Green House Gases Footprint: Cruise vers Car

Similar documents
AVIATION ENVIRONMENT CIRCULAR 2 OF 2013

ECOLABELLING of Portable Rechargeable Batteries

AIRLINES MAINTENANCE COST ANALYSIS USING SYSTEM DYNAMICS MODELING

Airplane Value Analysis Alex Philip

Hans Otto Kristensen. Consulting Naval Architect Phone: Mail: Evaluation of CO 2 emissions from cruise ships

Sustainable Regions Executive Summary Airlie Beach Mackay Region North Stradbroke Island Winton. Prepared by

The Carbon Footprint of Indian Aviation 2011

WATERBORNE TRANSIT. April 21, 2010

Cost analysis of Arctic HFO ban for Cruise shipping

May 2011 to April 2012.

BHP Billiton Scope 3 emissions

Transport Expert Panel. Summary Report Krakow,

GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AVIATION AND CLIMATE CHANGE (GIACC)

IN FLIGHT REFUELING FOR COMMERCIAL AIRLINERS

New Method for Environmental Performance Evaluation of Ro-Ro Passenger Ships

Analysis of en-route vertical flight efficiency

IMPACT OF EU-ETS ON EUROPEAN AIRCRAFT OPERATORS

Please contact your American Express Travel office for more details. Don t miss American Express Prize

Beyond Fuel Efficiency

CONNECT Events: Flight Optimization

PASSENGER SHIP SAFETY. Damage stability of cruise passenger ships: Monitoring and assessing risk from operation of watertight doors

Shore Power at Port of Seattle. A viable solution to curb emissions at berth

Assignment 6: ETOPS Operations and ATC

Report on Geographic Scope of Market-based Measures (MBMS)

JPDO Environmental Working Group Operations Standing Committee s E-Workshop

Research: Lifting the Lid on Passenger Satisfaction Passenger Experience Conference, Hamburg, 2016

Analysis of Operational Impacts of Continuous Descent Arrivals (CDA) using runwaysimulator

AN INTRODUCTION TO MSC CRUISES

ITA Europe 2015 Keynote Speaker

The Route Analysis Based On Flight Plan

Carbon Offset Schemes for Aviation: Inconsistent supply and weak

Frequently Asked Questions

PASSENGER SHIP SAFETY. Damage stability of cruise passenger ships. Submitted by the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) SUMMARY

land transport at a glance

AIS ship movements analysis for CBSS, Riga, 19 Sept 2012 Torbjörn Rydbergh, M.Sc., Nav. Arch. Managing Director & Owner

KEY FACTS 2011/ million passenger journeys were made on Stagecoach in the Highlands services 9 million miles operated across the Highlands and O

Fuel Burn Impacts of Taxi-out Delay and their Implications for Gate-hold Benefits

HENACT: : Caribbean Hotel Energy Efficiency Action project

SHIP POWER YOUR SHORTER ROUTE TO BIGGER PROFITS. JAAKKO ESKOLA Group Vice President, Ship Power

Online Case. Practice case. Slides HTS de préparation - fev 2016_rev HC.pptx Draft for discussion only

Report of. Transport Key Performance Indicators

Falcon 2000S & Challenger 350 Analysis

BREA. Contribution of Cruise Tourism to the Economies of Europe Country Report Italy. The European Cruise Council Euroyards. Business Research &

TAXIBOT. May Technical Partner

An analysis on the potential Motorways of the Sea alternative to all-road transport in the Ligurian - Northern Tyrrhenian area

3. ICAO Supporting Tools - Publicly available

Human Factors of Remotely Piloted Aircraft. Alan Hobbs San Jose State University/NASA Ames Research Center

May 2011 to April 2012.

Building Energy Performance Index (BEPIs)

Measurement of environmental benefits from the implementation of operational improvements

Sustain Aviation Growth Under Air Transport Economic Regulations

GAMA/Build A Plane 2017 Aviation Design Challenge

Annual & Hourly Cost Detail

ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL CHALLENGES IN LNG CONVERSIONS. 1 Wärtsilä

ITS. Intermountain Transportation Solutions Traffic Studies Transportation Analysis Signal Design Site Planning. January 9, 2013

AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA S AIRPORT COLLABORATIVE DECISION MAKING SYSTEM. (Presented by Airports Authority of India) SUMMARY

Evaluation of Alternative Aircraft Types Dr. Peter Belobaba

Be sure to like our Facebook page and tag yourself in I m Dashing to Dubrovnik

The VINGA project. Henrik Ekstrand Novair Flight Operations Aerospace Technology Congress

Quantile Regression Based Estimation of Statistical Contingency Fuel. Lei Kang, Mark Hansen June 29, 2017

