Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation - … Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation: Development of Methodology and Testing ... Performance Indicators ... for the maritime transportation

Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation:

Development of Methodology and Testing

1

Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation -


Annik Magerholm Fet (HiÅ/NTNU)

Eirik Sørgård (DNV)

1 Research report HiÅ 10/B101/R-98/008/00

Aalesund College (HiÅ) in co-operation with Det Norske Veritas (DNV)



2

Title: Report no.:

Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation - Development of

Methodology and Testing

HIÅ10/B101/R-98/008/00

Project no.: 98 / 101 HiÅ

Client(s) (name and adr.): Date: 99.04.30 The Research Council of Norway P.O. Box 2700 St. Hanshaugen N 0131 Oslo Norway

No. of pages: 32 Annexes: 1

Client’s ref.:Morten Østby Author(s): Annik Magerholm Fet (HiÅ), Eirik Sørgård (DNV)

Signature:

Responsible signature: Aalesund College, Per Kibsgaard Pettersen

Signature:

Summary: This is the main report for the project “Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation: Development of Methodology and Testing”. Aalesund College has led the project, and it is the pre-work for a hopefully coming project under the European Commission’s Fifth Framework program. The project activities have led to the following conclusions:

The “State of the Art” analysis concludes that the LCA-method has only been used to a limited extent for sea-borne transportation means. More work is needed to establish codes of practice for the evaluation of transportation (both for ships and other transportation means).

Result from a workshop focusing on needs and requirements descriptions shows that sea-borne transportation is to an increasing extent faced with environmental performance requirements from various categories of interested parties. However, actors in the Maritime Industry were interviewed to describe status and needs for environmental information, and this concludes that the need and the application of such information is not specified and not implemented in the businesses today. Environmental performance information will probably mainly be used for marketing purposes.

A simplified Life Cycle Assessment was carried out for M/V Color Festival to gain experience with the application of a standard tool. The study indicate that the operational phase is the most important in terms of contributions to pre-defined impact categories. However, a range of toxic substances during the ship’s life cycle has not been related to impact categories, and the scrapping phase was not considered in terms of environmental impact. LCA was found to be a good starting point for life cycle evaluations, and data and algorithms are to a large degree available although adjustments, structuring and quality assurance are required.

Main conclusions from the project are that to evaluate the environmental performance of ship transportation in a holistic and life cycle perspective, the two main perspectives are to be addressed in further research; methodological development, and improvement of relevant databases and analytical software tools for evaluating the environmental aspects of transportation modes.

Keywords:Life Cycle Evaluation, Life Cycle Assessment, Ship Transportation Distribution/Access: Open



3

Preface This report is a part of the documentation from the project "Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation - Development of Methodology and Testing". Aalesund College has been in charge of the project with dr.ing. Annik Magerholm Fet as project manager. Other partners in the project have been Det Norske Veritas and Color Line. Members of the steering committee have been Morten Østby Norwegian Research Foundation Kirsten Rognstad Det Norske Veritas Hans Andreas Nielsen Color Line Marine Annik Magerholm Fet Aalesund College The project has received financial support from the Norwegian Research Foundation under the “Maritim” research program, from Det Norske Veritas, Aalesund College and Color Line. The project period has been March -December 1998. Reports from the said project are: Angelfoss, Alfred (HiÅ): “Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation – Report from workshop 15 – 16 April 1998”, Report no. 10/B101/R-98/004/00, 1998. Angelfoss, Alfred (HiÅ); Johnsen, Tommy (DNV); Fet, Annik Magerholm (HiÅ); Karlsen, Harry (HiÅ): “Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation - State of the Art”, Report no. 10/B101/R-98/007/00, 1998. Johnsen, Tommy (DNV); Fet, Annik Magerholm (HiÅ): “Screening Life Cycle Assessment of M/V Color Festival”, Report no. 10/B101/R-98/009/00, 1998. Fet, Annik Magerholm (HiÅ); Sørgård, Eirik (DNV): ”Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation – Development of Methodology and Testing”, Report no. 10/B101/R-98/008/00, 1998. Fiskerstrand, Ingar; Remøy, Even T.: “Miljøinformasjon og Shipping”, Siviløkonomoppgave ved Høgskolen i Narvik, 1998.



4

Summary This is the main report for the project “Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation: Development of Methodology and Testing”. Aalesund College has led the project. This project is the pre-work for a hopefully coming project under the European Commission’s Fifth Framework program. It is also a pre-project for the project on “Life cycle evaluation of ship transportation”. The project activities have led to the following conclusions: The “State of the Art” analysis concludes that the LCA-method has only been used to a limited extent for sea-borne transportation means (only parts of the ship in selected life cycle phases have been analysed). Methods, software tools and environmental related data generally are available. However, more work is needed to establish codes of practice for the evaluation of transportation (both for ships and other transportation means). The framework should address transportation in general to establish a consistent framework for such comparisons (common assumptions, common system boundaries, common pollutants addressed, common impact categories, etc.). A workshop focused on needs and requirements descriptions, and on available methods. Result shows that sea-borne transportation is to an increasing extent faced with environmental performance requirements from various categories of interested parties. Companies may establish certified environmental management systems, environmental performance documentation and related certificates (environmental accountings, class notations, etc.) and overview of design, technology, equipment and procedures for pollution reduction to meet the increasing requirements. Actors in the Maritime Industry were interviewed to describe status and needs for environmental information. Based on the general development in the society and interviews with parties in the maritime industry, it is concluded that needs and requirements related to environmental performance information will increase in the future. However, the need and the application of such information is not specified and not implemented in the businesses today. Environmental performance information will probably mainly be used for marketing purposes. It is a long way to walk before companies within the maritime sector will include assessments in a life cycle perspective in their business strategies. A simplified Life Cycle Assessment was carried out for M/V Color Festival to gain experience with the application of a standard tool. The study indicate that the operational phase is the most important in terms of contributions to pre-defined impact categories. Based on the valuation method applied (Eco-indicator 95), NOx and SOx as the dominating pollutants to environmental impacts. However, a range of toxic substances during the ship’s life cycle has not been related to impact categories, and the scrapping phase was not considered in terms of environmental impact. Moreover, alternative impact categories with normalisation and evaluation factors reflecting the ship locations should be evaluated. This may increase the importance of the building, maintenance and scrapping phases throughout the ship’s life cycle. LCA was found to be a good starting point for life cycle evaluations, and



5

data and algorithms are to a large degree available although adjustments, structuring and quality assurance are required. Main conclusions from the project are that the project has demonstrated that the LCA is appropriate to identify and evaluate environmental impacts caused by material flows during the life cycle of a ship. However, to evaluate the environmental performance of ship transportation in a holistic and life cycle perspective, the two main perspectives are to be addressed in further research; methodological development, and improvement of relevant databases and analytical software tools for evaluating the environmental aspects of transportation modes. The project recommends a list of tasks to be performed to arrive at better code of practice for the life cycle evaluation of transport modes.



