Summary of Options
This document provides
marine port authorities and
terminal operators with an
overview of strategies that can
be implemented to reduce air
emissionsfrom daily operations.
These strategies are organized
to provide a tiered approach
to "greening port operations"
based on cost and existing
infrastructure, beginning with
low cost/no cost strategies.
EPA's Clean Ports USA program
and the Northeast Diesel
Collaborative Ports Workgroup
are focusing on diesel emissions
reductions due to their large
potential to improve public
health. These efforts are part
of a broader effort to increase
port sustainability, including
programssuchasEnvironmental
Management Systems and
Portfields (see www.epa.
gov/brownfields/poficy/
initiatives_sb.htm#pi)
The Clean Ports USA and
Northeast Diesel Collaborative
websites provide both national
and regional overviews of these
and other options, as well as
case studies. See www.epa/
gov/cleandiesel/ports/, www.
epa.gov/cleandiesel/ports/
stratapp.htm and
www.northeastdiesel.org/
For more information on any
of these voluntary options,
please contact EPA NE staff:
Abby Swaine
617-918-1841
swaine.abby@epa.gov
Halida Hatic
617-918-1680
hatic.halida@epa.gov
United States
Environmental Protection
I Agency New England
Ports Summary/June 2008
EPA New England
Options for the Marine Ports Sector:
Green Strategies for Sustainable Ports
Overview
The engines and equipment used at ports, including cargo handling equipment, trucks,
locomotives, tugboats, ferries and ships, can contribute significantly to the levels of fine
particulates (PM2.5), sulfur dioxides (SO2) and ozone-forming nitrogen oxides (NOx) and
hydrocarbons (HC) in the air. All of these pollutants contribute to PM2.5 pollution, with
NOx and HC also contributing to gound-level ozone (smog). Both ozone and PM2.5
can adversely affect human health, especially children and people with asthma or heart
disease. All of Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, as well as coastal Maine
and New Hampshire, experience days when ground-level ozone concentrations exceed
the air quality health standard. Two Connecticut counties, New Haven and Fairfield, are
designated nonattainment for the PM2.5 annual standard, and are also violating EPA's
24-hour PM2.5 standard (adopted in 2006). New England asthma rates (above 10%
in each state) are among the highest in the country. Reducing exposure to diesel exhaust
wherever it occurs, including in and around ports, is an important public health and air quality
priority for EPA New England.
Consistent with EPA's national Clean Ports USA program, EPA New England aims to
encourage ports to undertake voluntary emission-reduction measures by providing
education, assistance and other incentives. This non-regulatory approach can address
emissions from existing diesel engines and nonroad equipment that are not affected by
EPA's standards for diesel fuel and newly manufactured diesel engines.
Leading ports around the country are reducing diesel emissions to respond to customer
needs, community pressures, and/or their own environmental priorities. Ports such as LA/
Long Beach, New York/New Jersey, Boston, Virginia, Charleston, Seattle, Tacoma, and
(continued)
-------
terminal opera-
tors can choose
from a number
of strategies for
reducing
truck and
bus idling.
(cont.) Overview
many others are stepping forward to work with their tenants and customers to reduce
diesel pollution. (Readabouttheireffortsatwww.epa.gov/diesel/ports/casestudies.
htm.) Businesses that move freight are increasingly challenged by shareholders,
insurance companies, and customers to reduce their emissions footprints (e.g., the
Carbon Disclosure Project).
Business leaders recognize that sustainability equals profitability. The American
Association of Port Authorities is working to develop and implement a sustainability
framework for its members. Sustainable ports consider their operations in an all-
inclusive manner, and air quality is a great place to start because cost-effective, verified
technologies and cleaner fuels are available to reduce these emissions.
Tier I: Environmental Stewardship - Idle Reduction, Cleaner Fuels,
Environmental Management Systems, and Vessel Speed Control
The following options can save ports and their customers money while reducing
emissions.
1. Reduce Idling Time and Optimize Terminal Layout — Reducing idling
time of vehicles, vessels and equipment operating in, near, or around port terminals
provides immediate and measurable local reductions of harmful pollution at little to
no cost to the port authority or terminal operator.
By reducing unnecessary truck or bus idling, a driver can save several gallons of fuel
per day (significant at today's high fuel prices, and low profit margins for drayage
companies), and ports gain the benefit of improved community relations. Improved
gate control can both reduce idling time and increase security.
The following are divided into (a) strategies for addressing existing traffic; and (b)
strategies for addressing traffic associated with expansion of facilities.
