How To Reduce Fuel Consumption

Transcription

1 Merenkulun haasteet ja mahdollisuudet tulevassa kustannusympäristössä Staffan Herlin, Finnlines Oyj SKAL Logistiikkaseminaari

2 2 Grimald Group Global Network

3 Grimaldi Group - European Network Kapellskär Kotka Helsinki Turku St. Petersburg Baltic Sea North Sea Russia Cork Mediterranean Sea Hull Immingham Liverpool Tilbury Bristol Sheerness Southampton Wallhamn Göteborg Aarhus Esbjerg Malmö Travemünde Sassnitz Hamburg Lübeck Rostock Amsterdam Flushing Zeebrugge Antwerp Gdynia Ventspils Monfalcone Koper Venice Savona Ravenna Bilbao Livorno Setubal Valencia Cagliari Tripoli Civitaveccia Salerno Palermo Trapani Catania Tunis Malta Piraeus Yenikoy Gemlik Limassol Alexandria Mersin Latakia Tartus Beirut Haifa Ashdod 3

4 Finnlines Main Network Finnlines Ro-ro Lines Finland Southern Baltic Finland Scandinavia Finland North Sea, UK and Continent Finland Biscay HansaLink Helsinki Travemünde FinnLink Naantali Kapellskär NordöLink Malmö Travemünde TransRussiaExpress Lübeck St. Petersburg Transshipments to Mediterranean, Bay of Biscay Bilbao Atlantic Coast N & S America, West-Africa SPAIN UK Hull Immingham FRANCE North Sea Zeebrugge Antwerp BELGIUM Travemünde Lübeck Amsterdam NORWAY Aarhus Rostock Malmö GERMANY SWEDEN Wallhamn Sassnitz Naantali Kotka Turku Helsinki Kapellskär Hanko Gdynia Baltic Sea POLAND Rauma Ventspils FINLAND ESTONIA LATVIA LITHUANIA BELARUS St. Petersburg RUSSIA 4

5 Key Figures Finnlines Group Group Turnover (in million EUR) ,2 Average number of people employed Average number of employees ashore Average number of people at sea Fleet Average number of vessels operated Number of Finnlines owned vessels Average age of Finnlines own fleet (years) Total capacity of the fleet in lanemeters Cargo volumes transported: Units Cars (not including cars of passengers) Tons of freight not possible to be measured by the unit Passengers transported:

6 Environmental Requirements for Maritime Transports Regulation Costs : Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for CO 2 reduction As from (not yet applied for roro and ropax vessels). Subsidy/penalty systems possible for low score ESI/CSI/EEDI units Depending on IMO EEDI decision and authorities policies (e.g. ports) 2015 onward : Restriction of sulphur (SOx) emissions; 0,1 % Sulphur content in SECA Areas as from Question of exemptions on specific routes and vessels is still open Scrubber & retrofits: running & maintenance + 2 MEUR / ship or Switch to gasoil: +50% fuel costs : Ballast Water Convention (subject to ratification rate) Ratification/enforcement expected to be reached during 2013 After (dependent on the size of the vessel) the treatment plants are planned to become mandatory US additional restrictions possible Exceptions for transfers within closed sea under study 2016 or later: NOx Tier II applies to vessels keel laid after Tier III : Baltic Sea as a special emission control area for Nox: for new vessels keel laid 2016 or later NOx emissions reduced by 80% abt 0,6 MEUR / ship + running United States 0,8 MEUR / ship? Eventual exception for closed sea: 0 EUR Tier II: +3% fuel costs Tier III: new engines + /ship 2020 and later: Black Carbon, BC Technology not yet feasible, timetable and measures uncertain Depending on eventual IMO decision 6

7 Effects to Maritime Transport Costs in Finnish Foreign Trade Regulation Effect on costs Timeframe SOx; % (MKK) onwards Ballast Water Convention %? (FL own est) onwards Nox, new vessels % (MKK) 2016 or later CO % (LVM) 2020 or later effect through emission trading scheme or bunker tax, still open MKK = University of Turku, Centre for Maritime Studies LVM = Ministry of Transport and Communication, Finland 7

8 The biggest challenge in short sea shipping is looming ahead: as from IMO/Annex VI of the Marpol 73/78 Convention max sulphur limit 0,1% within ECA Source: Suomen Satamaliitto 8

9 IMO decision on emissions and fuel sulphur content 5,0 4,0 International (and the rest of EU) If feasible English channel, North Sea & Baltic Sea 3,0 2,0 1,0 0,0 9

10 0,1% SOx regulations Actions for reducing cost pressure on the industry ECA states Shipping companies Flexible tonnage for changing flows Reducing fuel incidence by optimizing occupation rate Young/energy efficent tonnage, tech investments Operative fuel saving measures (e.g. slow steaming) Experience/presence in EU and State Associations Concentrate flows Shippers Select a few big shipping partners with flexible / efficient tonnage Developing Logistics, i.e. scheduled slowsteaming, avoiding need for express deliveries, 10

11 11 Imbalance in export and import volumes and different commodity types challenges tonnage-type development in short sea shipping liner services

12 Over 50% of the world s ro-ro tonnage has been built over 20 years ago. After 2002 newbuildings mainly lanemetres have been built. Ro-ro tonnage age profile > 20 years old < 20 years old Finnlines fleet s average age is now under 10 years Lanemetre Lanemetre Lähde: Fearnleys 12

13 Finnlines New Ro-ro Tonnage for General Cargo The new designs have hoistable car decks on two levels in the main deck and an internal ramp to weather deck. The clearance on the main deck is increased to 7 m 13

14 Summary International and EU legislation has big influence on the competitiveness of the maritime transports in the future. Industry s own measures are heavily dependent on the scope and scheduling of the regulating measures, the critical factors being, e.g: Availability of suitable and flexible tonnage for different cargo types Age of tonnage reliability and ecology Cargo flow balance combination of flows Ownership of tonnage, risk bearing ability Implementation of operative measures to save fuel Investments in technologies to reduce emissions from ships ECONOMY = ECOLOGY 14

15 SLOW STEAMING Alternative to the high cost Sulphur decision (2015) 1) Reduce the speed in the Baltic to max. 18 knots => impact in Sulphur, CO2, + other emissions when reducing from abt. 22 knots to abt knots = % => Less cost, lower Bunker cost by abt % 2) Reduce the Sulphur % from current 1 % in the Baltic to 0,5 % => Impact on the rates abt % OUTCOME OF THIS MODEL: => Lower emission for the environment => NO cost impact => Increase of transit times only few hours 15

16 Kiitos