The Environmental Benefits of Marine Transportation
Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Sustainability and Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS)
Green Power from Seaway Waters
A Shared Resource Facing Multiple Demands
Since its inception in 1959, over 2.5 billion tonnes of cargo valued in excess of $375 billion has been transported via the Seaway. The St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation, on behalf of the Government of Canada, and the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, on behalf of the United States Government, are dedicated to managing the Seaway channels and locks based upon the precepts found in the three “pillars” of sustainability:
Environmental – We work diligently in overseeing transits into our waters, such that marine carriers move cargo in a manner that minimizes their environmental footprint.
Economic – We adapt new work practices and procedures and leverage technology to further refine our operations. The end result is a transportation system that moves tonnage cost effectively, reinforcing our stakeholders’ economic competitiveness.
Social – We continue to advocate the advantages of moving cargo via the Great Lakes Seaway System, recognizing that marine transportation is the most energy efficient mode, having a very advantageous greenhouse gas footprint.
The marine mode of transportation exhibits the best fuel economy of any mode. When compared to transportation by rail and truck, we note that the marine mode can move a tonne of cargo much further on a single litre of fuel. Given the design characteristics of a vessel’s hull, vessels actually operate more efficiently when loaded to capacity.
Credit: The Environmental Footprint of Surface Freight Transportation, Lawson Economics Research Inc., 2007
Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Superior fuel economy also plays a key role in explaining the marine mode’s advantageous performance in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. As we face the challenge of lowering our carbon footprint and reducing the level of greenhouse gases emitted each year, the marine mode provides a unique opportunity thanks to its superior fuel economy. The following chart clearly demonstrates the marine mode’s low carbon footprint within this context.
Credit: The Environmental Footprint of Surface Freight Transportation, Lawson Economics Research Inc., 2007
A Note on Marine Fuels
Vessels sailing within the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes use a wide variety of fuels. The actual fuel used depends upon the type of engine and auxiliary power units installed in the vessel, and the vessel’s trading pattern. Most vessels, whether oceangoing or dedicated to the lake trade use heavy fuels varying from Intermediate Fuel 60 to Intermediate Fuel 700. The number indicates the viscosity or thickness. Vessels with steam propulsion normally use heavy fuels in the Intermediate Fuel 380 to Intermediate Fuel 700 range in their boilers whereas diesel propelled ships consume lighter blends between Intermediate Fuel 60 and Intermediate Fuel 320. Marine Diesel Oil is also consumed by some vessels, and this fuel consists primarily of distillate fuel with a very small quantity of heavy fuel added or Gas Oil which is pure distillate available in several grades. Heavy fuel supplies bunkered (sold) on the Great Lakes typically has a sulphur content ranging from 1.5% to 2%. In comparison, distillate fuels usually have .005% sulphur content.
Credit: The Environmental Footprint of Surface Freight Transportation, Lawson Economics Research Inc., 2007
Environmentally Friendly Technologies
According to Ken Westcar, Marine Market Manager with Toromont Marine Power Systems located in Toronto, Ontario, new or repowered vessels on the Great Lakes Seaway System are fitted with engines having exhaust emission limits in compliance with International Maritime Organization (IMO) or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules. These rules are increasingly stringent, and revised International Maritime Organization standards coming into effect on January 1, 2011 (IMO II) require a significant reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions from engines installed after that date. Most shipowners are now specifying IMO II / Environmental Protection Agency Tier 2 compliant engines well in advance of the deadline.
For vessels that were once powered by steam, engine replacements featuring modern marine diesels combined with the installation of exhaust gas heat recovery devices and shaft driven alternators has, in some cases, reduced the vessels’ nitrogen oxide emissions by 75% or more. Most fleets have engine update programs that will substantially reduce nitrogen oxide and particulate emissions on the Great Lakes when burning traditional fuels.