6

TABLE OF CONTENT LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS............................................................................................................................... 8

1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 9

1.1 BACKGROUND....................................................................................................................................... 9 1.2 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................................... 9 1.3 IDENTIFIED PROBLEM AREAS......................................................................................................... 10

2 WORKING APPROACH ......................................................................................................................... 11

3 THE ”STATE OF THE ART” ANALYSIS............................................................................................. 12

3.1 FINDINGS FROM THE “STATE OF THE ART”- STUDY................................................................. 12 3.2 CONCLUSIONS FROM THE “STATE OF THE ART” ANALYSIS................................................... 12

4 WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS ............................................................................................................... 14

4.1 NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS........................................................................................................... 14 4.2 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES ................................................................................................ 14 4.3 CONCLUSIONS FROM THE WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS ............................................................ 14

5 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION................................................................................................... 16

5.1 RESULTS FROM THE “ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION” STUDY ........................................ 16 5.2 CONCLUSIONS FROM THE “ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION” STUDY.............................. 16

6 SCREENING LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................... 17

6.1 RESULTS FROM THE SCREENING ANALYSIS............................................................................... 17 6.2 CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE SCREENING LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT....................... 17

6.2.1 Conclusions related to M/V COLOR FESTIVAL........................................................................... 17 6.2.2 Conclusions related to LCA methodology ..................................................................................... 18 6.2.3 Conclusions related to the software SimaPro................................................................................ 19

6.3 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS FROM THE SCREENING ANALYSIS ........................................ 19

7 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................................. 20

7.1 SPECIFIC PROBLEM AREAS.............................................................................................................. 20 7.1.1 System boundaries ......................................................................................................................... 20 7.1.2 Geographical dependencies........................................................................................................... 20 7.1.3 Functional units............................................................................................................................. 21 7.1.4 Data Quality .................................................................................................................................. 22 7.1.5 Resource consume, discharges and emissions............................................................................... 22 7.1.6 Performance evaluation................................................................................................................. 23 7.1.7 Accidents and risks ........................................................................................................................ 24 7.1.8 Life cycle costs............................................................................................................................... 24

7.2 OVERALL METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 24

8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................ 26

8.1 WHO NEEDS LIFE CYCLE EVALUATIONS? ................................................................................... 26 8.2 DO WE HAVE METHODS AVAILABLE FOR LIFE CYCLE EVALUATION OF SHIP TRANSPORTATION?..................................................................................................................................... 27 8.3 IS LCA AN APPLICABLE METHOD TO SHIPS?............................................................................... 28

9 FURTHER WORK.................................................................................................................................... 29

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................... 30



7

APPENDIX 1: DRAFT APPLICATION TO CEC 5TH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME........................... 32



8

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABC Activity Based Costing BAT Best Available Technology CP Cleaner Production DfE Product Development and Design for Environment DNV Det Norske Veritas EA Environmental Auditing EAc Environmental Accounting EEA European Environment Agency EI Environmental Indicators EL Eco Labelling EMS Environmental Management Systems EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPE Environmental Performance Evaluation EPI Environmental Performance Indicators HiÅ Høgskolen i Ålesund (Aalesund College) ICS International Chamber of Shipping IEA International Energy Agency IMO International Maritime Organisation IPPC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ISM International Safety Management LCA Life Cycle Assessment LCC Life Cycle Costing LCS Life Cycle Screening MET Material, Energy and Toxic analysis MIPS Material Input Per Service unit SFT Statens Forurensningstilsyn SNAME Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineering STCW The International Convention on Standards of Training,

and Watchkeeping for Seafarers UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme VAA Value Added Analysis WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development



9

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 BACKGROUND Reduction of environmental impacts from all human activities is an overall objective of society. The transportation sector is an important contributor among industrial activities. A body of knowledge and methodology applicable to the reduction of environmental impacts from the transportation sector is available from a number of studies and projects performed in separate areas over the recent years. A number of rules and regulations have been imposed with the objective of reducing environmental impacts from ships. However, no systematic cradle to grave analysis has been performed for the maritime transportation sector to provide a total view on which policy development and research and development priorities can be based. Today's practise lacks consistency throughout the entire lifetime of a ship transportation system. The lack of consistency creates a wide range of uncertainties related to the data collected. An effort should be made through a holistic approach to analysing the environmental impact of ships during their entire life cycle, how the different impact processes interact and influence each other, and the potentials for reducing the impact in the short/medium term as well as in the long term.

2.2 OBJECTIVES This project is the pre-project for a planned main project on “Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation”. The main project is planned executed under the European Commission’s Fifth Frame program on Sustainable Transportation and Inter-modality. The overall and long-term goal for the main project1 is to establish a standardised method for life cycle evaluation of ships (and ship transportation), which incorporates the most factors for decision making with respect to environmental aspects of ship transportation. The objectives of this pre-project are to form the basis and point of departure for the main project, including: • to evaluate the possibilities for the development of a feasible methodology for life cycle

evaluation, • to establish system boundaries and defining the methods to be applied in the life cycle

evaluation, • to select adequate cases/scenarios for the main project, • to establish a project plan with international perspectives for the main project, and • to establish liaisons of co-operation with interested parties.

1 The objective as formulated initially in the application to the Norwegian Research Foundation



10

2.3 IDENTIFIED PROBLEM AREAS A range of aspects related to Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation were identified prior to the execution of the pre-project and will be addressed in this report: System boundaries: Rational and consistent system boundaries for processes and systems to be included in a life cycle evaluation have to be defined. Wide system limits will increase complexity and costs of the assessments. Geographical dependencies: Ships are build all over the world and trade in different areas. The actual environmental impact will consequently vary accordingly. The question is how these variations should be consistently handled in the assessments. Functional units: The functional unit will vary with ship type according to the objective of the operation. Units reflecting the function of the transportation have to be properly defined to allow comparison with other transportation means. Resource consume, discharges and emission: In order to execute assessments of ship transportation in a life cycle perspective, a range of data is needed for the sub-systems, materials and processes involved. Algorithms and models are needed to evaluate the environmental impact of the resource consumption, discharges and emissions of pollutants. There may be a need to define a set of relevant impact categories with related evaluation models. Performance evaluation: The question to be addressed is how the environmental performance of ships and ship transportation can be evaluated by means of a set of criteria so that design, construction, equipment, operation, maintenance and scrapping contribute to sustainability. A rational method is required to compare the total environmental profile of different concepts and alternatives. Such an evaluation procedure has to enable weighting between defined problems. Accidents and risk: Traditional Life Cycle Assessment do not include accidental impacts. It is a challenge to include the environmental impacts of accidents in the overall assessments of environmental performance. Life cycle costs: The purpose of the evaluation of environmental performance in a life cycle perspective is to form a proper decision basis for recommending and selecting pollution control options that do not entail excessive costs. The environmental assessment then have to be followed up with additional assessments of life cycle costs for the options identified. Further research: The crucial questions are; what do we know, what data do we have, what are we able to model, and which aspects should further research focus on?



