ENVIRONMENTAL PORT INDEX Presented on behalf of: Gun Rudeberg, Port of Stockholm Ellen Kaasik, Port of Tallinn Andrej Vatterrott, Port of Rostock Markku Alahäme, Port of Turku Ulf Sonesson, Port of Trelleborg Liselotte Rørup, Port of Kalundborg Axel Grelland, Port of Oslo Kaarina Vuorivirta, Port of Helsinki by Christopher Wooldridge, MESP, UK Clean Baltic Sea Shipping Riga, 20 th September 2012 1
Introduction Environmental shipping and port indexes are of paramount importance for several large ports and there will be a unique opportunity for the Baltic Sea Region to take the lead and provide an excellent show case for other maritime regions (www.clean-baltic-sea-shipping.eu) 2
Port Index and the CBSS project The Port Index should act as a catalyst and indicator of good practice in environmental management of port and shipping interests: Reduce ship-borne air pollution at sea, in ports and in cities Reduce nutrient inputs from ships at sea to a zero level Create a joint strategy for differentiated port dues Create pilot projects at full scale as best practice examples Create a network for collaboration between stakeholders to achieve the goals 3
Progress to date Completion of literature search Identification of potential KPIs Initial Group evaluation of KPIs Compilation of group best practice Data base of BPO members responses Specification for generic index model in progress 4
What is an index? A particular trend or condition A scale (of numbers) which show changes A numerical quantity, usually lacking units, that indicates magnitude of.effect A number which, by varying around a value of (10 or 100), enables a straightforward comparison over time in the average value of a set of items CONFIDENTIALITY - COMPETITION - ANONIMITY MEANINGFUL - SIGNIFICANT - FEASIBLE -PRACTICABLE - ACCEPTABLE 5
Group Good Practice I CURRENT PRACTICES WITH POTENTIAL INPUT FOR PORT INDEX * indicates repeated themes reported by several Partners 1 Is port certificated or registered for Self Diagnosis Method, PERS or ISO14001? 2 Is Environmental Policy readily available and comprehensive? 3 Noise*, emissions to air* including SO x, NO x, PM 2.5 and PM 10 4 CO 2,* Use of energy, Waste handling*, Overall air quality* 5 Differentiated port dues* Based on emissions to air and waste 6 Storm water/rain water handling and monitoring NOTES AND JUSTIFICATION Scope for rating EMS standard and status. Indicates standard and competence Key driver of environmental management activities, programmes and practice Potential EPIs. Direct link to emissions and air quality Links with PPRISM, Waste is a high priority issue throughout sector. Measures of sustainability. Considerations of incentive programmes. Bonus Malus Systems Influence on environmental condition and cargo storage Port of Trelleborg 6
Scope of Index Key Performance Indicators for BALTIC Port and Shipping Operational Conditional Managerial Monitoring Reporting Port of Helsinki List of potential KPIs Examples of current good practice 7
Role and status of Index Ports set an example Demonstrate standards and best practice Ports are catalysts for action Encourage culture of monitoring and reporting Integration to mutual advantage Baseline and benchmark 8
Components of Index Input data (Units) Standardization/Normalization Weighting to be applied? Source and reliability of data Compilation Evaluation Reporting Port of Turku 9
Specification of Index Ship-borne air pollution Port reception facilities sewage Harmonization and standardization of environmentally friendly infrastructure Baseline calculations of emissions in (Partner ports*) Availability of electricity, gas, LNG* Economic instruments such as differentiated port dues* 10
Supporting studies* (with significance to Port Index) 1. Baseline calculation of emissions 2. Demand for environmentally related infrastructure 3. Availability of electricity, gas, LNG 4. Developments in bunker, electricity and LNG markets 5. Analysis of existing economic instruments - differentiated port dues 6. Scenario analysis of future trends in sustainable shipping 7. Designs for shore-side electricity 8. A model Market-based instrument 11