Great Lakes Ship Gets Green Makeover
Leading Edge Marine Technology
Algoma Tankers’ recent tanker acquisitions feature technological innovations that are being incorporated into modern vessels putting them ahead of IMO requirements. Kevin Minkoff, Senior Marine Superintendent for Algoma Tankers, outlined the many innovations that are employed within these vessels. “Holds are treated with a heat cured ceramic coating which reduces leaching. Air conditioning systems use R-410A refrigerant which is free of ozone-depleting chlorine molecules. The hull utilizes a silicone type coating to reduce drag and improve fuel efficiency. Even the sewage system is assisted by vacuum, reducing water usage from 100 litres per person to a mere 12 litres. We capitalize on every saving possible.”
Air quality is an important factor in determining our quality of life.
Credit: Toromont Industries Ltd., 2007
At first glance, the marine mode does not appear to have a performance advantage. Considering the chart illustrated above, the casual reader may conclude that trucks offer a superior alternative to vessels plying the Great Lakes Seaway System. However, upon further consideration, a different conclusion can be reached.
The simple fact is that ships move a lot more cargo per unit of horsepower. Even if ships are not quite as clean per unit of horsepower, the end result is that ships burn less fuel to move a tonne of cargo. When viewed from this perspective, the marine mode once again becomes the transportation mode of choice, as burning less fuel equates to fewer emissions being vented into the air.
Let’s look at the bottom line results concerning air quality. Criteria air contaminants include nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds or hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and particulate matter. In this realm, the marine mode compares very well to the other modes of transportation (see chart below). Again, this advantage is due principally to the superior fuel efficiency of the marine mode.
Credit: The Environmental Footprint of Surface Freight Transportation, Lawson Economics Research Inc., 2007
A single Seaway-sized laker can carry about 25,000 tonnes of cargo. To carry an equivalent amount of cargo, you would need to assemble a fleet of 870 large trucks or 225 rail cars.
Moving more cargo via the marine mode provides the opportunity to reduce the amount of congestion on our busy highways and railroads.
The marine mode of transportation is the clear winner when it comes to safety. Accident definitions and reporting criteria differ somewhat by mode as well as in the reporting methods employed in Canada and the United States. However, estimates of standardized frequencies of accidents and their consequences in terms of deaths and injuries are published by the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics (National Transportation Statistics Report).
Credit: The Environmental Footprint of Surface Freight Transportation, Lawson Economics Research Inc., 2007
From this perspective, we can conclude that moving cargo via the marine mode is the safest means available.
Minimizing Spills, Noise, and Congestion
Our quality of life cannot be defined strictly by the price of goods on a supermarket shelf. We need to consider what it takes to get the goods to market. These factors include not only energy efficiency, emissions, and safety, but also factors such as spills, noise and congestion that the movement of goods brings about in our day to day lives.
‘Spills’ in this context refers to harmful discharges into the environment occurring as a consequence of freight transportation. Within this definition, we include cargo leakages, accidental or deliberate spills, and discharges of materials used in the transportation process - most prominently fuels or lubricants used by vehicles or vessels.
Noise from transport is commonly held to be a nuisance, particularly by those living near airports, rail marshalling yards, and highways. Noise is difficult to measure in ways which represent the nuisance that it produces. In the absence of any quantitative evidence, it can only be conjectured how noise nuisance differs among the three freight modes. However, in view of the relative proximity of transport operations to residential areas, as well as the nature of the transportation equipment and engines, it is proposed that trucks impose the greatest noise nuisance per tonne-km while vessels impose the least amount of noise nuisance.
Traffic congestion impacts a number of factors, including delays in shipments, increased greenhouse gas emissions, higher air contamination, and increased noise. In the absence of quantified estimates for average traffic conditions in the region bordering the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence Seaway, only conjecture of qualitative rankings is possible. It is clear from the nature of marine traffic that there are few, if any, delays on the water.
In terms of rail, some serious congestion occurs around Chicago, the largest U.S. rail hub, and the location of substantial transshipment activity. Considering truck traffic, there is severe congestion during rush hours in all of the major cities, and some cities such as Toronto are experiencing increasing congestion even within the daytime period between rush hour peaks. Given these factors, the Lawson Report (2007) proposed the following rankings.