11

3 WORKING APPROACH The main activities in this pre-project are to perform a screening analysis and to identify appropriate methods to be used to evaluate environmental performance of ship transportation in a life cycle perspective.

In order to form a basis for the development of a standardised method for life cycle evaluation of ships (and ship transportation), the following working approach was applied:

1. A state-of-the-art assessment was carried out by literature search to identify relevant methods, data, tools and analyses carried out.

2. A workshop was executed to present knowledge in the area, discuss applications to be covered and to identify data and tools available.

3. Actors in the Maritime Industry were interviewed to describe status and needs for environmental information.

4. A simplified Life Cycle Assessment was carried out for M/V Color Festival to gain experience with the application of a standard tool.

5. The preliminary and continually updated content of the CEC 5th Framework Programme was evaluated to prepare for a main project application. Discussions with tentative Norwegian partners were held and international partners were assessed.

The results from this project are presented according to this working approach.



12

4 THE ”STATE OF THE ART” ANALYSIS

4.1 FINDINGS FROM THE “STATE OF THE ART”- STUDY A “State of the Art”- study on the application of methods and tools for environmental impact analysis of ship transportation in a life cycle perspective was performed (Angelfoss et al, 1998). Information was collected by literature search and personal contacts. Table 1 next page presents the main findings.

4.2 CONCLUSIONS FROM THE “STATE OF THE ART” ANALYSIS The “State of the Art” analysis concludes that the LCA-method has only been used to a limited extent for sea-borne transportation means. In the cases where LCA has been used it has been confined to parts of the product chain and for a limited part of the system. The “State of the Art” study reveals that methods, software tools and environmental related data generally are available. However, although relevant methods are available they are not adequately adapted to ship transportation in a life cycle perspective. The challenge is to collect and systematise what is already available to establish a framework on which simplified analysis can be based that meet user needs. Such adaptations and integration should be addressed in future research. Although data on the environmental impacts of materials and substances are available, the process of collecting and systematising available information will probably identify areas were ship specific data are lacking on a more detailed level. From the study executed, it is concluded that e.g. the scrapping phase should be further addressed to derive adequate environmental data, and a method for the allocation of port pollution and resource consumption (including land use) should be established for life cycle evaluation of ship transportation. Available software tools are not developed specifically for the life cycle evaluation of ship transportation, and further work on developing life cycle analyses tools for transportation modes is needed. Although ship specific data and tools should have priority, an important application of a life cycle evaluation will be studies comparing alternative transportation modes. The framework should therefore address transportation in general to establish a consistent framework for such comparisons (common assumptions, common system boundaries, common pollutants addressed, common impact categories, etc.).



13

Table 1: Summary of questions and findings in the “State of the Art” analysis. Question raised Findings Methods available? A range of partly overlapping methods for environmental assessments are identified

(process, product and management oriented). International standards and guidelines for LCA are available. See chapter 3 and 9.3, 9.4, 9.6 in Angelfoss et al., 1998.

Categorisation and quantification of impacts?

Alternative methods for categorisation of environmental impacts from pollution are identified. No international standard or recommended method is found established. There is significant uncertainty in normalisation and evaluation factors. No specific characterisation factor for ship pollution is identified. See Chapter 4.1 in Angelfoss et al., 1998.

Valuation methods? Alternative methods for evaluation of environmental impact based on contributions to environmental impact categories are identified. Generally, the methods can be divided into valuation according to political goals, scientific goals, monetary values and authority panel procedures See Chapter 4.2 and 9.5 in Angelfoss et al., 1998.

Environmental studies on the ship building phase?

Several studies are identified (see Chapter 5.2 and 9.1.2, Angelfoss et al., 1998). Typical environmental issues covered are: • Related to water: Grinding substance, blasting substance, iron, heavy metals, paint,

coating (from flush down water). • Noise: Machinery, grinding, sawing, sandblasting, compressor operation, transport,

cranes, ventilation. • Related to air: Dust, particulates, VOC, smell, aerosols. • Waste: Iron and metals, waste containing oil, paint, remaining from rebuilding etc.

Environmental studies on the operation and maintenance phase?

Several studies are identified (see Chapter 5.3 and 9.1.3, Angelfoss et al., 1998). Typical environmental issues covered in the operational phase are: • Emissions to air: carbon dioxide, Chlorine Fluor Carbons, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen

oxide non-methane volatile organic compounds, halogenated hydrocarbons. • Discharges to water: oil spill, heavy metals, paint effluent, ballast water, sewage

dumping, overboard dumping, particulates. For the maintenance phase issues of particular interest are: • Discharges to water: oil spill, heavy metals, paint effluent, sand blasting substance • Noise (from sandblasting, grinding etc.)

Environmental studies on the ship scrapping phase?

No studies particularly addressing environmental issues are identified. Identified studies typically address economic and market aspects (see Chapter 5.4 and 9.1.4, Angelfoss et al., 1998).

Environmental studies of ports?

No studies are identified that address the allocation of port pollution and resource consumption to ship transportation (see Chapter 5.5 and 9.1.6, Angelfoss et al., 1998).

Methods for environmental risk assessments?

Methods and studies are available that address ship accidents and the related environmental risk. IMO guidelines are available. No studies are found that include risk aspects in LCA (see Chapter 5.6 and 9.1.5, Angelfoss et al., 1998).

Comparative studies of transport modes?

Two LCA based studies which compare transportation modes are identified. Only one of the studies include ship transportation (see Chapter 6.1 and 9.2, Angelfoss et al., 1998).

LCA of road transportation?

LCA is found to be widely used in the automobile industry, mainly to select environmental friendly sub-systems and components (see Chapter 6.2 and 9.2, Angelfoss et al., 1998).

Other? Agreements, regulations and guidelines for environmental issues of ship transportation are given in Chapter 7 and 9.7, Angelfoss et al, 1998.