Environmental Indicators For the Port Authority, Sector and Baltic* ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE Compliance with legislation and regulation Continuous environmental improvement Control of Environmental Aspects Voluntary self-regulation - evidence Sustainable development and environmental protection Shipping* Port of Stockholm 12
PPRISM Proposed indicators Environmental condition Indicators 1. Carbon Footprint 2. Amount of waste recycled 3. Total water consumption Consolidated Environmental Management Indicators Existence/reference to: 1. Environmental Management Programme 2. Environmental Policy 3. Reference to ESPO Code 4. Inventory of Legislation 5. Inventory of Significant Environmental Aspects 6. Objectives and Targets 7. Training 8. Monitoring Programme 9. Environmental Report 13
EPI Condition Stakeholders assessment results Clean Shipping Project (*33) BPA Conference (114) 1st ESPO SD Committee (17) 2nd ESPO SD Committee (11) On-line survey (114) Carbon dioxide emissions 3.9 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.67 3.7 Waste (excl. ships) 3.8 4.0 3.5 3.8 3.59 3.7 Water consumption 2.9 3.6 3.1 3.4 3.43 3.3 EPI Management Environmental Management Programme 4.6 4.0 4.3 4.6 3.85 4.3 Environmental Policy 4.5 - - 4.3 3.98 4.3 Monitoring programme 4.4 3.9 3.7 4.0 3.98 4.0 Environmental Report 4.3 3.9-4.3 3.81 4.1 Objectives and Targets 4.3 - - 4.2 3.86 4.1 Environmental Training 4.1 - - 4.0 3.86 4.0 ESPO Code of Practice 3.8 - - 3.9 3.67 3.8 Inventory of Aspects 3.7-3.8 4.5 3.88 4.0 Inventory of Legislation 3.6 - - 4.2 3.78 3.9 Overall (289) *Number of respondents Results between 1 5 (where 1 = least and 5 = most) 14
Stakeholders assessment results Results between 1 5 (where 1 = least and 5 = most) 15
Environmental Management Indicator Weighting Environmental Management System 1 Environmental Monitoring Programme 1.25 Inventory of Significant Environmental Aspects 1.5 Environmental Policy 1.5 ESPO Code of Practice 0.5 Inventory of environmental legislation 1.5 Objectives and Targets 1 Environmental Training 0.75 Environmental Report 1 16
Environmental (pprism.espo.be) 125 Initial EPIs Operational Management Condition 289 feedback The European Sea Ports Conference Sopot, Poland 11 th May 2012 17
Examples of best practice in Carbon Footprint Port Sources included Percentages Years Results Comments A Corunna (Spain) Antwerp (Belgium) Dover (UK) Oslo (Norway) Rotterdam (The Netherlands) PA vehicles PA boilers Electricity port area Stationary sources Mobile sources PA buildings Electricity Business travel Commuting Gas Oil Refrigerant Gases Owned vehicles Electricity Direct emissions Indirect emissions Other indirect emissions Direct emissions Indirect emissions Other indirect emissions 4 % 7 % 89 % 19 % 51 % 10 % 13 % 1 % 6 % 23 % 2 % 1 % 74 % 44 % 34 % 22 % 31 % 15 % 54 % 2009 2008 2007 2006 1124 t CO2 1357 t CO2 1296.5 t CO2 1301 t CO2 Results reported since 2006 Reduction of 13.6 % (2006-09) Published in Sustainability report 2009 2008 34700 t CO2e Calculated from 2000 2008 Results presented in the GreenPorts Conference 2011, Venice 2009 2008 2008 2007 2008 2007 13279 t CO2 15340 t CO2 1346 t CO 2 e 704 t CO 2 e 29094 t CO 2 33043 t CO 2 Results reported since 2008 Reduction of 13.4 % (2008-09) Published in their Environmental Bulletin 2009 Increase in 47.7% (2007-08) Published in the port of Oslo report: CO2 emissions for the year 2008. Results reported since 2007 Reduction of 12 % (2007-08) Published in their Annual Report 2009 18
Best Practices in Waste management Source Corunna Algeciras Cartagena Castellon Catalan Dover Santander Solid Waste Organic 1099 t Total solid 196.64 t 1152 t 4120 kg Paper 344 t waste 1.3tonnes 8.82 t 1.4 t 861 kg 5540 kg Plastics 57 t 3.9 t 10.1 t 0.095 m3 140 kg Non-hazardous industrial waste Scrap metal 154 t 4873 kg Wood 3321 m 3 165 t 1 m3 Electronic waste 460 kg 0.19 t 54 u Oil filters 0.14 t 4 u Hazardous waste Ink cartridges 152 u 167 u 117 u 149 u Used Oil 2400 l 1 t 10 kg 3 l 1.5 t Fluorescents 1201 l 160 kg 24 kg 209 u 80 kg Batteries 0.313 t 400 kg 499 kg 31.7 kg 43 u 19