Corporate Productivity Case Study

Innovation Week on Renewable Energy Systems

Overview of Boeing Planning Tools Alex Heiter

HOLIDAYS SUMMERS ABTO/WES PANEL RESEARCH growth. index %

Influence of the constructive features of rocket stoves in their overall efficiency

Table of Content. Table of Contents Mobile Experts LLC. All Rights Reserved. 1

Operating lease of 50 new MC aircraft. Annual General Meeting of Shareholders Moscow 25 June 2018

Master Thesis IMPLEMENTATION OF PROMOTION IN ENTERPRISES OF MILK PROCESSING / CASE KABI DAIRY

Final conference e4ships. -Project Pa-X-ell-

Air pollution measurements in Mediterranean ports International Mediterranean Shipping Conference, Rome, March 2017

Appraisal of Factors Influencing Public Transport Patronage in New Zealand

Growing Green: business travel carbon footprint reporting, data analysis and cost reduction

Content. Study Results. Next Steps. Background

ICAO Environmental Tools. Ted Thrasher Environment Branch, Environmental Modelling Unit ICAO Air Transport Bureau

Passenger-friendly and operationally efficient rail-vehicle interiors

P.001.FPG FUEL PLANNING GUIDE. First Edition

MIT ICAT M I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r A i r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n

Dynamic Airspace Overview concepts, complexities, benefits and outlook

Citation XLS Analysis - Owner & Charter Hour Contributions. Prepared March 31, 2017

Measure 67: Intermodality for people First page:

Physics Is Fun. At Waldameer Park! Erie, PA

MARITIM INNOVASJON FOR FREMTIDENS REDERI

Table of Contents 2015 Mobile Experts LLC. All Rights Reserved. 1

Special edition paper Development of a Crew Schedule Data Transfer System

Overview of the Airline Planning Process Dr. Peter Belobaba Presented by Alex Heiter

Assignment 2: Route Profitability Evalua8on Michael D. Wi?man

JUNE JULY 18. VIENNA

Green Cruise Port from the Cruise Network point of view

Venice Airport: A small Big Data story

Comfort on Board. Move Forward with Confidence

Chris Jones. Director - Strategic Initiatives Department of Economic Development and Tourism October 25, 2018

The Carbon Footprint of Queensland Tourism

Scrappage for Equality

Statement of continued support by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

Annual & Hourly Cost Detail

Agenda Introduction to Swedish Military Aviation Regulations, Past and Present Total Aviation System Approach

Carbon Footprint of Indian Aviation 2012

EU Report. Europe OCTOBER 2016

Price-Setting Auctions for Airport Slot Allocation: a Multi-Airport Case Study

Transcription:

Green House Gases Footprint: Cruise vers Car Jiří Jaromír KLEMEŠ*, Lidija ČUČEK¹ Centre for Process Integration and Intensification - CPI 2, Research Institute of Chemical and Process Engineering - MŰKKI, Faculty of Information Technology, University of Pannonia, Veszprém, Hungary ¹Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Maribor, Slovenia

Cruise Journey Time Distance (km) Venice Bari Bari Katakolon 17 h 30 min 780 17 h 500 Katakolon Izmir 19 h 30 min 450 Source: MSC Cruises Izmir Istanbul Istanbul Dubrovnik Dubrovnik - Venice 16 h 30 min 400 42 h 30 min 1,570 15 h 550 TOTAL 128 h 4,250

Car / Ferry Source: Google Maps *Obtained from <www.distancesfrom.com> **Assumed from: speed is 24 knots (44.4 km/h), and from <www.ferries.co.uk/patras_bari.html>) Journey Time Distance (km) Venice Bari Bari Katakolon Katakolon Izmir Izmir Istanbul Istanbul Dubrovnik Dubrovnik - Venice 7 h 35 min 819 16 h 30 min** 732* 19 h** 847* 8 h 28 min 568 16 h 4 min 1,281 9 h 4 min 834 TOTAL 76 h 47 min 5,081

By car (EXTREME!) Journey Time Distance (km) Venice Bari Bari Katakolon 7 h 35 min 819 28 h 2,745 Katakolon Izmir 21 h 31 min 1,725 Source: Google Maps Izmir Istanbul Istanbul Dubrovnik Dubrovnik - Venice 8 h 28 min 568 16 h 4 min 1,305 9 h 4 min 834 TOTAL 90 h 42 min 7,996

Cruise vs Car Source: MSC Cruises, MSC Preziosa, <www.msccruises.com.au/au_en/ships/msc- Preziosa.aspx> Last accessed: 17/09/2014

Cruise vs Car Car Occupancy Rate Source: Forbes, World s Best-Selling Cars 2013, 1.st Ford Focus, <www.forbes.com/pictures/mkk45jikj/ 1-ford-focus/> Last accessed: 17/09/2014 Source: European Environmental Agency, <www.eea.europa.eu/data-andmaps/indicators/occupancy-rates-of-passengervehicles/occupancy-rates-of-passenger-vehicles-1> Last accessed: 17/09/2014

