Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
160-163)
MR JESPER
KJAEDEGAARD, MR
EDMUND BROOKES,
MR DAVID
ASPREY, MR
ROBERT ASHDOWN,
AND MR
PHILIP NAYLOR
28 OCTOBER 2008
Q160 Martin Horwood: I am not saying
it is electric.
Mr Brookes: No, but if you want
an electric ship you have got to have the capacity to generate
that sort of power to run a ship of that sort of size which already
gives the economics of scale. It is well known there were a small
series of nuclear ships. We have discounted that because they
did not prove particularly successful in the 1950s.
Q161 Mark Lazarowicz: On this point
which we are discussing which quite interests me, is there anything
which the UK government itself should be doing pending some of
these international discussions and agreements? Could we do stuff
domestically which would make a difference?
Mr Ashdown: I think a large part
of shipping emissions are not necessarily generated when the ship
is at sea but when the ship nears land and comes into port. I
think we could make some very quick wins if in this country we
were to free up port access and reduce port congestion. I think
we would see some quite major reductions in emissions from shipping
if that were to happen.
Mr Naylor: Alongside that certainly
some studies I have seen associated with Nox emissions, where
air quality has been monitored in ports, at berths or around berths
in ports, suggest that most of the Nox emissions particularly
derive from motor vehicles which are waiting in the vicinity of
the ships to collect cargoes or to deliver cargoes to the ships,
generally speaking as a result of congestion in that port and
not being able to handle the ships as quickly as might be the
case. There is a transferred emission there from the ship not
being able to be handled particularly expediently.
Mr Brookes: I think we have also
addressed the concept of "cold ironing", where it is
possible to put a ship onto a shore supply, provided that supply
is cleaner than its own generating system where it is appropriate,
and I must stress that. If a ferry is turning round in an hour
it shuts its main engines down anyway and goes onto auxiliaries
to run the fans, to run the electric supply. That is an option
which can be looked at. Equally, if you are going to supply several
megawatts of power you have to have the infrastructure to put
it in which is expensive; and you also have to generate that electricity
itself in a friendly way otherwise it is a pointless exercise.
Mr Naylor: Our company in fact
did pioneer the use of shore electricity for ships in Alaska,
which was predicated largely on concern from the local stakeholders
in those communities. Huge investments were made to adapt the
ships to take the shore power, and of course corresponding investments
needed to be made ashore to deliver the power to the quayside
and to have the appropriate gantries that put the wire on the
ship and go up and down with the tide. In those particular places
it was obviously a net environmental benefit. It was sustainable
in the sense that the electricity itself was very inexpensive
and was generated by hydropower. We have also seen some other
suggestions, ideas and proposals to put shore power at berths
which ships could use when they call, which I would say are manifestly
unsustainable; in the sense that they are looking to provide the
power from electricity sources where the incremental level of
demand is provided by fossil fuels in some cases even with oil-powered
production, which inevitably, because of the nature of the technology
used in oil-fired power stations, is going to be less environmentally
friendly than using the ships' own generators to produce that
corresponding amount of electricity. These are always interesting
discussions. It was said that we are not environmentalists—that
was an observation which I think may not be entirely fair in the
case of our industry because, whilst we may not be environmentalists
per se, we certainly have a very high interest in conserving energy,
resources and materials, notwithstanding the fact that we make
our living from the sea. Presenting the environment in a very
friendly way to our customers is obviously of vital importance
to us. We do have a very strong desire and a very strong motivation—provided
we are doing things in the right way.
Q162 Mark Lazarowicz: Would it be
helpful if shore-side electricity would be charged as part of
a port's fees and then recouped that way? Would that be an incentive
to a change in the way things are done?
Mr Naylor: It would be fair to
say if it was done on an economic basis then using shore power
would be no different from using the ship's own generators to
produce electricity. Provided there was an economic rationale
for that then that would be something we would be interested in,
because there would perhaps be some other benefits to us in having
some downtime on the ship's own engines, for example, to do some
maintenance. I think the other thing which might be interesting,
though not necessarily a debate associated with carbon but with
other forms of emissions, particularly sulphur, come 2010 as a
result of the European regulations, the European directive on
fuel quality, ships at berth in European ports will in any case
need to burn a distillate grade of fuel which is going to essentially
double the cost of producing electricity on those ships when they
are in port. I think all of these things will alter the position
in relation to the viability of shore power.
Q163 Mark Lazarowicz: How far could
a difference be made by streamlining clearance procedures, rather
than the other technical measures we have talked about?
Mr Naylor: That is a very interesting
question because I deal with that with our ships all over the
world, because our ships trade worldwide and they clear into and
out of ports all over the place with 2,000, 3,000, 3,500 passengers
on board and a thousand crew. As you can imagine, in some places
around the world the clearance procedures can be quite protracted.
Happily in this country the clearance procedures, and I would
say the adoption of e-Borders, is actually facilitating the clearance
on board our ships. When we bring one of our ships to the UK we
do not actually suffer from any delays in clearing the passengers
ashore. As a result of that, we are able to operate with the shortest
possible port calls. I think some of the developments that are
being mooted perhaps have the potential to elongate those clearance
procedures as we go into the future and to that extent, purely
from a port call duration point of view, would not be helpful
in relation to the emissions from the ship.
Chairman: Thank you very much for your
evidence—it has been very helpful and interesting.
| 
