Wednesday, February 12, 2020

#STOP ADANI: AUSTRALIA IS WORLD'S LARGEST EXPORTER OF COAL



Latest News












The Australian bushfires have released more CO2 than the combined annual emissions of 100 countries. Add the country’s domestic emissions and the emissions from the vast amounts of coal and gas it exports and Australia becomes the world’s 4th largest emitter after China, the USA, and India, in spite of its population of only 26 million. 



Australia is the world’s largest exporter of coal. It accounts for close to 4 percent of the worldwide carbon emissions after including the contributions from its vast international sales of fossil fuels.

Australia’s stock exchange is home to 633 metals and mining companies

The Carmichael coal mine  in Central Queensland, Australia has been approved by the Queensland and federal Australian governments. 

The mine is proposed by Adani Mining,  subsidiary of India's Adani Group. 

At peak capacity the mine would produce (as of 2017) 60 million tonnes of coal a year, In court, Adani said in 2015 it expects the mine to produce 2.3 billion tonnes over 60 years. It would be the largest coal mine in Australia and one of the largest in the world. The mine would be the first of six large mines proposed for the area called Galilee Basin.

Exports are to leave the country via new port facilities after being transported to the coast via a new 189 km rail line. Most of the exported coal is planned to be shipped to India.The mine has drawn immense controversy the damaging environmental impacts including the potential impact upon the Great Barrier Reef, the groundwater at its site and its carbon emissions. 
*

Carmichael coal mine project. Photo: Courtesy of Tom Jefferson - Greenpeace

'Carmichael - located in Queensland's unexploited Galilee Basin and proposed by Indian conglomerate Adani - would take the crown of Australia's biggest and baddest coal mine and be one of the largest single mines in the world. It would double the size of Australia's biggest existing coal mine - 60 million tonnes of coal per year at full capacity. It is planned to operate for 90 years, several decades longer than an average coal mine. The plan also involves hundreds of kilometres of new railway tracks and new coal port terminals that threaten the Great Barrier Reef. It is estimated to cost AUD 16.5 billion.
The extent and intensity of the impacts associated with this project would be profound. And yet, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is riddled with holes and errors. This raises serious questions about whether the current approvals system is adequately equipped to protect people and the environment from developments that are just too damaging.'
Source: Banktrap 
 Abbot Point, surrounded by wetlands and coral reefs, would become the world’s largest coal port if the Carmichael mine goes ahead. Photograph: Tom Jefferson/Tom Jefferson / Greenpeace
The Guardian/15th august 2017

By Josh Robertson and staff/ABC NEWS
13 Jun 2019
 Photo by Julian Meehan.
Earth Island Journal/August 5th 2019



Tuesday, February 11, 2020

CLIMATE CRISIS: GREENING RAILWAYS


The future of railways in many countries around the world is all about moving away from diesel engines towards electrification and innovations in rolling stock and energy supply. Here is a summary state of play.

 GLOBAL RAILWAYS 



These are among the results of a 2018 market study “Railway Electrification — Global Market Development” produced by SCI Verkehr GmbH, the international consultancy firm specialized in railway technology and logistics.

Of around 1.3 million km of rail lines worldwide, around 344,000 km are electrified, i.e. just over a quarter. In individual market regions, the degree of electrification varies from 1 percent (North America) to 57 percent (Western Europe). 
The degree of electrification in Asia has risen substantially in the last few years. In 2013 it was still 34 percent, but by 2017 it had reached 47 percent. Besides China’s large investments in both constructing new lines and electrifying diesel lines, India has also been an engine for growth.
The world market for railway electrification continues to grow as sustained investments in Europe and Asia lead to high current market volume [c. EUR 10 billion ($12.38 billion)],as well as growth up to 3-4% per year up to 2022. 
This reflects the trend towards electric mobility in rail transport and the gradual turning away from diesel power. In particular, this market growth is generated by a large number of metro projects as well as intensified electrification of existing diesel lines with growing operational demands. 
The European market is once again growing especially dynamically.  Momentum for the market development up to 2022 will come from the realization of projects in France and Spain which have been partially delayed due to the debt crisis as well as from electrification of diesel lines in Eastern European countries and Scandinavia. The Asian market also continues to grow. China is continuing to invest large sums in electric rail lines.

A major influence on the market volume for electrification comes from projects to construct new lines or upgrading existing ones. Such changes to the existing network are always subject to political interests and decisions. This makes infrastructure policy a fundamental driver of the market.
Although rail electrification is a niche market within rail infrastructure, it is a growth market with long-term positive prospects, as there are economic and environmental advantages to electrical operation compared to diesel.

Among the small number of international suppliers in the field of rail electrification are Siemens, Alstom and Balfour Beatty. While Balfour Beatty sold its rail divisions in many countries as part of a restructuring strategy in 2012-2014, the possible merger of Siemens and Alstom might lead to the emergence of a new world market leader which would be bigger than the two Chinese rail construction groups CREC and CRCC. [That merger fell through but now there are discussions of merger between Bombardier and Alston.]
*

UK

In Blackpool, a Pendolino train was used to test the infrastructure between Blackpool North and from Preston, to ensure this 17-mile stretch can carry electric trains as the timetable is changing so that providers such as Virgin Trains and Northern can run these trains that are greener, more reliable and much quieter. Source: Transport Britain
Here in the UK the share of electrified railways comes in at a paltry 42% (June 2018). Network Rail is working on main-line electrification projects across Britain including lines in Glasgow, Manchester and London.[Update]
Rail electrification in numbers
In January 2018, 36% of the UK's rail network was electrified. Because the busiest routes are electrified, 70% of all trains in the UK are electric. 24% of the UK's trains are diesel-only. The remaining 6% of UK trains are bi-mode.
Source: DfT 

