Recently, a research group based
out of Duke University investigated the long term health and climate impact
from the maritime industry based in East Asia. A follow up story appeared in
EurActiv in collaboration with The Guardian. Across the globe there has been
many environmental regulations put in place on ground transportation; however,
when it comes to sea transpiration it has often been overlooked. This is likely
due to the recent substantial growth of the shipping industry. Indeed, over the
past several years the global greenhouse emissions of vehicles have drastically
decreased while the emissions from shipping industry has distinctly increased.
It is estimated that 3% of the global greenhouse emissions is due to shipping. East
Asia has become a significant hotbed of maritime transportation over the past
several decades, which is epitomized by the popularity of the “21st
Century Maritime Silk Road” – which stretches from the Chinese coast to Europe
through the Indian Ocean. This can be more quantified, however, by realizing
that global shipping emissions in East Asia have increased from 4% at the turn
of the century, to nearly 16% in 2013. A significant portion of these ships are
also foreign. Further, eight out of the ten of the world’s largest ports reside
in China. This work spearheaded by Liu, Shindell and He sought to provide a
better understanding of the global emissions from shipping in East Asia and to
use models to predict the health impacts these emissions had on the coastal
regions.
![Premature deaths per year attributable to East Asian shipping emissions in each 0.5[deg] [times] 0.5[deg] grid box.](file:///C:\Users\CHRIST~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image003.jpg)
The authors of the study
investigated a number of small molecules and particulates including carbon
dioxide, sulfur dioxide, NOx and non-methane volatile organics. To carry out
this study the research team employed an advanced method which was based on detailed
dynamic ship activity data. Impressively, they investigated 78 million hours of
vessel operation which they claim is roughly 177 days per vessel. Demonstrated
in the first geographic map shown above, the authors point to an increased special
distribution of carbon dioxide along the coastal regions and even higher in
areas near major ports. They make note that the other small molecules
demonstrated similar trends. Moreover, they also demonstrated that nearly 60%
of the shipping CO2 emissions occurred within 20 nautical miles of
these coastal regions – mainly from container carriers and bulk carriers. Furthermore,
using a methodologly previously published they were able to determine that
shipping emissions do indeed have a substantial impact on human health. Not
surprisingly, these impacts are largest near the coast. Using this methodology,
they determined that there were nearly 24,000 premature deaths in China,
Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Vietnam. The research team claim that the particulate
matter (PM2.5) has the most significant deleterious effect on human
health.
The writers of the news release articles
did a fine job in trying to demonstrate the findings to a general audience.
Although the title of the article, “Shipping air pollution cause 24,000 deaths
a year in East Asia,” is accurate some can also view it as a bit over the top.
One point of contention that I would point out with the follow up story is that
they claim that sulfur dioxide is the main culprit leading to adverse health
effects – such as cancer. However, in the study itself they state that it is
particulate matter that is of most concern. In a general sense I would rate it
high (8/10) because the story, although certainly abridged, can help bring to the
public eye that the perpetuators of climate change are constantly changing.
Twenty years ago it was vehicles – today its ships!
Press release
https://www.euractiv.com/section/transport/news/study-shipping-air-pollution-causes-24000-deaths-a-year-in-east-asia/
Nature - Climate Change, article
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3083.html
Interesting post! I have noticed that none of the articles have mentioned what kind of actions will be taken to control this pollution. I did a research online and I found that this contamination problem has been going on for several years. The United Nations' major maritime and environmental bodies, the IMO (International Maritime Organization) and UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are trying to find a solution to this problem. They think that the best way to control this issue is establishing a carbon tax or carbon credit market, but some industries are refusing to pay this tax. However, they think that they are not the only ones that are causing this type of pollution so they want that the aviation industry also pay this tax.
ReplyDeleteNice article! Its interesting to see how much CO2 emissions were concentrated in such a small area. I wonder what that does chemically to the atmosphere directly above that area of land. I wonder if any kinds of regulations were put into place or are going to be put into place after this article/ press release was published. It seems like they would because of the numerous premature deaths.
ReplyDeleteGreat post. It's interesting to think about how shipping is having more of an impact on climate change that cars. I would never have realized that without reading this article. I'm curious why most CO2 emissions from the ships are close to the coastal shores. Is it just a result of the combustion reaction of starting the ship's engine? It would have been nice if euractiv mentioned the dangers from PM2.5. I don't think most people know that small particles can harm their health and since the study found that PM 2.5 caused most the of the health effects, I think the public should have been informed in euracitv's article.
