status in high
seas?
Ship emissions to be assessed in a global perspective
Use existing analytical tools (GIS)
Risk assessment studies
of airborne emissions
from Ships, on a
regional approach
EU regulations
GIS model for
quantifying emissions
SOCIETAL
12
4. Main Recommendations for Joint Marine and Maritime Research Priorities:
The expert group decided to use a Risk Assessment (RA) framework to consider the
impacts and mitigation of hazards such as noise and air emissions on the marine
ecosystem. The RA framework helps to rationalise the scientific research effort with
a goal to best manage the risks and to support the decision-making processes (see
Ref. Marine Board-ESF PP 13).
The proposed approach is as follows:
-
Generic (based on a standardised framework)
Adaptive (mitigation feedback loop)
In line with the Precautionary Approach (MSFD/GES)
Structuring (in support of a decision-making process).
The Risk Assessment framework aims to establish a robust research program
allowing clear identification of research activities and actions with regards to noise
and emission reductions. The RA Frameworks for the impact of noise and
atmospheric emissions are given in the following:
13
RA
Framework 1
NOISE
Characterization: sources, type of measurements etc.
 Need for a common standardized protocol/definitions of
noise for marine/maritime communities
3. Effect assessment
 Need for marine acoustic data from industry/observatories
2. Exposure assessment
= assess the “Noise Signature”
= quantitative Impacts on the marine life: dose-response
relationships for sensitive species
- Map (predict/measure) the sound field and match it to the
distribution/abundance of sensitive receptors
Behavioral (e.g. masking)
Physical (e.g. Tissue/hearing damage , habitat
destruction
Traumatic(e.g. killing)
 Need to better assess the variations in response,
differences in susceptibility
-
- Frequency, intensity, sound pressure levels
- Bathymetric factors (shelf sea/high Sea)
 Need for integrated marine and maritime research,
4. Impact Risk Assessment
Incl. data.
 Establish a “Noise Budget”:
-
5. Mitigation
- Cost benefit analysis and range of
reductions
Qualitatively (e.g. to provide non-linear risk quotient)
Quantitatively (e.g. to give a full risk probability)
Temporal factors
Spatial factors
Intensity, Persistence,
Frequency,
- Implement noise monitoring systems
Local, Population,
Habitat
Doses
- Favor new technological designs: new
propellers, modify “wash” characteristics
etc.
 Need to characterize:
- Vulnerable habitats
- Thresholds (sound level/physical degradations)
No Acceptable risk
- Vulnerable species/stocks
 Need to realise “noise” maps (EMODNET)
 Good Environmental Status
 Positive societal impact
14
Acceptable risk
Need to characterize possible consequences of choosing different
levels as thresholds
 Establish expert groups that could provide statements of the
biological significance of particular risks for a few species
RA
Framework 2
Emissions (NOx, SOx & Particular matter)
Characterization: sources, type of measurements, air/sea
interface etc.
 Need for a common standardized protocol/definitions of
emissions
 Need for data from industry/observatories
2. Exposure assessment
= assess the “emission Signature”
- Map large ship emissions
- Frequency, intensity, emission levels
- EU regulation system (difference coastal/high seas regulations)
 Need for a GIS based model to quantify emissions
5. Mitigation
3. Effect assessment
= quantitative Impacts on the marine life
Masking
Tissue/hearing damage
Killing
Habitat destruction
 Need to assess impacts of NOx/SOx discharges
 Need to better assess the variations in response, differences in
susceptibility
4. Impact Risk Assessment
= set-up a “airborne emission budget from
vessels” (qualitative/quantitative) on a regional
approach
- Implement an emission trading
system (e.g. cost benefit analysis
and range of reductions combined
with other measures);
- Initiate public campaigns/
lobbying activities to
modify/redirect shipping
operations;
- Develop new technological
designs (e.g. new propellers,
modify “wash” characteristics,
develop “bio-mimetic” studies etc.
No Acceptable risk
 Good Environmental Status
 Positive societal impact
Temporal factors
Spatial factors
Intensity
Local,
Persistence
Population
Frequency
Habitat
Doses
 Need to characterize:
- Vulnerable habitats
- Thresholds ([concentration]/physical degradations)
- Vulnerable species/stocks
 Need to realize “emission” maps (EMODNET) on
a regional level
Acceptable risk
Need to characterize possible consequences of choosing different
levels as thresholds
15
 Establish expert groups that could provide statements of the
biological significance of particular
risks for a few species
16