Railway must be decarbonised to help meet ambitious environment targets


Source: Railway Engineer

The Institution of Mechanical Engineers published this valuable article by David Shirres in their journal Professional Engineering  on 26 July 2019: Since time of writing, Grant Shapps has become the new Secretary of State for Transport and the government's Energy and Clean Growth Minister Chris Skidmore has signed legislation to commit the UK to a legally binding target of net zero emissions by 2050.
The new net-zero target by 2050 [was] recommended by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC). The committee considers that this new target is achievable with known technologies but requires urgent policy changes.This requires deep decarbonisation of the national grid with a major expansion of renewable and low-carbon generation plus carbon capture and storage.
A CCC report calls for extensive electrification, with domestic gas boilers replaced by electric heating and widespread use of battery-powered road vehicles. As a result, electricity production needs to double by 2050. This report barely mentions the rail sector. 
  • Rail greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per passenger are typically a quarter of those from road transport. In 2017 rail transport produced only 2m tonnes GHG, compared with cars (59.6mt) vans (29.4mt), buses (3.4mt) and HGV (20.8mt).  
  •  A shift of 3% of passengers and 3% of freight from road to rail would give annual GHG emissions savings of 2m tonnes – the rail sector’s total emissions.
DIESEL
  • The rail industry must also address environmental concerns about diesel particulate emissions. As more cities create ultra-low emission zones, diesel train engine fumes in stations will become increasingly unacceptable. 
  • Last year, the government called for diesel-only trains to be off the tracks by 2040 and challenged the industry to develop alternative traction. 
BI-MODE TRAINS 
[Definition: A bi-mode locomotive) is powered either from an electricity supply or 
by using the onboard diesel engine 
  • [Former] Transport Secretary Chris Grayling has said that the new East-West rail line will not be electrified and that instead it will have “a completely new generation of low-emission trains”. 
  • Having experienced electrification cost overruns, the government’s view seems to be that new types of self-powered traction are needed to deliver a zero-carbon railway.
  • Grayling declared that bi-mode trains are the “best available technology”. Bi-modes are not ‘diesel-only’ and so are exempt from the 2040 deadline to remove other diesel trains.
Yet the reality is that they will spend most of their lives lugging around idle diesel engines -  which constitute 8% of their weight - under electric wires. In diesel mode, it would have the same performance as the trains they replace. 
HYDROGEN TRAINS
  • The only viable alternative self-powered rail traction with range and performance comparable to diesel is hydrogen trains. Yet these cannot deliver the power of electric trains and, due to conversion losses, require three times their energy. The low energy density of compressed hydrogen requires a pressure vessel eight times the size of a diesel tank.
 GO ELECTRIC
  • Electric trains are the only form of transport that offers high speed and high acceleration with potentially zero-GHG emissions, as they take power directly from the grid. So their carbon footprint will reduce as electricity supply is decarbonised.
  • Currently, the respective annual average GHG emissions for electric and diesel rail passenger vehicles are 93 and 352 tonnes. Projected grid decarbonisation will reduce electric vehicle emissions to 39 tonnes by 2040.  
  • For freight locomotives, the annual electric and diesel emissions are 122 and 866 tonnes, with emissions from electric locomotives forecast to be cut to 52 tonnes by 2040. Electrification is the only way to decarbonise rail freight as there is no low-carbon option for self-powered locomotives.   
*

NETWORK RAIL: A Guide to Overhead Electrification [Feb 2015]


At the moment, all trains on un-electrified routes are powered by diesel engines, similar in concept if not size to those under the bonnets of many lorries. However, electrification is preferred for major railway lines because electric trains are lighter, cleaner, cheaper, quieter and faster to accelerate. They allow more trains to be run more efficiently and more quickly. 
Electric trains are cheaper than diesel trains because: 
• They are cheaper to build, 20% cheaper to lease and maintenance costs are typically 33% lower.
• Fuel costs are typically 45% lower because electric trains are lighter and more efficient and electricity from the National Grid is cheaper than diesel fuel. 
• Electric trains are lighter and therefore cause on average 13% less wear to the tracks which means maintenance costs are therefore lower
Electric trains are environmentally superior because:
• They do not pollute the air during operation
• Power stations generating the electricity are more efficient and have more sophisticated and effective emissions controls. They therefore emit 20-30% less carbon per passenger mile than diesel.
  •  They are quieter and vibrate less due to the absence of diesel engines.
• Electric trains provide a better service because they have a higher power-to-weight ratio, which means that they are generally faster than diesel trains and accelerate more quickly, which reduces the journey times.

BATTERIES

Vivarail Class 230 Successfully Completes 40-Mile Battery Tests: Vivarail, which is transforming old London Underground rolling stock into battery trains – among other things – says it has been conducting tests on its Class 230 battery train during which it managed to run on battery power for 40 miles many times. Battery power is an important bridging technology for lines that are only partially electrified and will help reduce the environmental impact of the rail sector even further. The Wales Borders franchise will operate 5 Class 230s that are diesel-battery hybrids. https://railway-news.com/industry-insider-week-3-2020
*
HYDRO FLEX


All aboard Britain’s first hydrogen train
By Tom Burridge Transport correspondent, BBC News 20.6 2019
Hydrogen-powered trains are arguably the greenest trains out there.