-------
a. Existing truck and bus traffic: Idling can be reduced via
i. Policy
ii. Signage
iii. Outreach
iv. Policing/enforcement
v. Gate management and terminal appointment systems
vi. Waiting areas for drivers and passengers
b. Port and facility upgrades: In the strategic/master planning phase,
examine how people and cargo will move into, out of and within the port,
and what new on-dock equipment will be required.
Consider:
i. Facility layout, flow and access
ii. Gate control and scheduling
iii. Software to maximize efficiency in container exchange and in-
termodal transfers
(e.g., eModal's Virtual Container Yard)
iv. Waiting rooms for drivers and passengers
v. Idling policy, signage, outreach, and enforcement strategies
vi. Equipment powering options, including hybrid, variable idle
speed, and electric "shore power" (easier to integrate into
plans for new facilities than to retrofit into existing facilities)
Port authorities may want to consider including anti-idle provisions in ten-
ant leases when making any adjustments to leases. EPA NE is glad to as-
sist port authorities and terminal operators in crafting policies and signage
consistent with best practices and state idle limits. EPA NE, via the SmartWay
Transport Partnership, provides information on how to reduce idling, includ-
ing drayage control strategies (gate management, scheduling, etc.) and
shipper strategies that apply to port terminals (driver waiting areas, etc.).
SmartWay also provides partner shipper, carrier, logistics and affiliate organi-
zations with valuable individualized technical assistance and public recognition.
See www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/smartway_shippers_strategies.htm,
www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/swresources.htm#drayage and
www.epa.gov/smartway/partnerships.htm
2. Cleaner Fuels — Early transition to cleaner low or ultra- ow sulfur diesel fuels
provides immediate and substantial emissions reductions from port operations as a
drop-in solution. Many majorterminal operators and shipping lines (e.g., Maersk/APM
Terminals, Husky, SSA Marine, K-Line) have received very favorable press regarding
their switch to cleaner fuels, enhancing their public image.
ULSD tends to cost slightly more per gallon than LSD, but this price gap is expected
to narrow and disappear as ULSD becomes ubiquitous. This is a relatively low-cost
option with the potential for measurable and immediate benefits for workers and
neighborhood environments.
Biodiesel, a domestically produced, renewable fuel that can be manufactured
from new and used vegetable oils and animal fats, can be blended with petro-diesel.
Biodiesel reduces air pollutants such as particulate matter (PM), carbon monoxide
(CO), hydrocarbons (HC) and toxics. B5 (5% biodiesel and 95% petroleum diesel)
and B20 (the other popular blend) provide about equivalent performance. With
higher-bio blends, an additive may be needed for cold-weather operation. While
In addition to setting standards
for new engines, EPA has taken
steps to reduce the sulfur con-
tent of diesel fuel sold for on-
road and nonroad use:
• In October 2006, ultra-low
sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel (15
ppm) became available nation-
wide.
• Beginning in June 2007,
EPA's Nonroad Locomotive and
Marine Rule (NRLM) requires
refiners and importers to begin
producing low-sulfur (500 ppm)
diesel fuel for use in nonroad,
marine and locomotive engines.
In June 2010, nonroad diesel
fuel—except for marine and
locomotive—will transition to
ULSD. In June 2012, locomo-
tive and marine fuel will transi-
tion to ULSD.
-------
Please consider the
following in switching
to ULSD, biodiesel, or
other fuels:
Visually inspect the engine and
fuel system (filter, pump, lines)
initially and then periodically
thereafter to confirm system
integrity. Conduct a fuel analy-
sis before and after switching
fuel to monitor changes. The
fuel analysis should include, at
the least, results and specifica-
tions for sulfur, cetane, aromat-
ics, lubricity, distillation, and
flash point.
Monitor and change fuel filters
as necessary, since the new
fuel may precipitate residues
out of the engine and fuel sys-
tem. Some equipment manag-
ers recommend changing fuel
filters after 2 or 3 tanks of fuel.
prices fluctuate, biodiesel can cost slightly more per gallon than regular diesel
fuel. Increasingly, engine warranties are permitting biodiesel use, and an ASTM
standard for biodiesel (D6751) has been developed; for more information see
www.biodiesel.org.
Emulsified Diesel is a blend of diesel fuel, water, and other additives that reduces
emissions of PM as well as NOx. Emulsified diesel can be used in any diesel engine,
but the addition of water reduces the energy content of the fuel, so some reduction
in power and fuel economy can be expected. Emulsified fuel will stay mixed for a
fairly long time, but if a vehicle sits dormant for months at a time the water can settle
out of the fuel and possibly cause problems. There is a small price premium over
regular diesel.