ReplyDeleteThis is definitely a new and growing issue. You make a great point that 20 years ago ship pollution was such a small factor on the global scale it required little policy at the time. Now with changing times, ship emissions do need to be regulated and controlled, especially as global trade increases. The authors of the publication do a great job addressing and providing data on a rising problem. Hopefully soon we will see new policies in place for ship pollution and emissions.
ReplyDeleteNice post Chris! I am not surprised that shipping pollution is overlooked, as naturally, the first thing that comes to mind when I think about air pollution is emissions from cars! It would probably be smart to make the deleterious effects of this type of pollution more known to the general population, so it is good that publications such as the EurActiv article are coming out! Additionally, while these studies are specifically addressing air pollution, the shipping industry inevitably has contributed to water pollution as well. I wonder how the study’s estimates of pollution-related deaths, and other health implications, would change if water pollutants were considered. Also, it would be interesting to see how the air and water pollution were affecting marine life. I am sure fishing industries have been impacted by this pollution too. Unfortunately, I think this is just another example of how one small change within a system can have such far reaching effects.
ReplyDeleteThanks for choosing this interesting topic! This is something I've not heard much (or anything!) about, I guess as the article said, ships are more "out of sight out of mind" than are cars/trucks. This seems like a problem that is difficult to police with ships traveling such long distances, often in international waters and I assume with stops in many countries, I immediately wondered who has jurisdiction with regard to regulation of emissions (but thanks to Maria's comment I wonder no more!). Still, it seems the UN can't be very effective if companies can simply refuse to pay, push the burden onto the aviation industry.
ReplyDeleteGoogling a little brought me to the World Shipping Counsel, a shipping trade group, whose website states that a legally binding international treaty called MARPOL (the part they reference is Annex VI) was developed by the IMO and is currently in place. While the website does not get specific about what provisions are in there, I did notice that they take great pains to favorably compare shipping emissions with aviation emissions!
http://www.worldshipping.org/industry-issues/environment/air-emissions
Interesting post and views presented, Chris! I am surprised to know that shipping has a close relationship with air pollution. And I totally agree with your point that this article has brought the shipping issue to public attention and twenty years ago it was vehicles to cause air pollution and now it is ship! For this amazing finding, we need more researches to focus on this area and I am willing to see more new reports on it! Thanks for your work!
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting on this issue, Chris. Like a lot of our classmates (and I'm sure the general public), I was not aware of the magnitude of impact the shipping industry had on air pollution. I agree with Annabel - what came most naturally to mind when thinking about the source of air pollution is cars. I suppose since historically, vehicle emissions has been a big contributor to GHG increases and consequently the main legislative focus, it's mostly been what we have been taught.
ReplyDeleteIt's impressive that the researchers were able to clock in that kind of time in analysis. I'm sort of questioning the correlation and causation aspect, though. How much of the increased concentration of CO2 near coastal regions and ports is attributed to emissions from shipping? Coastal regions and ports are busy hubs, and I wonder if those increased emissions could just be from general day-to-day activities.
I am sure there are some regulations on ship emissions. But it will be very interesting to see if these trends continue, which I don't know why they wouldn't, what legislation comes from this. the challenge with this of course is how can one regulate ship emissions in international waters? Further, I would be interested in seeing how aviation emissions line up with these ship emissions. It will be worthwhile to keep an eye on these types of studies and what is ultimately made of it by the international shipping community.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Chris! It seems as if everyone always wants to blame someone else for the cause of air pollution. Being able to acknowledge the fact that ships have caused air pollution, the shipping industry should want to help with this issue. Little efforts can go a long way. It will not be long until aviation has to put efforts towards improving air quality as well.
ReplyDeleteInteresting topic here! You're absolutely right, sea transportation is overlooked - as many of our classmates have pointed out. It is an issue that is simply not in the forefront of our minds. That being said, I am curious how regulations would be best managed and enforced. One question I have is similar to what Rory mentioned: how are international waters governed and who has to power to mandate emissions reductions here? I know Maria & Mary mentioned the UN's role in this but how could this system be improved? Just some thoughts; great post!
ReplyDeleteI've never really thought about how ships contribute to air pollution, I think we all immediately think of cars and planes. This issue of regulation is probably due to different countries wanting different regulations for different water bodies, which would make shipping very difficult or even impossible in some areas. I think it would also be interesting to learn about how ships contribute to water pollution.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting topic. It makes me think of other methods of transportation that contribute to air pollution such as air planes. In regards to the news article, I find it odd as well that they focus on talking about sulfur air pollutants when it is the particulate matter doing the most damage. The news article and publication focus mainly human health, but what have been the effects on plants and animals, both inshore and offshore? This would be an interesting continuation study, but less likely because of human health being deemed as most important. Maybe some companies might integrate some "greener" methods to power their ships such as solar panels. After a google search, I find that some ships are already incorporating solar panels and some are powered solely by them.