"Mini power stations on wheels", is how Alex Burrows from the University of Birmingham describes them.He is the project director for the 'Hydroflex' train which was showcased at an event in the West Midlands. Unlike diesel trains, hydrogen-powered trains do not emit harmful gases, instead using hydrogen and oxygen to produce electricity, water and heat.It is "a fully green fuel", says Helen Simpson from rail rolling stock company Porterbrook, which created the Hydroflex in partnership with Birmingham University's centre for Railway Research.
But hydrogen trains are still incredibly rare.The only two in active service in the entire world are in Germany. Britain is looking to become one of the next countries to start running them.
And the 'Hydroflex' is a tester train where the technology is being trialled.
The hydrogen tanks, the fuel cell and the batteries sit inside a carriage where passengers would normally sit.In future commercial models that equipment will have to be stored away above and beneath the train. 

So why is this all happening now?
A quarter of the UK's trains run solely off diesel. The government wants them all gone by 2040.
"The carbon writing is on the wall", says Mike Muldoon from French train manufacturer Alstom, the company behind Germany's hydrogen trains.He argues the rail sector has to get greener "if we are going to convince more people to shift from car to train."
But until the day when hydrogen trains are ferrying passengers around the UK, diesel-powered trains are a necessity. That is because more than two thirds of our rail lines do not have overhead cabling which electric trains need to run.
So trains are bi-mode, which means they can run off electricity, where there are overhead cables, and off diesel the rest of the time. But bi-mode trains are, in environmental terms, far from perfect. And electrifying rail lines does not come cheaply for the government.
Regional routes which carry relatively few passengers are unlikely to be electrified soon.
And that is where hydrogen trains come in.The hope is that they will be carrying passengers in the UK in two years.
*

Hydrogen fuels cells on Alstom's iLint hydrogen train (Credit: Alstom)
 Can Britain just use the same hydrogen trains as Germany? The short answer is no. That's because German trains are taller."Because the Victorians went first they built trains smaller", says Mike Muldoon from Alstom. Smaller trains means less space to fit all the technology on board. The challenge now is to design trains which have enough hydrogen in their tanks to last an entire day."The technology should be discreetly hidden", says Mike Muldoon, Alstom's UK head of business development.
For example its hydrogen trains in Germany, which are similar to a future UK train design, have the fuel cells in the roof and the batteries underneath the train. 
Porterbrook's 'Hydroflex' train is bi-mode, meaning it can be powered by electricity made from hydrogen or take electricity from overhead cables. The plan is that the train will begin testing on the UK mainline in March.
Helen Simpson, from Porterbrook, says hydrogen trains are "very practical" for replacing long-distance diesel routes.
Source https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48698532

*

INDIA



The 4th largest railway network in the world
New Delhi: The Narendra Modi government’s determination to push through with the “complete electrification” of the Indian Railways’ 69,182-route kilometre network within a compressed time frame of three years has triggered a serious departmental war that threatens to lead to time and cost overruns.

Modi govt’s electrification push so far
Official documents show that since 2014, when the NDA government came to power, 217 electrification projects consisting of 31,468 route kilometres have been sanctioned. The pace of electrification work has also been bumped up. In 2013-14, the budgetary sanction was for a mere 610 route kilometres, but it went up each year  until, in March 2019, 35,488 route kilometres of the Indian Railways had been electrified.

 Targets since then have been steeper: 7,000 route kilometres in 2019-20; 10,500 km in 2020-21, and 10,500 km in 2021-22. But all these plans have run into complications, thanks to the absence of a blueprint to execute them.



No plan for scrapped diesel locos
Midway through the project, Railway Board officials are seen grappling with a critical concern: How to monetise the massive number of diesel engines that will go out of service due to electrification.
Responding to a questionnaire from ThePrint, ministry spokesperson Shubha Gupta said by 31 March 2020, the zonal railways have been instructed to phase out 403 diesel locomotives that have reached 31 years of age. Of these, only 14 are providing main line service; the remaining have been deployed for shunting/departmental services, or been “grounded”.
The older variety of diesel locomotives in India — called ALCOs after their original American manufacturer — are designed to run for 36 years (called ‘codal life’), but sources say the government has reduced that to 31 years to fast forward the electrification plan. The ministry refused to confirm or deny this.
In all, approximately 1,000 diesel engines in full working condition are reported to have been “stabled” or grounded so far.
Official targets call for the stabling of 4,000 diesel locos in the next two years. According to an official note circulated after the second meeting of the ‘Parivartan Sangoshthi’ (introspection camp on rail reform) that took place in New Delhi on 7-8 December, the ministry has not yet evolved a policy on monetising the diesel engines that will get stabled.
In the past, diesel engines that have hit their ‘codal life’ have been routinely sold off as scrap, with 80 per cent of the parts being retained to use as spares for newer engines.
“But, given the determination of the government to push through the complete electrification plan in a compressed time frame, without having finalised a concrete plan to monetise the diesel assets, one confronts a situation when diesel engines in perfect running condition are being condemned to rust away and perish,” an official said.
If these engines are sold off as scrap, they would, at best, fetch between Rs 25-50 lakh each. On the other hand, the cost of refurbishing 4,000 diesel engines for possible export to Asian or African countries would work out to Rs 8,000 crore at the rate of Rs 2 crore per loco.
Officials said the refurbished engines would fetch a price of approximately Rs 5 crore each in the international market. But there is a catch: Just a few countries use the broad gauge diesel engines that are in operation in India, and the demand for such engines in the international market is rather low. In the last 20 years, India has managed to sell less than 1,000 such engines to countries such as Tanzania, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
“It is unlikely that India will find a bulk buyer for such a large number of diesel engines,” ministry sources said.
‘Dual mode’ fails to get on the rails
The railways had announced with much fanfare in 2016 that existing diesel locomotives will be converted to ‘dual mode’ engines that could run on both diesel and electric traction. The government had said with this technological breakthrough, scrapped diesel engines could also be put to use.
In the last three years, however, engineers at the Varanasi-based Diesel Locomotive Works have continued to struggle to build the first prototype. The dual mode engines have failed to clear the mandatory performance and safety tests from the Lucknow-headquartered Research Design and Standards Organisation (RDSO).
Even if they do clear the tests, dual mode engines will not come cheap — according to the ministry’s response to ThePrint, the estimated cost of each would be Rs 18 crore.

