By
Susan Parker |
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd (RCCL) has begun 2013 with some positive news on one of two scrubbers it is trialling in its search for an alternative to burning marine gas oil, when the Emission Control Area (ECA) limit of 0.1 per cent sulphur comes into force in 2015.
The Green Tech system on board Liberty of the Seas got DNV approval at the end of last year and as 2013 began, the Bahamas approved it for regulation 4 under Annex VI of MARPOL at the International Maritime Organization.
“The whole issue of air emissions has been an ongoing challenge,” says Jamie Sweeting, principal at Sweeting Sustainability Solutions and global sustainability advisor to RCCL. “The way RCCL addresses it is to focus on energy efficiency. In 2011 RCCL reported a 19 per cent reduction in fuel use on 2005. It is now probably closer to 20 per cent.”
The company’s number one focus is to burn as little fuel as possible, which is obviously “good for the bottom line and good for the consumer”. But the ECA regulation has led the company to be more progressive. “We are certainly excited to have the scrubber approved. This will lead to it being used more often. Just because it works in a lab and on one trial, doesn’t prove it can work 24/7/365.”
The next stage of the programme is to make sure it is fit for purpose, something the company learned all about when trialling advanced waste water purification systems (AWPS).There is also the opportunity to extend the trial into how successful the system might be in removing pollutants such as black carbon, particulate matter, NOx and also CO2.
“I still believe that until the scrubber works 24/7 on a 10mW engine for weeks on end, you cannot really say it is operational,” says Sweeting. “We are cautiously optimistic. It really is on the cutting edge.” Once this has been proven, then the question is: “Do we trial one on a dual engine or a number of singles on different ships?” It is a promising start but there’s quite a long way to go before this becomes the panacea that so many in the industry hoped for at the beginning of the scrubber journey a few years ago.
In the meantime, RCCL has developed an agreement with the US Environmental Protection Agency, the US Coast Guard and Transport Canada on averaging in the North American ECA which has been approved by the Bahamas and Malta.
“Basically it allows us to average the emissions so that the total net benefit for the environment and public health is guaranteed to be at least as good as or better than straight compliance.” This can be done within a ship, for example burning 0.1 per cent on one engine and 2 per cent on another so that average is less than 1 per cent, but also across a fleet of ships. In Alaska, three ships could be burning 0.1 per cent and two 2 per cent so that the average is less than 1 per cent sulphur.
North America has been split into five zones – North Atlantic, South Atlantic/Caribbean, the Gulf of Mexico and South/North Pacific – and averaging will apply across one zone only. “This is a win/win for us as it allows us to optimise our engines to the fuel mix we have.”
These IMO regulations are being applied on a per-company basis. RCCL’s installation of gas turbines over a decade ago is now reaping results. But this is only going to help for a limited time, as Sweeting explains: “In 2015, when 0.1 per cent comes in, our averaging will not really help. It will help a little in operation but not in meeting the regulations cost-effectively.”
Ballast water has been the subject of much discussion recently. While the IMO is close to ratification and the USCG is supportive of the IMO standards, Sweeting says: “What is of concern to the whole industry is that we have not come up with a common standard. Various states in the US adopt different protocols and standards and the EPA has not said it supports the USCG position.”
With no common standard, there is an understandable reluctance to purchase systems. “We have been trialling systems over the years. When we get clarity, we can then source a system that will work. My advice to RCCL has been to hold off spending millions of dollars until we know the standards. It is obviously untenable to have one standard in one port and one in another.”
Another area of concern is the Baltic and the issue of harmful nutrients in ballast water. Sweeting admits that RCCL’s opinion on the subject differs from that of the regulators regarding how to get to the same goal of reducing nutrients. However, he says, “ultimately we, as the cruise industry, want to see all environmental impacts reduced so that the Baltic can recover.”
Although cruise ships are mostly equipped with very sophisticated AWPS, these were not designed specifically to deal with nutrients and hence to meet the new requirements, waste needs to be discharged ashore. “Helsinki and Stockholm are prepared and have good facilities but the challenge is that if a port has five ships in on a day it may not have the capacity to take 100 per cent of waste on that day. Stockholm is the best in the world as an environmental port, but even they will admit that they cannot necessarily achieve 100 per cent capacity 100 per cent of the time.”
Sweeting says that under law, there must be adequate port reception facilities but when, in rare circumstances, a port says it cannot accept a ship’s waste, the shipowner should not be held liable. In addition the new regulation requires there to be 70-80 per cent removal of nutrients, which far exceeds the 35-50 per cent that can be achieved on board, so ports must be encouraged to install more reception facilities.
Last but by no means least, the company is working to achieve a zero landfill cruise ship out of South Florida this year. “This means working with a vendor to ensure that all the waste is separated. What cannot be recycled will be sent to, for example, a waste energy plant.”
As all the above measures indicate, RCCL is certainly not sitting on its environmental laurels – and Sweeting says there is even more going on behind the scenes which has yet to be announced.