ReplyDeleteGreat topic! I'm interested to see whether there's good research on which parts of the shipping process the particulate matter comes from (as opposed to greenhouse gases like CO2 or NOx), so it can be better regulated. It would also probably be more difficult to regulate the particulate matter emissions because their effects are mainly on human health, not on climate change itself, which might be seen as more important, more urgent, or at least more familiar to regulate. The health impacts are concerning because they are deniable - the shipping companies could say there's no way to definitively prove that the premature deaths are CAUSED by their activities, or that "more research is needed" in order to shirk blame. Great job shining a light on an often-overlooked area of greenhouse gas emissions and its impact on the health of people in the area!
ReplyDeleteI am also curious about the increase in emissions seen along the coast. How do they control for emissions present in port cities? Additionally, could this simply be due to the fact that emission measurements are more difficult to make in the middle of the ocean? Otherwise I agree that this seems like some important research and Chris does a good job presenting and evaluating the articles in question.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, Chris! It is good to know that more attention is being directed towards air pollution caused by other avenues of transportation. I'm curious as to whether there is a significant drive towards developing more fuel efficient/"greener" engines in the shipbuilding industry, compared to the automobile industry. I also agree that it would be highly beneficial to examine the impact of air pollution from planes... there is in fact an article on National Geographic Magazine that I found (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/10/101005-planes-pollution-deaths-science-environment/) in which the author claims that "plane exhaust kills more than plane crashes". The article cites a study which reports that 8,000 deaths a year result from pollution (particulate matter) from planes at cruising altitudes, whereas only 2,000 deaths resulted from pollution during take-off and landing. Furthermore, while the plane is flying at cruising altitude, wind currents can easily carry the pollutants far away, causing air pollution to occur in countries (or even continents) that are far removed from the location of the plane.
ReplyDeleteVery nicely written, Christopher! One thing I liked about your presentation in class today was how you emphasized that cars and emissions from land vehicles are normally thought of as the major culprits of air pollution, with the shipping industry being vastly overlooked. You also discussed that some of the pollution isn't coming from ships owned/operated by southeast Asian countries, but those countries have to deal with the effects of that pollution. The EurActive article mentioned that "Thousands of protests are sparked every year in China as a result of concerns about environmental degradation." I was curious as to whether those protests concerned what I would call "native" pollution, or pollution generated by the people living in the affected area, or if the protests were mainly focused on pollution that is brought in by the activities of other countries. Nice job today bringing this issue to our attention.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting post. To most people, cars are much more visible than ships on a daily basis, and there are probably far more cars than ships. For those reasons, I would not have guessed that ships play such a large role in air pollution today. Of course, the title of the article is a bit bombastic, and as you stated, some of the facts of the journal were misstated, but the material can be somewhat dense, and the article does do a nice job overall presenting those facts to the general public.
ReplyDeleteNice topic, it was really interesting to read how greatly the shipping lanes effect the CO2 emissions, when most people don't think of ships and freighters as the vehicles that pump out greenhouse gases. I wonder of the fact that many of the Asian countries focused on in this study, based on the map, are considered developing countries allows them to have more lax standards in the fuel used to power the ships used to transport this freight out of their ports.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your post! I found it especially interesting because for many years I have listened to my dad, who works on container ships, talk about the changing air quality regulations the ships had to abide by. Thus, while it is mentioned in the EurActiv that shipping is a new and less publically recognized source of air pollution, I think the maritime industry has been well-aware of this problem for several decades. From a practical standpoint, my dad has expressed that the regulations on fuel and emissions currently in place for US-flagged ships require more care and consideration from the crews of these vessels. For example, within 300 miles of the North American coast diesel ships must burn ultra-low sulfur fuel (less than 0.5% sulfur) or be equipped with scrubbers that remove sulfur products from the exhaust. Interestingly, some of the scrubbing methods utilize the strong base sodium hydroxide, which must be properly disposed of after use and also requires additional safety measures on the vessels during operation. This makes one wonder if there should be regulations on how these ships decrease their emissions to circumvent the use of toxic and/or hazardous methods.
ReplyDeleteI have been very curious about how the opening of arctic passages (due to melting sea ice) may impact shipping. Apparently the passages are not ideal, but they have the potential to reduce the distance traveled by cargo ships, and thus the amount of emissions they produce.
ReplyDeleteIt would be interesting to know what policy methods might have an impact in this area, as well as what countries might be responsible for implementing and enforcing them. For example, I wonder if a net importer, like the US, should bear the burden of making and enforcing shipping regulations, or if net exporters, such as China should, or if some combination of the two would be best.