High cost of electrification

Meanwhile, the decision to abruptly remove 4,000 diesel engines from mainline operations will necessitate the manufacture/purchase of an equal number of electric engines. At an average cost of Rs 12 crore for each electric loco, the total cost will come to Rs 48,000 crore, plus the loss incurred on the diesel locos, which could end up being about half that figure.
This means that when the full electrification plan is completed, it will have cost the railways in excess of Rs 1 lakh crore — approximately Rs 50,000 crore to convert the 29,880 kilometres of un-electrified tracks, Rs 50,000 crore for electric locos, another Rs 5,000 crore to construct sheds to house these locos, and the additional cost of training loco pilots.
Given the precarious state of rail finances, rustling up the funds to execute the electrification plan seems a tall order. As highlighted in a recent report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, the railways’ operating ratio touched an alarming figure of 98.4 per cent during 2017-18 — meaning that it spent 98.4 paisa to earn every rupee.  
No savings on fuel bills 
There’s another aspect of this process that has left Railway Board officials scratching their heads: Despite diesel locos being stabled and new electric locos being introduced, the railways’ overall fuel consumption has either remained the same or even risen in the last few years.
Sources say there is no clarity yet on why consumption has plateaued or risen despite the large-scale electrification and scrapping of diesel locos. They propound two theories, the first of which is that while old diesel engines have been scrapped on paper, those working on the main line continue to operate at the same level as before.
Another point raised by a ministry official is the change in the procurement practice for locomotives. Earlier, engines were purchased based on freight and passenger traffic projections calculated by the Traffic Directorate, but under the current dispensation, the production of electric engines “is being inflated in a random manner”.
The other possibility is that while more routes have been electrified, these sections are not fully usable. An official said on the condition of anonymity that several lines have been electrified in patches, and thus still require diesel traction. The ministry did not comment on the matter.
“One therefore has a situation when both diesel and electric engines are becoming surplus and are idling away,” the official said. 

Record Capital Expenditure for Indian Railways 

Source: railwaygazette.com 6th Feb 2020.

A 17% year-on-year increase in capital expenditure for Indian Railways in 2020-21 was announced when Minister of Finance Nirmala Sitharaman presented the national budget on February 1. The Ministry of Railways said the emphasis would be on continuing capacity enhancement works, and accelerating implementation to make Indian Railways ‘the growth engine of the economy’. Electrification of 6 000 route-km is targeted, with wiring of the entire broad gauge network now envisaged for completion by 2023-24.

GERMANY




 Following the positive outcome of a feasibility study, DB Cargo has confirmed it is to buy 50 Toshiba diesel-battery hybrid 100 km/h locomotives for shunting and short-distance freight operations, and will lease a further 50 locos. The HDB800 locos will be equipped with Toshiba’s SCiB lithium-ion battery system.DB said 50 hybrid locos would replace 61 of its older locomotives, offering ‘considerably’ reduced diesel consumption, lower maintenance costs and higher average fleet availability. It will be possible to charge the batteries via an external power supply, providing the ability to increase the proportion of renewable energy used.

‘Their new drive systems will allow our shunting yards to work in a more resource-efficient way, with annual energy savings of 30% and diesel fuel savings of 1 million litres per year. Alongside this, modern technology will make using the vehicles easier for our staff.’


*

SOLAR

DB to Feed Solar Power Directly into Its Traction Network 
Deutsche Bahn says it will feed solar power directly into its traction network for the first time.
The German state-rail operator has signed a contract with Enerparc for a new solar park measuring around 70 football pitches in size. 60 percent of the electricity DB currently consumes comes from renewable sources. The company hopes to make this 100 percent by 2038.
Deutsche Bahn is already the biggest consumer of green electricity in Germany. According to the company’s own calculations 60 percent of its electricity currently comes from renewables. This percentage will rise to 61 percent by 2021 and to 100 percent by 2038.
Torsten Schein, Head of the Management Board at DB Energie, said: “We're responsible for the acquisition of electricity for the rail network and are Germany's fifth-largest electricity provider. By feeding this solar electricity directly into the network, we are gathering experience and insights regarding supplying the railway with renewables.”
*
Deutsche Bahn set up a team of experts for the express purpose of preparing the railways for the changing climatic conditions. One example is DB’s extensive vegetation management in order to become more resilient to the climate. Further projects include ones that cool infrastructure, such as aerogel, and insights from bionics.
Following the successful tests of the cooling effect of white rails in summer 2019, DB is now white rails in actual passenger operations. To do that, the company has painted a thousand metres of track on the Hanover-Würzburg high-speed line with environmentally friendly paint. This real-world test is to inform DB of the durability and wear of the paint. It will also provide insights into how best to apply the paint over long distances. Substantive results are expected in a year. These will then provide the foundation for a potential expansion of the project on further lines.
*