14

5 WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS The workshop addressed the following issues (Angelfoss et al, 1998): • Needs and requirements set to environmental life cycle evaluation of ship transportation • Methodological approaches and relevant software tools 5.1 NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS One goal of the workshop was to identify interested parties and their needs and interests for information about the environmental impacts caused by a ship during its life cycle. It was concluded that the environmental “friendliness” of ship transportation should be evaluated against a set of criteria. The requirements set to such criteria must meet these formulated needs. The demand for environmental performance information is generally expected to increase in the future, but the specific requirements are vague. It was stressed that improved environmental performance have to be assessed in relation to costs and practical problems. Table 2 (see next page) shows a preliminary list of interested parties, their driving forces to take environmental issues into considerations and possible applications of environmental performance information.

5.2 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES Mainly the methods in the ISO 14040 serie on LCA were discussed. However, to evaluate ship transportation in a life cycle perspective, it is necessary to also take other management and evaluation methods into use, e.g. formal environmental management systems, environmental indexing and environmental accounting. Their application must be systematised and simplified.

5.3 CONCLUSIONS FROM THE WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS Sea-borne transportation is to an increasing extent faced with environmental performance requirements from various categories of interested parties. The needs for environmental performance data is therefore growing, in particular with respect to environmental impacts from the operational phase of vessels. However, it is also a growing demand for information on local environmental impacts due to building, maintenance and scrapping activities, and in addition a growing focus on the efficiency of resource use (eco-efficiency). The present needs by parties in the maritime transportation industry seems to be: • Environmental management systems certificates • Environmental performance documentation and related certificates (environmental

accountings, class notations, etc.) • Overview of design, technology, equipment and procedures for pollution reduction.



15

Focus will probably be placed on life cycle cost and pollution reduction, practical problems and limitations in the operational phase. IMO will probably define new regulations for reduced ship pollution. National and regional authorities will define new requirements and incentives. Classification societies will offer environmental class notations. Ship owner associations will promote the environmental friendliness of ship transportation. These parties may to some degree need life cycle evaluations to compare transportation modes, to balance pollution reduction obtained and imposed costs and to develop rational and consistent criteria for regulations and requirements. The workshop presented alternative methods to documentation and assessment needs (reference is given to the “Workshop Proceedings report”, Angelfoss et al, 1998). A preliminary list of computer tools for LCA was presented. Although this was preliminary work, the findings showed that a range of tools and related databases are available2.

Table 2: Interested parties and their driving forces to take environmental concern in different phases of a ship’s life cycle. Interested parties Driving forces Application of the environmental information The ship owner and the Norwegian Shipowners’ Association

Reducing material, maintenance and fuel costs, better rates, higher sales prices.

Optimise the operation of a given ship with regard to economy and environmental aspects.

The ship designer Future search for environmentally acceptable solutions.

Information on environmental impacts caused by materials by assembling and disassembling processes as well as information related to the operation of the ship.

The authorities, port authorities and the International Maritime Organisation (IMO)

Establish and harmonise regulations, stimulate better environmental performance, and reduced pollution.

Differentiation of taxes to stimulate reductions in SOx and NOx during the entire life cycle, reduced risks in ports and a relevant basis for preparing reports on environmental performance of sea-transportation means.

The shipyards and related industry, branch organisations for shipyards

Materials and cost savings, improved environmental performance.

Ease the shipyard’s planning and performance in accordance to environmental requirements, hereunder to select materials and methods with low impact on the local environment.

International Labour Organisations (ILO) and branch organisations

Aim at protecting the employees regarding health and safety.

Find substitutes to substances, materials and equipment with hazardous impact on working conditions of the employees.

The charterer Increased requirements to documented environm. performance, quality and safety.

The criteria for such performance may differ from one geographical area to another due to variations in the environmental conditions, e.g. the North Sea versus other marine areas.

The society and environmental organisation

Hazardous effects on the environment

Information on negative effects in a holistic perspective.

Insurance companies and financial institutions

Reward for better performance (reduced costs).

LCA results help to set decision criteria for e.g. reduced premium.

2 http://sun1.mpce.stu.mmu.ac.uk/pages/projects/dfe/pubs/dfe33/ecotools.htm



16

6 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION

6.1 RESULTS FROM THE “ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION” STUDY Needs and requirements related to documentation of environmental performance information were analysed and documented in the report “Miljøinformasjon og Shipping3” (Fiskerstrand and Remøy, 1998). This study was executed as part of diploma thesis at Bodø Graduate School of Business. The study summarises general trends in the society with increasing focus on environmental issues and expected increased requirements for environmental performance information from industrial activities. Environmental performance criteria are under development within finance institutions, insurance companies, ports and cargo owners. As part of this study, parties in the maritime transportation sector were interviewed with respect to needs, requirements and application of environmental performance information. The parties confirm that environmental aspects are likely to become more important in the future as an integral part of the business activities. At present, there is generally no requirement within the business community for documentation of environmental performance. Environmental performance information is merely limited to Environmental Accounting and Environmental Management Certificates. It is probably a long way to walk before environmental performance information in a life cycle perspective is developed, required and applied within maritime business parties. However, bank and insurance may give better conditions for clients with documented environmental performance as part of a total consideration. Customers of ship transportation assume that environmental performance information may be important for them as well in the future. At present, such information is used only to a limited degree applied when choosing transportation partner. However, it is believed to be applicable for marketing purposes, but is seldom asked for or considered important.

6.2 CONCLUSIONS FROM THE “ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION” STUDY Environmental performance information is believed to become important in the future. However, needs, requirements and applications of such information are at present not well defined in the business community and are mainly used for marketing purposes. It is therefore anticipated from the results of this study that needs and applications of environmental performance information in a life cycle perspective will be limited to regulators and branch organisations for defining rational requirements to the shipping industry.

3 In Norwegian only



17

7 SCREENING LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT In the screening analysis a simplified LCA was performed. The most important sub-systems and related processes were included in the study; e.g. the hull materials and important processes related to these during construction, maintenance and scrapping of the ship, material flows during production, operation and scrapping of diesel engines. A commercial software package was applied and tested. The assessment included application of standard evaluation method and two alternative antifouling systems were compared to provide an example of the application of LCA.

7.1 RESULTS FROM THE SCREENING ANALYSIS As a part of the project, a screening LCA was performed on the Color Line Ro-Ro Passenger vessel M/V COLOR FESTIVAL (Johnsen and Fet, 1998). The goal of the screening LCA was to demonstrate and confirm that the LCA-method is applicable for environmental life cycle evaluation of ships by application of a standard computer tool (SimaPro). Aspects addressed and experience gained are listed in Table 3, see next page.