Environmental Management Components Average score: 7.4 (out of 10) Observatory/Dashboard 20
BPO member s website survey* (Context for WP5 and CBSS) Presence of Environmental Information on port s website Achievement of PERS/ISO or EMAS Environmental Management Systems Publicly available Environmental Policy Statement Publication of Environmental Report Evidence of Environmental Monitoring Identified EPIs to provide evidence of trends Publication of data and science-based reports Differentiated fees/dues Economic Instruments Examples of established good practice 21
Example of BPO survey responses Port Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 33 Yes Yes, ISO 14001 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Solutions for sorting of waste in the ports and fixed systems for handling waste water, grey water and black water from the ships. - Noise - Diesel consumption per tonne of handled goods - Emissions to air, land and water - Diesel and energy consumption - Waste management - Cooperation projects 34 Yes Yes, ISO 14001 in several terminal operators Yes No N/M N/M N/M No The port applies an environmentally differentiated port charge, which means that vessels that offer good environmental performance receive a discount N/M - Onshore power supply for vessels -Rail shuttles to replace road transport - Gas recycling in conjunction with the loading and discharge of oil - The port facilitates the use of LNG as ship fuel. - Green Bunkering to reduce the risk of oil spills. 22
1 QUESTIONS Oceania % YES Asia % YES Africa % YES North America % YES Latin America % YES ESPO Environmental Review 2009 (122 ports) % YES Baltic Ports (48 ports) % YES Does the port website show Environmental Information? 56 4 20 16 20 69 69 2 Does the port have an EMS? 60 20 32 28 20 48 38 3 4 5 6 7 8 Does the port have an Environmental Policy? 72 28 36 44 28 72 46 Is the Environmental Policy made available to the public? 36 8 12 24 16 62 27 Does the port publish an Environmental Report / Review? 56 20 20 36 16 43 27 Is environmental monitoring carried out in your port? 72 32 40 56 24 77 40 Has the port identified environmental indicators to monitor trends in environmental performance? Does the port publish factual data by which the public can assess the trend of its environmental performance? 44 16 24 44 8 60 31 4 0 8 20 0 36 15 23
CLEAN BALTIC SEA SHIPPING: PORT INDEX (Potential model) Port: Driver Set an example - Mitigate Support Encourage - Enforce ISSUES & ASPECTS INDICATORS INDEX NOTES 1. Port Environmental Management EMS* Policy ESPO Code Inventory of Aspects Inventory of Legislation Objectives* & targets* KPIs* and Monitoring* Training Reporting Infrastructure 1.00* 1.50 0.50 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.25 0.75 1.00? Indicative of competence & standard of Port environmental programme. Data from SDM/PERS, PPRISM & Website. *Shipping aspects integrated. 2. Environmental Condition Air Water Soil Sediment Ecosystems/Habitats Water Consumption* Carbon Footprint (Scope 3)? Selected EPIs for each category (each port unique). Trend more significant than absolute value. Baseline and benchmark value. 3. Shipping Aspects* Vessel speed reduction Green Ship Promotion* On-shore Power Supply (Automated Mooring) Exhaust gas/auxiliary Waste? Voluntary/Virtual Arrival Green fees/esi/csi Influence of economic instruments. 24
Index of Sustainability - DASHBOARD KPI Y/N Evidence Trend Detail 1. EMS i) ii) iii) Y Y Y Certificate ppm www. ISO14001 Particulates Training 2. Condition i) ii) iii) Y N N GHG Scope 3-13.6% 3. Shipping i) ii) iii) iv) Y N Y Y www. Green fees OSP ESI - 12% 25
Pathway to completion (31 st March 2013) 1. Refinement & acceptance of Index concept 2. Input data sources and standardization 3. Weighting Baseline - Benchmark 4. Pilot sample evaluation and validation 5. Input from Supporting Studies * CBSS 6. Input interpretation use 7. Recognition 8. R&D deliverable Practicable tool?* 26
THANKS TO THE PORT INDEX RESEARCH GROUP WP5 and THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION 27