FUEL CELL TRAINS

The Rhein-Main Verkehrsverbund (RMV) subsidiary Fahma GmbH, which operates the Taunusbahn, has chosen a winner of its Europe-wide tender for 27 fuel cell trains: Alstom. The French rolling stock manufacturer will deliver the Coradia iLint units in time for the timetable change in December 2022. Alstom says this order will give Fahma GmbH the world’s largest fleet of fuel cell trains.
The contract also includes an order for the supply of hydrogen and for the maintenance and provision of reserve capacities for 25 years. Alstom will supply the hydrogen in co-operation with Infraserv GmbH & Co. Höchst KG. The filling station is situated in the Höchst industrial park.
The full value of the contract is 500 million euros (557 million USD), of which Alstom’s share is 360 million euros (401 million USD).
Parliamentary State Secretary of the German Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, Enak Ferlemann, said:
“The purchase of 27 vehicles is a lighthouse project for fuel cell mobility, about which I’m very pleased. The federal government supports this investment in climate-friendly mobility by assuming 40 percent of the additional vehicle costs incurred in comparison to diesel vehicles, as well as by providing proportional support for the hydrogen filling station. The project can serve as a model for the German transport ministry. We hope that many other projects in Germany will follow this example.
The 27 hydrogen fuel cell trains will replace the existing fleet of diesel trains on the RB11, RB12, RB15 and RB16 lines.
Tarek Al-Wazir, the Minister of Transport for the German state of Hesse, said:
“On Hesse’s tracks you can still find many diesel vehicles today as overhead lines are missing. Fuel cell traction is therefore a quickly feasible alternative to expensive electrification. In Hessen, transport is responsible for one third of greenhouse gas emissions. Steam instead of diesel soot is therefore an exciting approach. We will continue to actively support the project and make every effort to ensure that the necessary adaptations to the rail infrastructure around the hydrogen filling station in"
Hydrogen Refuelling
The hydrogen fuel cells will be refuelled at the Industriepark Höchst in Frankfurt, an “innovative chemical and pharmaceutical site in Europe’s heartland”. It is well situated for access to international transport routes and is home to more than 90 companies, such as Bayer, Sanofi and Celanese.
Dr Joachim Kreysing, Managing Director of Infraserv Höchst, which operates the industrial park, said:
“With its existing hydrogen infrastructure, Industriepark Höchst is an ideal filling station location for fuel-cell vehicles. The operation of the hydrogen filling station for trains as a supplement to the tanking facilities for buses and trucks fits in perfectly with our concept, with which we as an innovative company are further developing our energy supply concepts and are relying on environmentally friendly energy carriers.”
 Alstom’s Coradia iLint
The Coradia iLint, which is already in operation elsewhere in Germany, is the first passenger train in the world that uses electrical power from hydrogen fuel cells. The Landesnahverkehrsgesellschaft Niedersachsen began operating Alstom’s hydrogen trains in September 2018 and will operate a total of 14 of them from 2021. This makes RMV the second German operator to adopt the technology. 
They are locally emission free, with the only by-products being steam and liquid water. Another emissions area where these trains have a positive scoresheet is noise. They produce decibel levels on par with suburban trains.
Dr Jörg Nikutta, Managing Director, Alstom Germany and Austria, said:
“We are very pleased that Alstom’s zero-emission Coradia iLint regional trains will be operated in Hesse in the near future, allowing climate friendly transportation of passengers in the Taunus region. This new success, coupled with Coradia iLint’s previous success, demonstrates how trendsetting and sustainable transportation is already a reality.”
Coradia iLint for RMV
Each of the 27 trains will come with passenger information systems with real-time information monitors. They will have 160 seats per vehicle as well as space for bicycles, wheelchair and prams. Passengers will also benefit from complimentary wifi. Once these 27 trains are in service, capacity on the Taunus subnetwork will rise by up to 40 percent. This is particularly positive for commuters who travel during rush hour.
Prof. Knut Ringat, Managing Director, RMV, said:
“This award sets two records: With the commissioning of the new vehicles in 2022, RMV will have the world’s largest fleet of fuel cell trains in passenger transport and it is the largest order in the history of our subsidiary fahma. After electrically powered trains, electric buses and hydrogen buses, we are now offering our passengers a further opportunity to travel without emissions. This milestone makes me proud and is a giant step towards a mobility without pollutants.”Ulrich Krebs, District Administrator, Hochtaunuskreis and Deputy Chairman of RMV’s Supervisory Board, said:
“In addition to electrifying the S5 to Usingen, the fuel cell trains offer various advantages for routes that have not yet been electrified. Commuters benefit from more space in the trains and a significantly quieter journey because the engine noise of the vehicles is quieter due to the electric drive. This is also an advantage for the people living near the lines.”
https://railway-news.com/germany-27-hydrogen-fuel-cell-trains-alstom/





Monday, February 03, 2020

CLIMATE CRISIS: GREENING SHIPPING


Source: GREEN CONTAINER SHIPPING
Ships move approximately 80% of the world’s goods. When compared to other forms of transportation, marine shipping is the most energy-efficient way to move large volumes of cargo.'[Source: Clear Seas]
'If you leave out passenger ships and tugboats, there are about 51,000 commercial ships on the ocean, mostly cargo vessels transporting everything from fish fingers and fridges to cars and crude oil. We all depend on this industry. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) about 80 per cent of the goods we trade go by sea. The dominance is because ships move goods around cheaply, if slowly. Ships also emit less carbon dioxide than other modes of transport. 
[Source: Peril On The Sea by Joshua Howgego New Scientist 27 Jan 2018]

The world’s key ports have committed themselves to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) while continuing their role as transportation and economic centres. This commitment is called the World Ports Sustainability Program (WPSP). The ports do this through influencing the sustainability of supply chains, taking into account local circumstances and varying port management structures. The ports actively seek the cooperation of ships in support of measures to reduce emissions to air from ships.