7.2 CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE SCREENING LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT

7.2.1 Conclusions related to M/V COLOR FESTIVAL Within the system boundaries defined in this study, the following conclusions can be made for Color Festival: • Calculated per functional unit (ton*km) Color Festival has higher environmental impacts

than figures found in literature for other ship types and other transport modes. • All life cycle phases should be considered as important, but with respect to different

environmental impacts. Global warming, acidification, eutrophication, smog and energy consumption for the operational phase. Solid waste from the scrapping phase. Local impacts like toxicity for humans and ecology for construction and maintenance.

• The processes in the life cycle considered as being most important are combustion of oil during operation, leaking from antifouling during operation, removing primer and antifouling and applying new during maintenance, non recycled/reused materials and components after ending their life time.

• According to the valuation method in SimaPro (Eco indicator 95), the ship contributions are by far most severe to the impact categories human toxicology and acidification. It should be noted that NOx and SOx contribute significantly to the category human toxicology as well to the acidification category. Thus, according to the valuation method applied, NOx and SOx emissions in the operational phase are the most important pollutants contributing to environmental impact.



18

Table 3. Aspects addressed and experience gained with LCA of a defined ship Aspects addressed Experience gained Functional unit The main purpose of the ship is to provide shopping and amusement facilities.

Transportation of trucks, cars and passengers is secondary. The functional unit is then difficult to define and the ship will be considered to have a low environmental performance when measured by tonne-kilometre per year. Economic turnover may be a good alternative.

System boundaries No specific problems were identified in this study. The SFI system was applied and found to be a good starting point to break up the systems into sub-systems. Port and land activities were not included, but should be assessed for inclusion. Generally, data needs will reflect system boundaries defined. Different system boundaries will make comparisons difficult. A general rule could be that boundaries are defined according to what the user can control.

Data collection The applied tool contains relevant cradle to gate data for materials and some general ship data. There is a lack of data for the scrapping phase. Generally, data for ship specific processes are more widespread and lack quality assurance. This reduces reliability in estimates and increases required time resources. The applied tool may form a good basis for the development of a ship specific database, although input is time consuming.

Allocation Materials which are recycled get subtracted the amount of emissions and resource consumption saved by the recycling. This commonly take place in the scrapping phase of the analysis. Alternative allocation methods should be evaluated. A method is needed for the allocation of land based activities.

Inventory results The inventory resulted in an extensive list of pollutants and resource consumes. This is difficult to handle. Pollutants should be prioritised and/or related to well defined impact categories. The applied tool enable reduction of this list.

Impact categories Ship contributions to a range of pre-defined impact categories was estimated. These categories did not cover all pollutants and do not reflect ship locations. The operational phase generally contribute most significantly to all impact categories except for ozone depletion and toxic discharges to water. By defining alternative categories for heavy metals and pesticides, the operational phase become less important. The scrapping phase is not included in the present study which limit the impact assessment. A common set of impact categories for ship transportation should be defined.

Valuation Two methods were applied to value impact categories and the ship emissions/discharges and resource consumes by means of a common unit. The operational phase was identified as the most important with NOx and SOx emissions as the main contribution pollutants. An important aspect of ships is the low need for land areas. This is not included in the applied methods, but is important for comparisons with other transportation modes.

Geographical dependencies

The applied impact categories and related normalisation and evaluation factors were representative for central Europe emissions and discharges. No attempt was made to adjust methods to ship locations and related local and regional impacts.

7.2.2 Conclusions related to LCA methodology • Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a methodology that can be applied to analyse the

environmental aspect related to the life cycle of a ship, but the methodology is very time consuming to use and methodology simplification and specification is needed for efficient use.

• It is necessary to involve construction and maintenance yards, together with the ship owner to get easy access to reliable information.

• Existing valuation techniques used within LCA should be used very critically.



19

• The functional unit is very important when systems are compared to each other. It is common to use ton*km as a functional unit for transportation systems. This unit should be used with caution as ship may not be build to maximise this unit.

• It is beneficial to break the system down into sub-systems. This way the analysis becomes flexible with respect to break down of results.

• Access to data for the scrapping phase is poor. • Allocation rules related to recycling are important as long as cradle to gate data are

included. If cradle to gate data not are included within a system, the system will not get any benefits from recycling materials, except that less waste are generated.

7.2.3 Conclusions related to the software SimaPro The LCA software program SimaPro 4.0 has been used. The following conclusions has been made related to the programme based on this screening analysis: • To model complex and large systems it is essential to start building system elements and

combine these to represent the main system. • The model must be build by combining processes on a text format. Other programs have

the advantage that the model can be build by combining boxes into a flow diagram. • The program has very good presentation possibilities. • Since existing methods for classification and characterisation are mainly developed for

land-based industries / activities, the same practice is not always applicable directly for sea-borne transport. A more detailed check of the impacts of emissions from a ship operating in open waters should be performed. Characterisation factors should also be checked against new literature.

• The programme allows for alternative impact assessment methods if impact evaluation data are implemented.

7.3 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS FROM THE SCREENING ANALYSIS The results arrived at in the screening analysis can be briefly summarised like:

• The production phase is most important regarding material usage and ozone depletion, and contributes significantly to ecotoxicolgy in water. The production phase will mainly contribute to local environmental impact.

• The operational phase dominates the contribution to greenhouse effects, acidification, eutrophication, smog formation, human toxicology, water ecotoxicology

• The scrapping phase gives significant negative contribution to photo-oxidant formation, solid waste and material usage.

The combustion of fuel was identified to be the most important contributor to environmental impacts both global (greenhouse gasses), regional (acidification) and local (human toxicology). In addition, antifouling with TBTO is the source for local ecotoxicology. The Eco-indicator 95-valuation method ranges human toxicology most important, then acidification before eutrophication and global warming. However, by using another valuation method the results would most probably look slightly different.



20

8 DISCUSSION

8.1 SPECIFIC PROBLEM AREAS In order to arrive at a unified recommended practice, a few areas were already at project start identified as areas that needed special attention (see Chapter 2.3). These problems areas are discussed in the following.