Cruise vs Car Type MSC Preziosa Ford Focus BMW M5 Number of passengers 3,502 + 1,388 crew members 1, 1.5, 2, 4 (3,502 876 cars*) Fuel consumption - moving 273.6 t/d 6.8 L/100 km** 14.8 L/100 km*** Average speed 18 knots = 33.3 km/h Depending on the assumption Driving time 128 h (4,250 km) Depending on the assumption Hotel mode 40 h 18 h (2 hotel nights) Fuel consumption - standing 67.2 69.6 (68) t/d / *based on the number of passengers **Source: Cars, Fuel consumption, <www.carsconsumption.com/ford-focus-2-0-petrol-m5-fuelconsumption-efficiency/>, Last accessed: 17/09/2014 ***Source: MotorTrend, Used 2013 BMW M5 Performance Specs, <http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2013/bmw/m5/specifications/>, Last accessed: 23/09/2014

GHG (Carbon) Footprint Mode of transport Cruise and ferry Car Fuel Low sulphur fuel Petrol Specific CO 2 * 3.16 kg/kg 3.17 kg/kg LCA CO 2 *,** 3.63 kg/kg 3.65 kg/kg Specific CO 2-eq *** 3.41 kg/kg 3.42 kg/kg LCA CO 2-eq **** 3.49 4.2 (3.93) kg/kg 3.69 4.43 (4.0) kg/kg *CO 2 based only on fuel consumption, source: WELL-TO-WHEELS ANALYSIS OF FUTURE AUTOMOTIVE FUELS AND POWERTRAINS IN THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT <ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/media/ttw_report_010307.pdf> Last accessed: 17/09/2014 **PE, LBP (2011) GaBi 4, software-system and databases for life cycle engineering, Stuttgart, Echterdingen, Germany, 1992 2008. www.gabi-software.com ***Čuček L., Martín M., Grossmann I.E., Kravanja Z., 2014, Multi-period Synthesis of Optimally- Integrated Biomass and Bioenergy Supply Network. Comp Chem Eng, 66, 57-70. ****Eriksson M., Ahlgren S., 2013, LCAs of petrol and diesel, a literature review, Report 2013:058, <pub.epsilon.slu.se/10424/17/ahlgren_s_and_eriksson_m_130529.pdf> Last accessed: 23/09/2014

Assumptions GHG (Carbon) footprint calculated only for consumed fuel and hotel accommodation at LCA basis Carbon footprint related to car and cruise production and recycling is excluded 20 kg CO 2-eq per one guest hotel night is emitted (Source: Filimonau, V., Dickinson, J., Robbins, D., Huijbregts, M.A.J., 2011. Reviewing the carbon footprint analysis of hotels: Life Cycle Energy Analysis (LCEA) as a holistic method for carbon impact appraisal of tourist accommodation. Journal of Cleaner Production 19, 1917-1930)

Assumptions - ferry Source: Superfast Ferries, <www.superfast.com/adriatiki/en/the-fleet.html>, Last accessed: 22/09/2014 Fuel consumption is assumed to be 0.29 pounds/(h*hp) 102 t/d (Source: Hydro Lance Corporation, <www.hydrolance.net/page9.htm> Last accessed: 22/09/2014

GHG (Carbon) Footprint - Cruise/Best selling car Car route: Venice Istanbul Venice Driving time: 37 h (3,480 km)* Extreme low Type MSC Preziosa Ford Focus Number of passengers/ transport mean driving mode hotel mode 3,502 + 1,388 crew members 1 (3,502 cars) 1.5 (2,335 cars) 2 (1,751 cars) 4 (876 car) 1,459.2 t 621 t 414 t 310 t 155 t 113 t n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Total LCA-based CO 2 Total LCA-based GHG 5,707 t 2,407 t** 1,651 t** 1,272 t** 706 t** 6,179 t 2,624 t** 1,796 t** 1,380 t** 760 t** *Source: Google Maps **from the total amount 140 t CO 2-eq is due to hotel accommodation

GHG (Carbon) Footprint Car/ferry route: Venice Bari Katakolon Izmir - Istanbul Dubrovnik - Venice Driving time: car - 41 h (3,502 km), ferry 35.5 h (1,579 km) Nominal Type MSC Preziosa Ford Focus + Ferry Superfast Number of passengers/ transport mean driving mode hotel mode 3,502 + 1,388 crew members 1,459.2 t 1 (3,502 cars) / 5 ferries 625 t / 754 t 1.5 (2,335 cars) / 4 ferries 417 t / 604 t 2 (1,751 cars) / 4 ferries 313 t / 604 t 4 (876 cars) / 4 ferries 156 t / 604 t 113 t n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Total LCA-based CO 2 Total LCA-based GHG 5,707 t 5,158 t* 3,844 t* 3,464 t* 2,898 t* 6,179 t 5,603 t* 4,170 t* 3,754 t* 3,134 t* *from the total amount 140 t CO 2-eq is due to hotel accommodation