*

In April 2018, delegates at the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the UN agency that regulates international shipping, agreed on a target of reducing the sector's emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG] by at least 50 per cent by 2050 and pursuing efforts to phase them out entirely..'  
 'In fact, [in March 2018] a report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found that shipping emissions could be cut 95 per cent by 2035 using existing tech. How? 
The first thing is to change the way ships operate.
Reducing ship speeds could save up to two-thirds on fuel. While this sounds easy, it would reduce owners' annual profits, so they won't do it voluntarily. 
We could also boost fuel efficiency, by building bigger but more slender ships from lighter materials and equipping them with drag-reducing tech already fitted to some vessels. Such measures could reduce fuel use by more than a third. 
The last, and most important, change is to replace the heavy fuel oil used by most ships. Even switching to liquefied natural gas would provide big savings. Better yet would be to completely replace fossil fuels with hydrogen, ammonia, electricity or even nuclear power. Ships could also harness solar and wind power. 
The challenge is to make all this happen, and fast. 
Cutting shipping emissions to near zero will require eventually replacing most of the ships now in service. But ships are expensive to build and remain in use for a long time. The average age of the commercial fleet is 25 years. 
This is one of the reasons why many wanted the IMO to set a much more ambitious target now. If shipping companies don't start designing and building greener ships soon, we will run out of time. And the IMO is not exactly in a rush. It is not due to come up with a final plan for actually achieving the 50 per cent target until 2023. 
The IMO has no direct way to enforce this. The countries ships sail between - the port states -have some powers to enforce what happens in their waters. 
The rules in international waters are meant to be enforced by the countries where ships are registered - the flag states. Most ships are now registered to flag states such as Panama and Liberia rather than in the countries where they operate. This is done to avoid tougher regulations and higher costs elsewhere, so it is far from clear whether the major flag states will be willing and able to enforce emissions targets - especially as some have been fighting to prevent them.
 Ship owners, meanwhile, are not going to want to cut emissions if it costs them money.   A big part of the problem here is that the heavy fuel oil is not taxed, while some alternative energy sources, like electricity, are. So the world urgently needs to impose some form of carbon pricing on shipping - as it does on all fossil fuels.  
 [Source: 'It's time to sail the deep green sea' by Michael Le Page. New Scientist/ 21 April 2018]
*

 International Maritime Organization (IMO



  • IMO has been working to reduce harmful impacts of shipping on the environment since the 1960s
  • Annex VI to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL Convention) was adopted in 1997, to address air pollution from shipping. 
  • 'These regulations ... seek to control airborne emissions from ships (sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), ozone depleting substances (ODS), volatile organic compounds (VOC) and shipboard incineration) and their contribution to local and global air pollution, human health issues and environmental problems
  • Annex VI entered into force on 19 May 2005. It was revised, significantly strengthened and then adopted in October 2008. These regulations entered into force on 1 July 2010.
  •  'phasing in a progressive reduction in sulphur oxide (SOx) from ships and further reductions in nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from marine engines.' 
 • The regulations to reduce sulphur oxide emissions introduced a global limit for sulphur content of ships’ fuel oil, with tighter restrictions in designated emission control areas. 
  • Since 2010, further amendments to Annex VI were adopted, including  to Emission Control Areas (ECAS)
There are currently four Emission Control Areas (ECAS) where requirements are more stringent than the global limits. They are the Baltic Sea area (SOx only); North Sea area (SOx only); North American area (SOx, NOx and PM); and United States Caribbean Sea area  (SOx, NOx and PM). 
  •  Limits for the sulphur content of ships' fuel oil: In the ECAS areas, the sulphur cap is 0.10% m/m (mass/mass).The  global sulphur cap was 3.5% but has been cut to 0.50% from 1 January 2020 
  • IMO claims that: 'This will significantly reduce the amount of sulphur oxide emanating from ships and should have major health and environmental benefits for the world, particularly for populations living close to ports and coasts.'
  • How can ships meet lower sulphur emission standards? Ships can meet the requirement by using low-sulphur compliant fuel oil. An increasing number of ships are also using gas as a fuel as, when ignited, it leads to negligible sulphur oxide emissions. Another alternative fuel is methanol which is being used on some short sea services.                                                                                                                                    *

IMO 2020 – Lower Sulphur Means Higher Freight Rates



According to the business intelligence company CRU the IMO 2020 MARPOL Annex VI policy is likely to raise freight rates by around 10-20%.

According to IMO: 'Ships may also meet the SOx emission requirements by using exhaust gas cleaning systems or “scrubbers”, which “clean” the emissions before they are released into the atmosphere. CRU says that uptake of scrubber systems has been higher than anticipated and their growth will accelerate further.

Capesize ships are the largest dry cargo ships. They are too large to transit the Suez Canal (Suezmax limits) or Panama Canal and so have to pass either the Cape of Good Hope or Cape Horn to traverse between oceans.

Panamax and New Panamax ships are travelling through the Panama Canal. They strictly follow the size regulations set by the Panama Canal Authority, as the entry and exit points of the Canal are narrow.