8.1.1 System boundaries According to the ISO 14040-standard: The system boundaries determine which unit processes shall be included within the LCA. Several factors determine the system boundaries, including the intended application of the study, the assumptions made, cut-off criteria, data and cost constraints, and the intended audience. The selection of inputs and outputs, the level of aggregation within a data category, and the modelling of the system shall be consistent with the goal of the study. The system should be modelled in such a manner that inputs and outputs at its boundaries are elementary flows. The criteria used in establishing the system boundaries shall be identified and justified in the scope of the study. LCA studies used to make a comparative assertion that is disclosed to the public shall perform an analysis of material and energy flows to determine their inclusion in the scope of the study. As shown in the screening-report there are defined different system boundaries for different subsystems. This is in accordance to the standard that says that the boundaries determine which unit processes shall be included within the LCA. However, the project has not discussed in detail cut-off criteria, data and cost constraints etc., and the criteria used when system boundaries are established. Neither are the effects on the final results by using cradle to gate data evaluated. It is necessary to develop a set of criteria for defining system boundaries for different types of ship transportation. Important aspects to include in the discussion are the relationships between system and subsystems, and how much of their material life cycles and their operational areas shall be included in the analysis, hereunder also allocation methods (e.g. how much of the positive effects of materials that are recycled at the end of the system’s life cycle should be subtracted from the impacts of the total system, or how to allocate the building of harbours, land use, infrastructure etc. in the evaluation of ship transportation). One rule of thumb could be that the life-cycle boundary is drawn around those activities that may significantly affect a firm's bottom line and which the firm can control.

8.1.2 Geographical dependencies In the screening analysis a weighting model developed for mid-European conditions is used (the Eco-indicator 95 model). The weight factors will vary according to the weight model selected in the analysis program. However, if a set of weight factors is to be developed for



21

ship operation or for other life cycle phases of a ship, it is necessary to take environmental conditions for different geographical areas into considerations (do e.g. SO2 and NOx impact the environment similarly in different geographical regions, or is it necessary to weight toxic materials with local environmental impact with the same factor in different geographical areas). Today there are different laws and regulations for different geographical areas world wide due to changing condition of the environment. One will most probably in the future see that different set of weight factors will be available, e.g. for the North Sea area, for the inland water ways in mid Europe, and for trans-Atlantic shipping. Most probably will there be a need of models to analyse and evaluate multivariable problems (emissions to air compared with discharges of heavy metals to sea) for different geographical areas.

8.1.3 Functional units According to the ISO 14040-standard: A functional unit is a measure of the performance of the functional outputs of the product system. The primary purpose of a functional unit is to provide a reference to which the inputs and outputs are related. This reference is necessary to ensure comparability of LCA results. A system may have a number of possible functions and the one selected for a study is dependent on the goals and scope of the study. The related functional unit shall be defined and measurable. Since M/V Color Festival has different functions (transportation of goods and passenger, in addition to being a hotel with all its facilities), it is difficult to give an exact recommendation of the best functional unit. However, this project considered the function of Color Festival to be transport of passengers, trailers and cars. Therefore the functional unit becomes a measure of mass and distance per year. However, this functional unit does not cover the total functions of the ship, and may therefore not give the "correct" picture of the environmental performance of the ship. The screening LCA also concluded that this ship has a higher environmental load per functional unit. It may be discussed whether a functional unit e.g. related to economic turnover, could be a more feasible functional unit. Another interesting question is whether it is necessary to define the functional unit at all in the beginning of the study since the results per functional unit are only of interest when different transport means are being evaluated against each other. The results from the impact assessment show the total environmental impact from the ship, the true performance of this ship. To arrive at a recommended practice of the selection of the best functional units, different transport means fulfilling the same transport function should have been evaluated. It is worth to remember that the definitions of the functional units are not final. As an LCA is developing it will normally be necessary to redefine the functional unit several times.



22

8.1.4 Data Quality According to the ISO 14040-standard: Data quality requirements specify in general terms the characteristics of the data needed for the study. Data quality requirements shall be defined to enable the goals and scope of the LCA study to be met. The data quality requirements should address:

- time-related coverage; - geographical coverage; - technology coverage; - the precision, completeness and representativeness of the data; - the consistency and reproducibility of the methods used throughout the LCA; - the sources of the data and their representativeness; - uncertainty of the information.

In comparative studies, the equivalence of the systems being compared shall be evaluated before interpreting the results. Systems shall be compared using the same functional unit and equivalent methodological considerations, such as performance, system boundaries, data-quality, allocation procedures, decision-rules on evaluating inputs and outputs and impact assessment. Any differences between systems regarding these parameters shall be identified and reported. The screening LCA is based on a large set of data representing different unit operations of the System Life Cycle. The data are collected from several sources and databases. Very often there are several versions of them in the databases reflecting different time and space contexts and the increase of the knowledge about the unit operations. Since there are innumerable ways to compose an LCA application using the different versions of the data elements, its quality may vary in a range determined by the fluctuation of the elementary qualities. However, due to the elementary quality basis and its real weakness, the data can only be improved, but never completed to the «final truth». Consequently, there is no absolute reference available where the actual quality could be compared. To achieve a base of reference, it is recommended to build databases especially developed to evaluate and compare different ship transportation and the transportation means. In this context it is important to address uncertainty evaluation, which includes technical uncertainty (inexactness and measurement errors), methodological uncertainty (unreliability and choice of system boundaries and evaluation methods), and epistemological uncertainty (ignorance and errors due to lack of knowledge on system behaviour and on environmental behaviour). The use of statistical analysis is also of importance to address.

8.1.5 Resource consume, discharges and emissions To evaluate the effect of resource consumption, discharges and emissions, it is necessary to build impact models. The impact assessment is a technical, quantitative and/or qualitative process to analyse and assess the effects of the environmental burdens identified in the inventory analysis. There is no generally accepted methodology for consistently and accurately associating inventory data with specific potential environmental impacts. It is



23

difficult to find weighting factors which can be commonly adopted all over the world. The methodological and scientific framework for impact assessment is therefore still being developed. Although the methodology is not well developed and validated, impact assessment processes may generally include

• classification (briefly description of potential environmental effects the inputs and outputs may cause)

• characterisation (the relative contributions of each input and output are assigned to impact categories)

• valuation (the relative importance of different environmental impacts is weighted against each other)

In general, this process involves associating inventory data with specific environmental impacts and attempting to understand those impacts. The screening LCA used the environmental impact model (Eco-indicator 95) built into the software tool SimaPro. However, several of the identified material streams are not included in the database of SimaPro. Therefore it was necessary to add these materials with own weight factors into the database to get them included in the environmental assessment. The project results show that it is important to do further research to develop environmental impact assessment practice for ships and related material streams. For example to find procedures to simplify the methodology and make it less time consuming, find criteria for the evaluation of ships in open waters, and to establish allocation rules related to recycling. Other aspects to be addressed in further research are to establish evaluation models for selected case studies, evaluate the impact caused by different subsystems in different phases of the life cycle, demonstrate how to draw interpretation from the classification table, and demonstrate how to link environmental and economic performance.

8.1.6 Performance evaluation The question to be addressed is how the environmental performance of ship transportation can be evaluated so that design, construction, equipment, operation and scrapping are performed in accordance with a set of acceptability criteria. The project has identified this as a major problem, but has not come to any specific recommendation. To establish such acceptability (or evaluation) criteria the LCA method is not sufficient since the LCA-method is a product-oriented method and not a method for evaluation of ship transportation in a holistic perspective. It is recommended that different environmental management tools can be adopted and combined in an appropriate manner to meet the needs and requirements (or the acceptability/evaluation criteria) from different interested parties (see e.g. Table 2). This approach is recommended partly on experiences from previous projects (Fet, 1998). Evaluation criteria can be described by means of environmental performance indicators (EPIs). How to build acceptability criteria for the environmental performance of ship transportation is an important area for further research studies.



24

8.1.7 Accidents and risks Accident and risks are not addressed in the screening LCA, and it is not a a subject in the ISO 14040 standards on LCA. However, it is a challenge to include this in future models for evaluating environmental performance of ship transportation in a life cycle perspective.

8.1.8 Life cycle costs Life Cycle Costs was not addressed in the project. The screening life cycle assessment of two alternative antifouling concepts demonstrated an LCA application which may followed up by LCC in order to establish the required decision basis.

8.2 OVERALL METHODOLOGY The screening analysis has demonstrated that the LCA-methodology is an appropriate tool for evaluating environmental impacts from a ship in its different life cycle phases. However, the state of the art analysis and the report on environmental information and shipping also show that the LCA-method alone is not sufficient when environmental performance of ship transportation in a life cycle perspective is to be evaluated. It is necessary to take other methods and tools into use since different acteurs in the life cycle of a ship have different needs and requirements set to this information. To meet these requirements it will be necessary to apply both environmental management systems, use environmental performance evaluation, use environmental accounting systems etc. Based on the experiences during the project, it is seen that it is possible to build a guide or recommended practice for the life cycle evaluation of ship transportation. It is already demonstrated that the LCA is appropriate to identify and evaluate environmental impacts caused by material flows during the life cycle of a ship. However, to evaluate the environmental performance of ship transportation in a holistic and life cycle perspective, it is preferred to combine several environmental management tools. For example use LCA to evaluate environmental impact of material flows, environmental management systems to make companies to commit themselves to good environmental performance of their products, processes and activities, and using environmental accounting systems for onboard ship activities. An identified area for further studies is to combine and test the methods for selected transportation case studies. Trough further research it should be possible to describe a recommended practice for environmental life cycle evaluation of ship transportation and for reporting environmental performance from ship transportation. This may be done by using the following steps 1. Identification of needs and definition of requirements regarding environmental

information. 2. Specification of environmental performances and analyses (hereunder using parts of LCA,

EMS, EAc etc. as appropriate). 3. Improvement and reporting.



25

To come to improved solutions, an iterative process is necessary, and the tools and evaluation techniques to be taken into use will depend on the intended application of the results.



26

9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

9.1 WHO NEEDS LIFE CYCLE EVALUATIONS? According to a declaration by the Business Charter for Sustainable Development (BCDS); “Sustainability demands that we pay attention to the entire life cycles of our products” (International Chamber of Commerce, 1991). This should result in a need for life cycle evaluations within the shipping industry as well. Environmental information in the shipping industry was addressed in a separate study within this pre-project (Fiskerstrand and Remøy, 1998). Environmental aspects are believed to be important in the future. Demands on the shipping industry seems to be limited to certificates for environmental management standards. Life Cycle Evaluations are not on the agenda. Environmental accounting and other environmental performance information may be beneficial to promote environmental acceptability in advertising, but are today rarely criteria applied to contracting, investments and financial risk considerations (by bank and insurance). Needs and application for life cycle evaluation within the shipping industry were addressed as part of the workshop executed within this pre-project (Angelfoss, 1998). At present, the resources required to perform a complete LCA of a ship is high. The value of the results for a shipowner are considered limited compared with costs for the analysis and the needs and requirements a shipowner faces. LCA and LCC techniques applied to equipment and sub-systems may be valuable to form a decision basis for implementation of pollution reduction options. Examples may be exhaust gas cleaning equipment, bunker fuel homogenisers and antifouling systems. There is often a common interest between economy and environmental “friendliness” (e.g. related to fuel savings) that may define needs for life cycle evaluations of both costs (LCC) and environmental impact (LCA), but limited to equipment and sub-systems. Demands for life cycle evaluations of ship transportation will probably be limited to: • Governmental bodies that need to compare alternative transportation modes and related

regulations and incentives to adjust to a sustainable development. • Shipowner organisations that on behalf of their members will document the environmental

performance acceptance of ship transportation to increase transport market shares and to argue for economical incentives to reduce environmental impact

In order to simplify life cycle evaluations of ship transportation: • the resources required to execute such analysis have to be reduced significantly, • the outcome of the analysis have to reflect aspects that the user can control, • the methods applied have to be systematised and simplified, and • the data have to be presented in a standardised manner and made available. • further research should concentrate on the most important aspects



27

9.2 DO WE HAVE METHODS AVAILABLE FOR LIFE CYCLE EVALUATION OF SHIP TRANSPORTATION?

A state-of-the-art study was executed as part of this pre-project (Angelfoss et al., 1998). The study reference a range of methods which could be applicable for life cycle evaluations. The challenge is not do develop new methods but to systematise and simplify the existing methods in a holistic perspective. Application of methods addressing the entire life cycle of a ship was found to be limited. Studies covering the separate phases building and operation and maintenance are numerous. Studies covering environmental aspects of the scrapping phase was not found. The existing data and experiences for proper simplifications are too fragmented, and must be supplemented by research. The evaluations have to include both environmental and economical considerations. LCA and LCC may be a proper basis for further simplifications to arrive at methods for screening analyses. However, such simplified methods have to be adjusted to particularly address characteristics of ship building, maintenance, operation and scrapping. Environmental impact assessment (contribution to defined impact categories, e.g. acidification) and evaluation techniques (weighting between impact categories) are required to estimate consequences of emissions/discharges and to prioritise pollution to be controlled and reduced. The state of the art study (Angelfoss et al., 1998) identifies a range of evaluation techniques that may be applicable. These should be tested to gain experience to identify differences and uncertainty in such evaluations. The study also lists the most commonly applied impact categories for which normalisation and evaluation factors to some degree are available. However, there is a need to establish such relations that are ship specific. For example, NOx and SOx emissions in open sea will not contribute to acidification to the same degree as if the emissions took place from land based industry. An important benefit with ship transportation is the limited need for land areas. Methods to calculate the land use requirements for a ship transportation and the pollution contribution from ports should be established. Accidental discharges from ships may be considered for inclusion in a life cycle evaluation. The state-of-the-art study presents some methods for risk assessment for ship transportation. For studies of ship transportation in general, these methods may be applied to estimate the environmental impact contribution from accidents. Resource and energy consumption related to accidents are not addressed in the identified methods. However, the problem arises when a specific ship is to be analysed. The risk related to a ship will to a large degree depend on human and organisational factors that are difficult to quantify. It is recommended to prioritise the development of a simplified method for life cycle evaluations rather than to include factors related to accidents.