GHG (Carbon) Footprint Car route: Venice - Bari Katakolon Izmir - Istanbul Dubrovnik - Venice Driving time: 91 h (7,996 km) Extreme high Type MSC Preziosa Ford Focus Number of passengers/ transport mean driving mode hotel mode 3,502 + 1,388 crew members 1 (3,502 cars) 1.5 (2,335 cars) 2 (1,751 cars) 4 (876 cars) 1,459.2 t 1,428 t 952 t 714 t 357 t 113 t n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Total LCA-based CO 2 Total LCA-based GHG 5,707 t 5,352 t* 3,615 t* 2,746 t* 1,443 t* 6,179 t 5,852 t* 3,948 t* 2,996 t* 1,568 t* *from the total amount 140 t CO 2-eq is due to hotel accommodation

GHG (Carbon) Footprint - Cruise/Luxury car Car route: Venice Istanbul Venice Driving time: 37 h (3,480 km) Extreme low Type MSC Preziosa BMW M5 Number of passengers/ transport mean driving mode hotel mode 3,502 + 1,388 crew members 1 (3,502 cars) 1.5 (2,335 cars) 2 (1,751 cars) 4 (876 cars) 1,459.2 t 1,353 t 902 t 676 t 338 t 113 t n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Total LCA-based CO 2 Total LCA-based GHG 5,707 t 5,078 t* 3,432 t* 2,607 t* 1,374 t* 6,179 t 5,552 t* 3,748 t* 2,844 t* 1,492 t* *from the total amount 140 t CO 2-eq is due to hotel accommodation

GHG (Carbon) Footprint Car/Ferry route: Venice Bari Katakolon Izmir - Istanbul Dubrovnik - Venice Driving time: car - 41 h (3,502 km), ferry 35.5 h (1,579 km) Nominal Type MSC Preziosa BMW M5 + Ferry Superfast Number of passengers/ transport mean driving mode hotel mode Total LCA-based CO 2 Total LCA-based GHG 3,502 + 1,388 crew members 1,459.2 t 1 (3,502 cars) / 5 ferries 1,361 t / 754 t 1.5 (2,335 cars) / 4 ferries 908 t / 604 t *from the total amount 140 t CO 2-eq is due to hotel accommodation 2 (1,751 cars) / 4 ferries 681 t / 604 t 4 (876 cars) / 4 ferries 341 t / 604 t 113 t n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5,707 t 7,845 t* 5,647 t* 4,818 t* 3,577 t* 6,179 t 8,547 t* 6,146 t* 5,238 t* 3,878 t*

GHG (Carbon) Footprint Car route: Venice - Bari Katakolon Izmir - Istanbul Dubrovnik - Venice Driving time: 91 h (7,996 km) Extreme high Type MSC Preziosa BMW M5 Number of passengers/ transport mean driving mode hotel mode 3,502 + 1,388 crew members 1 (3,502 cars) 1.5 (2,335 cars) 2 (1,751 cars) 4 (876 cars) 1,459.2 t 3,108 t 2,072 t 1,554 t 777 t 113 t n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Total LCA-based CO 2 Total LCA-based GHG 5,707 t 11,484 t* 7,703 t* 5,812 t* 2,976 t* 6,179 t 12,572 t* 8,428 t* 6,356 t* 3,248 t* *from the total amount 140 t CO 2-eq is due to hotel accommodation

Summary Total LCA-based GHG, t Total LCA-based GHG, t 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1 1.5 2 4 1 1.5 2 4 1 1.5 2 4 MSC Preziosa Average car - low Average car / ferry Average car - high Mode of transport, case, and car occupancy rate 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1 1.5 2 4 1 1.5 2 4 1 1.5 2 4 MSC Preziosa Luxury car - low Luxury car / ferry Luxury car - high Mode of transport, case, and car occupancy rate

Conclusions This has been a simplified study, mainly to raise discussion It has not been counting for cruise providing luxury and entertainment not possible for the car travel (incl. swimming pools, cinemas etc.) Showing that the occupancy matters a lot, especial for cars as the difference 1 and 5 passengers is very considerable The driver of the car should not be consider a passenger as the cruiser crew is also not counted as passengers If fully included the cruiser is a clear winner More detail study would be desirable to consider production and recycling phases as well similar entertainment for the car travel. The luxury coach travel should be analysed as well.