Handysize are small-sized ships with a capacity ranging between 15,000 and 35,000 Dead Weight Tonnage (DWT). These vessels are ideal for small as well as large ports, and so make up the majority of ocean cargo vessels in the world. They are mainly used in transporting finished petroleum products and for bulk cargo.
  • CRU estimates that 20-25% of the larger Capesize vessels will have scrubbers fitted by end 2020. For the mid-size Panamax vessels, the uptake is lower at 5%. The smaller Handymax vessels are unlikely to install scrubbers at all. 
  •  Considering the share of each type of vessel we calculate that in 2020, 10%-15% of total ocean-going freight capacity will employ scrubbers, rising to ~20% by 2025. 
  • More Capesize capacity will be fitted with scrubbers because the vessel size and the typical length of voyage mean a larger volume of fuel is burned making the capital investment and the pay-off period much more attractive. In addition, Capesize vessels generally travel on fixed routes between very large ports (e.g. Brazil or Australia to China), where the likelihood of the high sulphur fuel oil (IFO180) being available is greater than that of a small port.
  • Of the vessels fitted and due to be fitted with scrubbers, most have opted for the open loop option (where the exhaust gases are washed with sea water and dischargd into the sea). 
  • This comes as a surprise as closed-loop scrubbers initially were considered to be more environmentally friendly as the ‘waste’ was [held on board] and disposed of after treatment at ports. 
  • However, since some studies have concluded that there is no notable negative environmental impact to using open loop vessels, many companies fitting scrubbers are willing to take the risk. Open loop scrubbers cut down on installation and running costs, along with the logistics of carrying and disposing of the waste. 
  • There are some regions (Singapore and Fujairah) where an open loop scrubber is not allowed to operate, but until we see such controls at major ports such as Rotterdam, Qingdao and Newcastle the movement of bulk vessels will be largely unaffected.
  • Fuel blending will be key in achieving compliance with the IMO's regulations
  •  Bunker fuel is a residual fuel of the oil refining process, it is cheap, has high sulphur content and has been the standard fuel used by the shipping industry.  By way of explanation: The fuel blending involves adding a proportion of Biofuels or other fuels to achieve a lower proportion of sulphur in the mix. The physical blending on board of bulk liquid products during a sea voyage to create new products is prohibited by the IMO.   


AIR POLLUTION


  • Commercial ships emit several types of air pollution as by-products in the form of smoke. Ship-source pollutants most closely linked to climate change and public health impacts include carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulphur oxides (SOx) and particulate matter. (PM) 
  • On a global scale, the marine shipping industry’s share of total emissions from human sources is: CO2 (2.2% per year), NOx (15% per year), SOx (13% per year) 
  •  CO2 is an important GHG. When it is absorbed by seawater, the water becomes more acidic and this  has adverse effects on marine life and ecosystems. NOx causes acid rain and medical problems in humans. SOx has similar effects. 
  • In addition, the smoke from ships also contains a collection of solid and liquid particles formed during fuel combustion.This “black carbon” is the second largest contributor to climate change after CO2. The particles absorb solar energy in the air before falling to earth. High concentrations of black carbon darken the ice and snow surfaces and significantly reduce the amount of solar energy reflected back into space - known as the albedo effect - which accelerates melting. 
*

LNG As Marine Fuel Revealed To Be Worse Than Business As Usual For Climate – Report By MI News Network | In: Shipping News | January 28, 2020

  • A new report from the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) has found that the most popular Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) ship engine, particularly for cruise ships, emits between 70% and 82% more life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the short-term compared to clean distillate fuels. 
  • The shocking new report, “The climate implications of using LNG as a marine fuel”, comes as the shipping sector grapples with its enormous climate footprint, and more ship operators are turning to LNG as a purported climate solution.
  • The ICCT report examines the lifecycle GHG emissions from marine fuels, including a previously poorly understood source of climate emissions from LNG-powered ships — the unintentional releases of the climate super-pollutant methane from ship engines, known as methane slip.
 Credits: iso.org

