The impact of trunk route deployment changes on pollutant emissions in international container shipping after Panama Canal expansion

• Pages: 335-352
• Date: 08 August 2016
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-09-2014-0142
• Published date: 08 August 2016
• Author: Hui-Huang Tai,Dung-Ying Lin
• Subject Matter: Management science & operations,Logistics

The impact of trunk route

deployment changes on pollutant

emissions in international

container shipping after Panama

Canal expansion

Hui-Huang Tai

Department of Shipping and Transportation Management,

National Kaoshiung Marine University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, and

Dung-Ying Lin

Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science,

National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan

Abstract

Purpose –The expansion of the Panama Canal that is completed in 2016 provides container carriers

with new opportunities to redeploy global oceangoing trunk routes. The purpose of this paper is to

examine the cargo sources and geographical locations of three trunk routes, the departure points of

which are all in East Asia.

Design/methodology/approach –The operating conditions of various shipping practices were used

to simulate trunk route deployment after canal expansion. Subsequently, a clean-line strategy

featuring liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a replacement for heavy oil is proposed to explore the effects

that container carriers have on energy savings and emission reductions.

Findings –The results showed that the unit emissions of ships traveling trunk routes in East Coast North

America and East Coast South America did not differ significantly regardless of whether the container

carrier employed a conventional method or the new deployment plan following the expansion of the

Panama Canal. By contrast, the adoption of a new method for sailing through the canal yields significant

emission reductions for Far East/Europe routes. In addition, the slow-steam strategy adopted by carriers

and the more costly clean-line strategy of LNG-fueled ships are both effectivewhen applied to trunk routes.

Originality/value –The results of this study provide a reference to container carriers deploying route

structures and the International Maritime Organization when promoting emission-reduction policies.

Keywords LNG-fuelled ship, Panama Canal expansion, Trunk route deployment, Unit emissions

Paper type Research paper

Nomenclature

P

e

the sum of the pollutant

emissions (tons) including

sailing, maneuvering,

navigable canal, locks,

and port periods

Pe

Sailing total emission (tons)

of pollutant e(including

NO

x

,SO

2

,CO

2

, HC,

PM) when ship is

sailing

The International Journal of

Logistics Management

Vol. 27 No. 2, 2016

pp. 335-352

©Emerald Group Publis hing Limited

0957-4093

DOI 10.1108/IJLM-09-2014-0142

Received 9 September 2014

Revised 20 November 2014

Accepted 18 August 2015

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-4093.htm

The authors would like thank the editors and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive

comments, which helped the authors to improve the manuscript. The authors would also like to

acknowledge the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, ROC for providing partial

funding support under contract number MOST 103-2410-H-006-079-MY3. The contents of the

paper remain the sole responsibility of the authors.

335

The impact of

trunk route

deployment

Pe

Maneuvering total emission (tons) of

pollutant e(including NO

x

,

SO

2

,CO

2

, HC, PM) when

ship is maneuvering

Pe

Canal‐time total emission (tons) of

pollutant e(including NO

x

,

SO

2

,CO

2

, HC, PM) when

ship is sailing on navigable

canal in Panama

Pe

Locks‐time total emission (tons) of

pollutant e(including NO

x

,

SO

2

,CO

2

, HC, PM) when

ship is at major locks

(Gatun, Pedro Miguel and

Miraflores Locks)

Pe

Port total emission (tons) of

pollutant e(including

NO

x

,SO

2

,CO

2

, HC, PM)

when ship is at port

TimeSailing sailing time from port ito

port j(hours)

TimeM aneuvering maneuvering time

(hours) including terminal-

waiting time

for each ship, liner-

owned private terminal

operators estimated

eight hours at hub ports

and five hours at

feeder-ports

TimeN avigable‐canal sailing time (hours) in

navigable canal for each

ship, estimated similarly at

eight hours for the sailing

period

TimeLocks‐time waiting time (hours) at

major locks for each ship,

estimated similarly at ten

hours on the spillway

TimePort terminal handling time at

port (hours) for each ship

based on variable handling

and operating situations at

terminals

Diejdistance (nm; nautical mile)

from port ito port j

Vspeed of container ship (kt;

nm/hour)

Q

i

quantity of containers

(TEU) handled at port i,

including loading and

unloading boxes for

some ships

EF

i

terminal gross handling

efficiency at port i,

consultation with terminal

operators showing that

operators always use more

than 4 gantry cranes upon

a ship calling in most hub

ports, the gross efficiency

is more than 150 TEU/

hour in some mega-hub

ports, and others are just

within the range of

efficiency (100-170 TEU/

hour). All these have a

uniform efficiency of 150

TEU/hour for Shanghai

and 120 TEU/hour for

other ports

Fo

tmain engine fuel economy

(ton/hour) with oil type o,

including heavy oil (ho),

LNG and diesel oil (do), tis

the ship type of 2,500 TEU

or 10,000 TEU

Ko

n;eemission factor (tons/ton of

fuel type) of pollutant e

(including NO

x

,SO

2

,CO

2

,

HC, PM) for heavy oil, LNG

and diesel from sailing,

maneuvering, navigable

canal, lock-time and port

time (n)

kmain engine fuel use,

heavy oil (ho) then

k¼1, LNG then k¼0

1. Introduction

The expansion of the Panama Canal, which is completed in 2016, substantially

influence the container shipping industry. After the expansion, the canal is accessible

to container ships with a capacity of at least 12,000 20-foot equivalent units (TEU),

336

IJLM

27,2