3. Environmental Management System (EMS) — An EMS is a comprehensive,
systematic approach to identifying and managing all environmental aspects of a
port's operation. Ports in New England and elsewhere that have invested the time to
develop EMSs report that they more than pay for themselves. A port with an EMS is
seen as proactive and responsible. Having an EMS provides the appropriate structure
for integrating environmental, asset and security programs for easier management.
The Plan-Do-Check-Act discipline built into an EMS can be set up to flag opportunities
to upgrade equipment and pursue other efficiencies on a routine basis. Knowledge is
transferred from individuals to the organization. Some big shippers and carriers are
ISO 14001 certified, and are therefore looking to develop relationships with ports that
have or are on their way (via EMS) to ISO certification.
Port authorities can ease into the process of developing an EMS by drawing the
"fenceline" rather narrowly (starting with one facility or operation), and/or by hiring a
consultant to facilitate the process. Some ports who have done an EMS recommend
doing most of the work in-house to create buy-in and develop staff expertise. The
scope of the EMS can be gradually expanded, ideally even to tenant operations.
EPA NE staff (see www.epa.gov/regionl/ems/index.html) and EPA Ports
Sector contact Kathleen Bailey (see www.epa.gov/sectors/poris/index.html)
are available to help get you started.
-------
4. Harbor Speed Limits/Marine Vessel Speed Reduction — Developing
a voluntary speed reduction (VSR) program is a low cost way to reduce emissions,
particularly NOx, in and around the harbor. The Port of Long Beach adopted a Voluntary
Commercial Cargo Ship Speed Reduction Program in 2005 that asks vessels traveling
in and out of the ports to adhere to speeds at or below 12 knots within 20 nautical
miles of the coast. Cooperating operators can qualify for Green Flag recognition and
15% lower docking fees. CARB has estimated NOx reductions of 4-8% are being
achieved. For more information, see www.polb.com/environment/air_quality/
emissions.asp.
A port with an
Environmental
Management
System is seen
as proactive
and responsible.
Tier II: Technology Strategies - Retrofit, Repower, or Rebuild Equipment
Adding verified emissions control devices (retrofitting), repowering or rebuilding engines,
or replacing equipment are key strategies for reducing emissions. Many terminal
operators are taking advantage of EPA's more stringent engine standards to achieve
emissions reductions through early fleet turnover. More information about each strategy
can be found at vAvw.epa.gov/cleandiesel/ports/iechnologies.htm.
1. Retrofit — Existing diesel engines can be retrofitted with EPA-verified advanced
pollution control technology ("aftertreatment" devices) to reduce emissions of PM,
HC, CO and NOx. A number of technologies exist for both onroad and nonroad
engines, including:
a. Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC)
b. Diesel Particulate Matter Filter (DPF)
c. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
EPA and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) verify the emissions performance
of retrofit technologies. These devices tend to be cost-effective on a dollar-per-pound-
-------
For more information on EPA's
verification program and for
a current listing of EPA veri-
fied technologies, please visit:
www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/
verif-list.htm
of-pollution basis. Workers and others exposed to exhaust from these engines can
experience substantial benefit from retrofit devices. DOCs are the least expensive,
can be used with either LSD or ULSD fuel, and are verified for use on a wide variety
of dockside equipment as well as construction vehicles and trucks. DOCs reduce
particulate matter emissions between 20 and 40 percent. DPFs provide approximately
90 percent particulate matter reduction, but are somewhat more expensive, require
ULSD and higher operating temperatures, and are also verified for use on a wide
variety of dockside and other equipment. Flow-through filters offer good emission
performance with expanded temperature operating conditions. Selective Catalytic
Reduction devices (SCRs) primarily reduce NOx emissions (unless paired with a DPF or
DOC), and are verified for a narrower range of equipment (including some vessels).
2. Repair/Rebuild - - Through routine maintenance and repairs, owners and
operators can prevent premature engine failure, and ensure that engines are
operating at maximum power and efficiency and meeting emissions standards. In
addition, timely maintenance can identify opportunities to rebuild engines using
cleaner and more efficient components that can help reduce emissions during the
remaining useful life of the equipment.
3. Repower and on-dock supply options — It can make sense to replace a
failing or very dirty old engine in a useful chassis with a newer, cleaner diesel engine
or one that can use an alternate fuel or source of power (propane, electricity, etc.).