  • The authors found that using LNG could actually worsen the shipping industry’s climate impacts compared to marine gas oil (MGO) when considering the amount of heat these emissions will trap over a 20-year period. 
  •  “This groundbreaking new analysis is a damning climate indictment of LNG as marine fuel. For a sector that is already one of the largest contributors of global greenhouse gas emissions, this report reveals that switching ships to LNG is worse than doing nothing. This should serve as an alarming wake-up call for the International Maritime Organization, which must act now to ensure it includes all greenhouse gas emissions in its emissions reduction strategy,” said Kendra Ulrich, Senior Shipping Campaigner at Stand.earth.
  • LNG is being hailed as a climate solution by many in the shipping industry — a sector that is responsible for more global GHG emissions than major climate polluting nations, including Germany, Iran, South Korea, and Canada. If left unchecked in a business-as-usual scenario, international shipping GHG emissions could rise from its current 3% share of emissions to a staggering 17% of global GHG emissions by 2050. If ships were to continue to uptake LNG as a marine fuel, emissions could be even worse. 
  • “The report shows the need for adopting policies that can reduce the broader GHG emissions of shipping instead of CO2 only, said Dr. Elizabeth Lindstad, Chief Scientist at SINTEF Ocean, Maritime Transport.
  • The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned that global GHG emissions must be nearly halved from 2017 levels by 2030 to avert the worst impacts of climate change, and methane emissions from all sources must be cut by at least 35% from 2010 levels by 2050.
  • Given this short timeframe to drastically reduce climate-disrupting pollution, the report authors evaluated the climate impacts of marine fuels using 20-year and 100-year global warming potentials. Methane emissions are particularly problematic because methane traps 86 times more heat than the same amount of carbon over a 20-year period. 
  • Of the 756 LNG ships currently in use or on order, the most popular engine type, by far, is also the worst offender with the highest rate of methane slip. This engine is especially popular with cruise ships, and the cruise industry promotes these LNG ships as having significant climate benefits. 
  • As recently as December, the largest cruise operator in the world, Carnival Corporation, touted its LNG program as an example of its climate leadership in an announcement about joining the “Getting to Zero Coaliton.” This coalition aims to have zero-emission vessels in operation by 2030. 
  • “Carnival Corporation’s program to increase the number of LNG ships in its global fleet is like jumping out of the oil pot and into the climate-fueled fire. While most of Carnival’s global fleet still burns one of the dirtiest fossil fuels on earth — heavy fuel oil — LNG is far from a solution to its massive climate pollution problem. We urge Carnival to stop fueling its ships with oil refinery waste and end its investments in climate-disrupting LNG ships. If Carnival wants to be an environmental leader, it must switch to the cleanest fuel available — marine gas oil — and put its investment dollars toward truly zero-emissions technologies,” said Ulrich.
  • The International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Pollution Prevention and Response Subcommittee meets February 17-21 in London, in what is being hailed by the international community as an Arctic Summit. The pollution subcommittee will be asked to send strong recommendations to its parent committee, the Marine Environment Protection Committee, on urgent control measures for black carbon in the Arctic and other marine ecosystems.
  • Also on its agenda are banning the use.. of heavy fuel oil in the Arctic, and closing a loophole that allows for the continued use of heavy fuel oil under more stringent fuel sulfur standards if ships install “emissions-cheat” systems called scrubbers.
  • The Marine Environment Protection Committee meets March 30-April 3 in London, where, after two years of stalling and delays, its top priority will be its Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy and agreeing to short-term measures to begin reducing emissions.
*


CRUISE SHIPS


Source: Cruise ships are damaging the world’s seas'
John Gapper/ Financial Times 5th June 2019

This has not been a happy week for cruise operators. On Sunday morning, a large cruise ship collided with a dock in Venice, injuring four people.  On Monday, a judge in Miami approved a $20m settlement with Carnival Corporation, the world's biggest cruise operator, for repeatedly polluting oceans. 

"If you all did not have the environment, you would have nothing to sell," Judge Patricia Seitz observed sharply to Arnold Donald, chief executive of Carnival, in Miami. Carnival pleaded guilty to having dumped waste and oily water into the sea, despite a previous criminal conviction for the same offence. 

Cruise operators need to clean up their act. They face protests at the most popular spots such as Venice, Dubrovnik and the Norwegian fjords for sailing behemoths there — the Opera looks big but is only half the size of MSC Cruises' latest vessels, which can take 5,000 passengers. 
Now they are under scrutiny for their emissions and the waste they generate. 

It is unfair in some ways. Cruising is a growing form of tourism but still tiny compared with the industry as a whole: 28m people took cruises last year out of about 1.4bn tourist arrivals in foreign countries. It suffers the curse of the visible — cruise ships, with what the Miami court settlement monitor called "all the myriad needs of a small free-floating city", are hard to ignore. 

"The more people cruise the world, the more the world becomes a better place," Carnival claims in its 2017 sustainability report. There is something to that. McKinsey & Co estimates that travel and tourism generated $7.9tn, or 10 per cent of global gross domestic product, in 2017, and more than 1,000 crew can be employed on a cruise ship. But it is not unalloyed gain.

One problem is emissions. Cruise ships use heavy oil for fuel, like other commercial ships, and the shipping industry is estimated to create 13 per cent of sulphur dioxide emissions, causing 400,000 cases of premature death globally a year. There are sulphur control areas along coasts, yet one Carnival ship was found to have burnt oil inside Iceland's protection zone. 

Operators including Carnival use filters to curb emissions and some are turning to liquefied natural gas as a fuel — Carnival's AIDAnova, a liner powered by LNG that can carry 6,600 passengers, went into service last year. But the sector as a whole remains a polluter. 

A second problem is waste disposal. Carnival was originally fined $40m in 2017 after a whistleblower on a ship operated by Princess Cruise Lines, one of its subsidiaries, disclosed that its crew had secretly dumped oil-contaminated bilge water into the sea through a "magic pipe" since 2005. 

Cruise ships also collect a lot of "grey water" from showers and "black water" sewage. 
No cruise ship is allowed to dump untreated waste into the sea, even beyond the 12-mile coastal zone imposed by maritime law, and modern ships have extensive treatment facilities. 
The Cruise Lines International Association estimates that ships recycle 60 per cent more waste per person than on land, but the Carnival case shows that breaches are common. 

Compared with tourism as a whole, the cruise industry is a limited cause of ecological concern. But it is growing beyond the baby-boomer market in Germany and the UK, where the average passenger is 57. Virgin is launching a cruise ship next year aimed at a younger crowd, promising a "sailor experience that balances the duality of enjoying the earth and caring for it".

This growth, and the fact that cruise ships are contained environments that could become leaders in sustainable tourism, make it vital to avoid repetitions of the Venice crash and the Carnival case. Taking them out of the Giudecca Canal, where they overshadow Venice, is a start, but other ports need to ask themselves how much they need sail-by visits from the giants. Most of the environmental responsibility lies with the operators themselves, which have raised their standards but need to do more. It is tempting to behave badly at sea, when no one is watching, but it is ugly.