Credit: The Environmental Footprint of Surface Freight Transportation, Lawson Economics Research Inc., 2007
Sustainability and Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS)
The St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation and the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation recognize that, as stewards of the St. Lawrence Seaway, we operate within a shared resource. Understanding and minimizing the impact of marine transportation on the environment is critical to us. Since we hold the key to the door of the Great Lakes, we are responsible for ensuring that our efforts set the standards in this field.
The Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Study, released in 2007,summarizes the problem succinctly and unequivocally: “The introduction of non-indigenous species into the Great Lakes basin and St. Lawrence River, particularly through ballast water from trans-oceanic ships, is one of the most pervasive and challenging environmental problems facing these waters.” (pg. 65)
Over the past 200 years, more than 185 invasive species have found their way into the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes. It is important to put this invasion into context. Many vectors have played a role in this, including aquaculture, live fish markets, sport fishing, recreational boating, bait fish, pets and plants, as well as ballast water from ocean-going ships. Historically, ocean going ships are responsible for the majority of the introductions of AIS, up to two-thirds by some accounts.
A Brief History
The earliest-recorded example of an aquatic invader was the sea lamprey, which reached the Great Lakes via the Erie Canal in the 1820s. Over the last 20 years, scientists have documented about 12 new species — including the notorious zebra mussel, which has been largely responsible for making AIS a publicly recognized issue.
The zebra mussel, a fingernail-sized mollusk from the Caspian Sea, arrived in North America aboard a transatlantic freighter and was possibly flushed into Lake St. Clair along with ballast water in the late 1980s. Since then, it has spread to all of the Great Lakes as well as to rivers and numerous other lakes in Ontario, Quebec, and several states. The impact of this tiny creature has been widespread, posing challenges to a myriad of stakeholders who must now contend with its effects.
Canada brought in voluntary guidelines in 1989 requesting all ships entering the freshwaters of the St. Lawrence River and the Great Lakes to exchange their ballast. The use of ballast water exchange was based on the effectiveness of Canadian studies undertaken by Environment Canada to protect the aquaculture facilities in the Magdalen Islands.
The U.S. Coast Guard brought in mandatory regulations based on the Canadian guideline in 1993, and began inspecting ships with ballast water on board. The inspection process included boarding ships at Montreal prior to an initial transit of the system, and boarding ships between the two U.S. locks in Massena, New York, on subsequent transits. Ballast water was tested to ensure a minimum salinity of 30 parts per thousand which is considered evidence that the tanks have been adequately exchanged with saltwater, providing a reasonably harsh environment for any remaining organisms.
Beginning in 1997, the U.S. Coast Guard, Transport Canada, and the Seaway Corporations developed a joint inspection program called the “Enhanced Seaway Inspection” for foreign flag ships, which covered applicable safety and environmental equipment onboard. During the inspection by one or more of the member agencies, the ship’s ballast tanks are sampled to verify compliance.
In 2002, the U.S. and Canadian Seaway entities instituted a requirement that all foreign flag ships entering the Great Lakes Seaway System comply with the Best Management Practices of the Shipping Federation of Canada. In addition, domestic “lakers” were mandated to comply with Voluntary Management Practices, subjecting them to regular inspections of ballast tanks and regular removal of sediment.
In January 2006, a joint U.S. / Canadian Ballast Water Working Group was created to standardize the collection of commonly needed information concerning ballast water management. The group is comprised of representatives from Transport Canada Marine Safety, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, and Canadian St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation. This Ballast Water Working Group initiated ballast water management ”best practices” for all vessels entering the lakes and began joint inspections of ballast water tanks.
In June of 2006, Transport Canada introduced mandatory regulations stipulating that all ships entering the Seaway from the Atlantic and destined for a Canadian port were required to exchange their ballast at least 320 kilometres (200 miles) from shore and in seas at least 200 metres deep. These rules covered, for the first time, ships with no ballast water on board, - “NOBOBs” (ships that are fully loaded with cargo and thus have little to no water in their ballast tanks). The NOBOB ships had to subject their empty tanks to salt water flushing.