Some equipment can be repowered with a cleaner onroad diesel engine. Repowering
is most appropriate for equipment that has a useful life much longer than that of the
engine. The cost of the new engine is at least partly offset by better fuel efficiency and
reliability, easier diagnostics, an extended warranty, and a reduction in maintenance
costs. (Crane electrification is a good example of this, and one for which many
ports have made an attractive business case.) If the chassis or other components are
compromised, it may make more sense to plan for replacement.
Some alternative-fuel engines that show particular promise for fuel savings and are
being tested at ports include hybrid diesel/electric or diesel/hydraulic engines (to
capture braking power) and variable speed drives (to better adjust power output to
load, and minimize fuel use during idle). It can also make sense, particularly in doing
facility renovations and expansions, to supply "shore power" for refrigerated trailers
and long-haul truck cabs to reduce the need for idling, since increasingly these pieces
of equipment may have on-board capacity to use an external source of electricity.
-------
Tier III: Infrastructure and Replacement Strategies
The following options require considerable planning, coordination, and investment;
however, the public and environmental health benefits of implementing these
strategies should not be overlooked. These strategies are being tested on the West
Coast where severe air quality problems have resulted in significant government and
private investment. Ports on the East Coast may benefit from ensuing technology
refinements and economies of scale.
1. Replacement — If equipment has reached the end of its useful life such that
repairing, rebuilding and repowering are not cost-effective or practical, replacement
is the logical alternative and does not represent "added" cost. An example of this is
replacing worn-out forklifts with propane-fueled models, which emit less NOx.
Where local air quality problems are severe, it can even make sense to retire older
equipment or vehicles early in spite of the cost and replace them with newer low-
emission equipment. Drayage trucks are typically old and not in great repair, and
travel and idle in areas near ports where their emissions can have a relatively large
impact. Their owners are typically capital-poor and reluctant to accept even free retrofit
devices. Some major port areas with severe air quality problems are undertaking
programs to scrap and replace port-dedicated drayage vehicles through heavy
subsidies or outright purchase.
2. Intermodal shipping — In New England, almost all transport of goods from
port to customer is accomplished via truck, which leads to highway congestion
and emission impacts. It may be more efficient to shift a portion of this traffic to
rail and short-sea shipping modes where possible. (See www.marad.dot.gov/MHI/
documents/l-95_Corridor_Coalition_First_Full_SSS_report.pdf and www.portmod.
org/news/press/White%20Paper.htm)
Tier III
-------
Tier III
The Clean Ports USA and
Northeast Diesel Collaborative
websites provide both a national
and regional overview of these
and other options, as well as case
studies. See www.epa.gov/
cleandiesel/ports/, www.epa.
gov/cleandiesel/ports/stratapp.
htm and www.northeastdiesel.
org/ports.htm
Ports can support the development of improved intermodal options by participating
in metropolitan, regional, and state-level planning associations and advisory
groups managed by transportation agencies. On their own, they can build on-dock
connections to existing rail spurs, contract with shippers that use intermodal facilities,
and undertake new barge operations. Ports with on-dock rail should consider idle
reduction, hybrid or gen-set engines, cleaner fuels and emission reduction technology
options for the locomotives operating there.
For more information, see www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/documents/
intermodal%20shipping.pdf and www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/ports/rail.htm
3. Cold ironing — Depending on the type of vessels frequenting a port, and the
duration of their stay, hotelling emissions from cruise and cargo vessels can represent
a significant proportion of total emissions. Working vessels such as tugboats that
spend hours at a time idling their engines in harbor can also draw shore power
instead. Providing shore power allows compatibly-equipped vessels to "plug in"
to meet their energy needs in lieu of running their auxiliary engines while docked.
Building the necessary port-side infrastructure is a major undertaking, but it offers an
effective mechanism for reducing local air pollution. Increasingly, newly built vessels
are equipped to meet cold ironing requirements on the West Coast and in Europe, so
they would be ready to accept shore power if provided elsewhere.
Cold ironing is a strategy that New England ports will want to keep in mind in planning
for a greener future. Ports and utilities could collaborate on supplying shore power
at attractive rates, or developing other incentives to make switching to shore power
practical and affordable for vessels berthing and calling here. It may make sense to
start with tug boats or ferries. Reducing emissions from ships at and near the dock
can make a port more attractive to cruise passengers and area neighbors by reducing
emissions.
Printed on 100% recycled/recyclable paper with a minimum 50% post-consumer fiber using vegetable-based ink
oEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency New England
EPA901-F-08-004
June 2008
------- |