28

9.3 IS LCA AN APPLICABLE METHOD TO SHIPS? The screening life cycle assessment (Johnsen and Fet, 1998) performed within the project showed that LCA as a method is applicable for life cycle evaluations of ships. Moreover, the applied softwaretool SimaPro, may serve as a good starting point for the execution of such analysis4. However, an important problem is identified for combination ships in defining a representative functional unit. Economic turnover is proposed as a functional unit for such ships. Use of land area as a resource is not addressed, but should, as this is an important feature for the environmental “friendliness” of ships. A method have to be developed to allocate the environmental impact of port activities to ship transportation. The applied software tool include data for materials. Existing data for the ship specific processes are to widespread to enable efficient analysis. The scrapping phase have to be addressed. These problems are important to address to enable consistent comparisons of alternative transportation modes.

4 despite of already identified weaknesses, see conclusions for SimaPro



29

10 FURTHER WORK The project has demonstrated that the LCA is appropriate to identify and evaluate environmental impacts caused by material flows during the life cycle of a ship. However, to evaluate the environmental performance of ship transportation in a holistic and life cycle perspective, the two main perspectives are to be addressed in further research:

• methodological development • improvement of relevant databases and analytical tools for evaluating the

environmental aspects of transportation modes. Suggested project activities to be performed to improve the mentioned areas are therefore: 1. A simplified method for life cycle evaluation of ship transportation should be made. This

could be based on existing environmental management methods, and must focus on the needs and requirements set by interested parties.

2. Impact categories for the transportation sector in general should be developed, with characterisation, normalisation and evaluation factors that reflects the transportation modes. This will enable comparisons and handling of the several hundred pollutants resulting from building, maintenance, operation and scrapping of ships.

3. Life cycle evaluation techniques (LCA and LCC) should be applied to a few defined ships covering the range of types to acquire experience and data that can be applied to develop a simplified method with related data and algorithms.

4. The ship scrapping phase should be further analysed to obtain data for emissions, discharges, resource consume and degree of re-cycling.

5. A method with relevant data should be established to allocate port activities to the ships life cycle.

Since the problems of intermodal transport systems and sustainability are heavily addressed in the coming Fifth Frame program in EU, one important area of further work is a project plan with international perspectives for the main project. The plan is to work this out in the nearest future as a co-operation between the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Det Norske Veritas and international partners. A preliminary draft proposal is developed, see Appendix 1.



30

REFERENCES Aanondsen, S. ”Livsløpsanalyser for beregning av miljøpåvirkning brukt som verktøy ved prosjektering av skip. (Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as a tool in shipdesign).” Hovedoppgave, Norges Teknisk- Naturvitenskaplige Universitet, Fakultet for Marin Teknikk, Institutt for Marin Prosjektering, 1997.

Angelfoss, Alfred; “Life Cycle Evaluations of Ship Transportation, Workshop April 15.-16.”, Ålesund College, Report no. 10/B101/R-98/004/00, 1998.

Angelfoss, Alfred; Johnsen, Tommy; Fet, Annik Magerholm and Karlsen, Harry; “Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation – State of the Art.”, Ålesund College, Report no. 10/B101/R-98/007/00, 1998.

Fet, A.M., «Life Cycle Screening - an appropriate methodology for identifying environmental key issues in the Ship Industry», Report Å 9517, Møre Research, Ålesund, Norway, 1995.

Fet, A.M, Oltedal, G., «Renere produksjon i verftsindustrien i Møre og Romsdal», Report Å 9418, Møre Research, Norway, 1994.

Fet, A. M. , Embelmsvåg, J., Johannesen, J. T., «Environmental Impacts and Activity Based Costing during operation of a Platform Supply Vessel», Rapport nr , Å9604, Møreforsking Ålesund, 1996.

Fet, A.M., “Systems Engineering Methods and Environmental Life Cycle Performance within Ship Industry”, Norges Teknisk. Naturvitenskapelige Universitet (NTNU), Trondheim, ITEV-rapport 1997:1

Fet, A.M., “ISO 14000 as a Strategic Tool for Shipping and Shipbuilding.”, Journal of Ship Production, August 1998, USA.

Fet, A. M., “Environmental Management Tools and their Application – A Review with References to Case Studies”, Paper presented on the 2nd International Conference on Technology Policy and Innovation, August 3-5, 1998, Lisboa, Portugal, an don UNEP’s Fifth high level seminar on Cleaner Production, September 29.-30., 1998, Seoul, Korea.

Fet, A. M., Fiskaa, T. M., “Guide i miljøtiltak for norske skipsverft”, rapport Å9803, Møreforsking Ålesund, 1998.

Fiskerstrand Ingard and Remøy Even; “Environmental Information and Shipping”, Thesis, Bodø Graduate School of Business, 1998.

International Chamber of Commerce, World Industry Conference on Environmental Management, Vol. 2, Conference Report and Background Papers, ICC, Paris, 1991.



31

International Organization for Standardization (ISO), «Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework», ISO 14040, 1997.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO), «Environmental management - Life cycle assessment – Goal and scope definition and inventory analysis», ISO/DIS 14041.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO), «Environmental management - Life cycle assessment – Life cycle impact assessment», Draft ISO/CD 14042.2

International Organization for Standardization (ISO), «Environmental management - Life cycle assessment – Life cycle interpretation», Draft ISO/CD 14043.2

Johnsen, Tommy and Fet, Annik Magerholm; “Screening Life Cycle Assessment of M/V Color Festival”, Ålesund College, Report no. 10/B101/R-98/009/00, 1998.

Pre’ “SimaPRO, Multi User User Manual”. Pre’ Consultants B.V. Amersfoort, The Netherlands.

The Ship Research Institute of Norway, “SFI Group System, A functional classification of the ship”, Nowegian Shipping and Offshore Services AS, Oslo, Norway.

Schnitler, P. “Environmental indexing of Ships –Operational Discharges”, DNV Report no 95-2032.



32

APPENDIX 1: DRAFT APPLICATION TO CEC 5th FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

Environmental assessment of transportation modes in a life cycle perspective

EU 5th FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME REFERENCE

OBJECTIVES

Life Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation - … Cycle Evaluation of Ship Transportation: Development of Methodology and Testing ... Performance Indicators ... for the maritime transportation

Documents