Harmonizing the Rules
The introduction of these regulations created a discrepancy between the Canadian and U.S. protocols, since on the U.S. side, NOBOB testing was only a best practice.
This changed for the 2008 navigation season, with a regulatory initiative by the U.S. Seaway Corporation and the issuance of a joint Seaway regulation. For the first time, all incoming ocean ships, regardless of destination, loaded or unloaded with cargo, had to execute salt water flushing of all ballast tanks. Every oceangoing ship entering our waters is now subject to a consistent and rigorous inspection process.
Ballast Water Education
In an effort to highlight the thorough nature of the new procedures, the Canadian and U.S. Seaway Corporations hosted a Ballast Water Media Day in Montreal on May 5, 2008. The media and interested stakeholders had an opportunity to hear from academic experts that salt water flushing of ballast tanks is a highly effective means of eradicating invasive species. Demonstrations of the inspection process were held on board a Fednav, Ltd., ship, enabling journalists to witness firsthand the rigorous procedures that every incoming ocean ship is now subject to.
To view a video of the ballast water demonstration event, click on this link.
Since March of 2008, all ballast water entering the Seaway and Great Lakes has been subject to these strict guidelines and management principles. If a vessel upon inspection is found to have non-compliant ballast water on board, it is given the option to (a) treat the non-compliant ballast water tank with a government approved treatment, (b) return to ocean waters and flush its ballast water tanks with saltwater or (c) retain the non-compliant ballast water on board for the entire duration of its transit of the Great Lakes Seaway System.
According to the strict protocol, no non-compliant ballast water is being discharged into the Seaway and Great Lakes. All ballast water is being either treated or managed. Non-compliant tanks are subject to a letter of retention, mandating that the ballast water be retained on board for the entire voyage within the Seaway and Great Lakes. Upon a vessel’s exit from the system, tanks subject to a letter of retention are re-inspected to confirm that the ballast water volume and salinity matches the volume and salinity recorded earlier upon the vessel’s entry into the system. Substantial fines apply should a vessel have violated the order to retain non-compliant ballast water onboard.
Looking Forward
Salt water flushing is currently deemed to be the most practical means of countering the introduction of new species into our waters. As we look forward, new IMO standards promise to further advance ballast water management standards. These standards hold that new vessels built in or after 2009 will need to have the means to treat ballast water and guarantee that water discharged meets a number of criteria. Under the IMO standards, existing vessels will need to undertake refits by 2014 to 2016 in order to treat ballast water and meet the same criteria.
Green Marine – An Industry First
The St. Lawrence and Great Lakes marine industry is taking action to strengthen its environmental performance. For the first time in North America, all sectors of the marine industry have united to voluntarily adopt an environmental program designed to drive a process of continuous improvement along this major maritime corridor.
The program, entitled, “Green Marine”, is being spearheaded by an alliance of the marine industry associations in Canada and the United States:
- American Great Lakes Ports Association
- Canadian Shipowners Association
- Chamber of Marine Commerce
- Ontario Marine Transportation Forum
- Shipping Federation of Canada
- St. Lawrence Economic Development Council (SODES)
- St. Lawrence Shipoperators and
- United States Great Lakes Shipping Association
Both Seaway entities have been members of Green Marine community since its inception. For more information on Green Marine, please consult the www.green-marine.org web site.
Green Power from Seaway Waters
Every avenue is being explored in the Seaway’s quest to exhibit the highest standards in building a sustainable business. One example of this commitment to sustainable development is the construction of three hydroelectric power plants on the Welland Canal adjacent to Locks 1, 2 and 3 by Rankin Renewable Power Inc. Enough energy will be generated by these stations to power nearly 5,000 homes, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 38,900 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year, the equivalent of taking 8,420 passenger cars off the road.
Credit: The St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation