In many cases, a shift to more environmentally friendly transport modes may be impossible, as the available infrastructure or product characteristics demand a particular mode of transport. But even if a shift to a ‘greener’
mode is not possible there is still much scope for reducing the emissions from the mode in use.
The greenhouse gas emissions of transport operations stem mainly from the burning of fuels. There are also emissions embedded in the manufac- turing process of the vehicles and the disposal of the vehicles at the end of their lifecycle; nevertheless, the focus during the operations will be on the fuel consumption. Fuel consumption is relatively easy to measure across transport operations. Fuel is also a main cost factor in transportation and fuel savings therefore usually mean cost savings for operators, making the reduction of fuel consumption an attractive focus for ‘greening’ transport operations.
Alternative fuels
With rising oil prices in the past and political willingness to reduce the dependency on oil, several alternative fuels were brought to the fuel market.
Their environmental balances vary tremendously and since most of them are relatively new in their application to the wider transport industry it is worthwhile to keep a holistic and critical perspective. A prime example of hidden issues is the political promotion of biofuels. Political leaders in Europe and elsewhere promoted the use of biofuel as a way to reduce green- house gas emissions whilst at the same time providing a new income stream for rural communities. The European Union even demands that petrol contains 10 per cent biofuel. To produce more biofuel, agricultural land previously used for food production was often converted to grow biofuel crops. Additionally, forest areas were converted into farmland for the growth of biofuel crops. The implications of the promotion of biofuel are therefore increased land use and a threat to biodiversity, and also increasing food prices leading to civil unrest – as during the so-called ‘tortilla crisis’ in Mexico in 2008 – in countries where citizens spend a large proportion of their income on food. Furthermore, the harvest of crops to make biofuel relies on weather conditions. After a serious drought in the United States, the world’s major producer of corn, the United Nations asked the country to change its biofuel laws, which demand 40 per cent of the corn production to be used to make ethanol biofuel, amid fears of rising food prices world- wide (BBC, 2012). The use of agricultural products and land for biofuel
Freight Transport 77 which would otherwise be used for food therefore leads to a serious ethical dilemma, and biofuel development has since diverted more into using waste and uneatable crops and by-products from food production as a source of raw material.
Similarly, the promotion of bioenergy in generating electricity needs to be seen critically. Although electric vehicles are considered environmen- tally friendly and particularly suitable for short-distance urban travel, their
‘fuel’ – electricity – may be produced from different sources. Electricity from wind power and solar power is sustainable, but these sources are also very unreliable and volatile, and therefore other sources of energy are needed to ensure sufficient provision of electricity. These sources must come from fossil fuels, nuclear energy or biomass. Whilst fossil fuels show high levels of emissions and nuclear power is often unpopular, the use of biomass can only be considered as sustainable if it comes from waste products and by-products that are occurring anyway. If biomass is specially grown for the purpose of energy production it cannot be considered as a sustainable source of energy due to the ethical implications, the use of energy in the biomass supply chain itself, and the extremely low conversion from biomass into eventual electricity (Leopoldina, 2012). Whenever electric power is used to run vehicles it is necessary to investigate how the electricity is gener- ated, as this will be the main determinant of whether it is a ‘sustainable’
mode or not.
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is a fossil fuel too, nevertheless it burns with lower emissions than most oil-based products. So far it hasn’t gained a huge market share as a fuel for cars as the distribution infrastructure does not exist yet. However, it is expected to be increasingly used in international shipping. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has limited the nitrogen content in ship fuel for ships operating in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea to 0.1 per cent from 2015 onwards. This low level of nitrogen cannot be achieved with the bunker fuel commonly used in international shipping. Using higher-quality, oil-based fuels or cleaning the exhausted fumes would be more costly for operators than the use of LNG. Fuelling infrastructure for LNG already exists to some extent around the North and Baltic Seas and is currently extended to ports around this area. Currently only a few vessels are operating on LNG and there is doubt whether the conversion of vessels to LNG is viable. More likely, only newly built ships will use LNG as a fuel and therefore the market share of this ship fuel will be increasing gradually over the coming decades (Tankstellenmarkt, 2012; Germanischer Lloyd, 2012). Although only 95 vessels are currently operating with LNG fuel worldwide (56 of
Figure 3.2 Well-to-wheels greenhouse gases emissions for future mid-size car
0 Petrol (2012)
Petrol Natural gas Petrol + US grid Petrol + renewable
100 200 300 400 500
430 220
200 110
160 190 0
36
gCO2e per mile US grid
Renewable Distributed natural gas Wind energy
fuel cell battery
hybrid, long range
conventional internal combustion 180
them in Norway), shipbuilders’ orderbooks, political support – particu- larly from the European Union – and the establishment of standards by the International Maritime Organization give reason to expect a rising number in the near future (WPCI, 2016).
Compared to the fuel market for road vehicles, the ship fuel market in this case has the advantage that only a relatively small number of refuel- ling stations need to be built with some infrastructure already in place for local ferries, particularly along the Norwegian coast and in ports. Although the number of potential consumers is rather small, the consumed quanti- ties make it worthwhile erecting a sufficient infrastructure. And lastly, there is regulatory pressure on the operators to switch to a lower-emission fuel (Germanischer Lloyd, 2012).
Figure 3.2 shows a comparison of greenhouse gas emissions for different fuel applications for cars and light-duty vehicles in the United States. The emissions differ significantly, and as discussed above, all fuels have their particular issues in their production.
Freight Transport 79