The performance of container terminals needs to be improved in order to make them not only more competitive and productive, but also more ...
The performance of container terminals needs to be improved in order to make them not only more competitive and productive, but also more sustainable. Consequently, measuring performance in ways that go beyond traditional efficiency and productivity measures is an emerging challenge. In the case of energy consumption, a clear link exists between the sustainability, efficiency, competitiveness and profitability of a terminal. This sustainability/ efficiency link between energy consumption and performance is not yet well understood, nor has it yet been analysed in detail. Today, the container terminal industry is under a great deal of pressure to meet economic and environmental standards.
This industry’s levels of energy consumption and the resulting emissions are significant but, despite increasing energy consumption rates and costs, few energy efficiency measures or strategies are in place in today’s ports and terminals. Latin America’s energy security is an issue that is high on the political agenda, and there is an emerging awareness of energy consumption, efficiency and the associated costs in maritime trade. Port authorities and terminal operators have started to become aware of the challenge of energy efficiency, and many of them are increasingly concerned with their emission profiles.
The regulation of port areas has become more stringent, mostly in relation to sulphur and nitrogen oxides (Acciaro and Wilmsmeier, 2016; Acciaro, 2014), but in the future, regulations on particulate matter (PM) and other short-lived climate change gases are expected to become stricter as well. Energy consumption is an important factor in port operations and portrelated economic activities and, with energy costs increasing for land-based industries as well, port authorities and terminal operators are looking for ways to reduce their fuel bills. With the growth of global container trade and port infrastructure development, ports have come to be significant energy consumers. Latin America’s container exports have undergone both a considerable increase in
scale and structural changes as trade volumes have grown and reefer cargo (refrigerated perishable goods) has become more diversified (e.g., Vagle 2013a, 2013b). This type of trade not only requires different types of handling and logistics, but also consumes more energy throughout the transport chain. Terminals around the world are working to shift from fossil fuel to electricity. These efforts are coupled with the development of renewable energy sources within the port perimeter (Acciaro et al., 2013). While some terminals have taken such steps voluntarily and have invested in energyefficient technologies, many port authorities and terminal operators still lack an awareness of the importance of having energy-efficient infrastructure, and many times they lack sound strategies for measuring their energy consumption and for using energy-efficiency indicators (Wilmsmeier et al., 2014).
Energy management strategies place ports in the middle of a complex web of energy flows and, in order for such strategies to be successfully implemented, terminal operators and port authorities have to be aware, as a minimum, of how energy is used in the port and where it is coming from (Acciaro, 2013). A coordinated approach can result in energy cost savings and can even provide a new source of business for the participating ports. Within the shipping and port industry,
which has experienced decades of sustained growth of throughput and overall expansion, energy management was not seen to be a particularly urgent issue until quite recently. However, in view of the current economic challenges, a changing geography and structure of trade, and a greater awareness and demand for sustainable logistics, the topic of energy efficiency has come to the forefront of academic and industry discussions.
This issue of the Bulletin analyses the state of the art of energy consumption in Latin American countries in an effort to shed light on current and future challenges and opportunities relating to the implementation of energyefficiency strategies and to the further development of benchmarking tools to support sustainable terminal operations. This issue also seeks to build on the analyses presented in Issue No. 329 of the Bulletin and to explore new challenges in the geography of transport
The International Energy Agency (IEA) (2016) has reported that the transport sector’s rate of energy consumption has been rising at an annual average rate of 1.4%. Most of this increase in total transport energy consumption is correlated with economic growth, higher standards of living and the consequent upswing in the demand for personal mobility. Petroleum and other liquid fuels accounted for 96% of all fuel consumption in 2014. Motor petrol (or motor gasoline, as it is known in North America) remains the largest single transport fuel input, representing 39% of the total,
with diesel coming in a close second at 36% as of 2012. Electricity still accounts for a much smaller percentage of the world’s transportation fuel use, although its importance in passenger rail transportation is on the rise. The proportion of the world’s energy use that is covered by mandatory energy-efficiency regulations has almost doubled over the past decade, climbing from 14% in 2005 to 27% in 2014. Still, the current pace of progress in this respect is only about two thirds of what is needed in order to double the global growth rate in energy efficiency. Among end-use sectors, industry was the largest contributor to reduced energy intensity, followed closely by transportation.
As crucial hubs in the global trading system, ports are an important link in the global logistics chain in which energy-efficiency potentials have yet to be taken advantage of. Thus, in the context of Sustainable Development Goal 7, ports can do their part to help double the global rate of increase in energy efficiency and can participate in international cooperation efforts to facilitate access to clean energy technology, including renewable energy and energy-efficient technologies. Climate change poses the single biggest threat to development, and its widespread, unprecedented impacts place a disproportionately heavy burden on the poorest and most vulnerable. Urgent action to combat climate change and minimize its disruptions is integral to the successful implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. (United Nations, 2016). Sustainable Development Goal 9 encompasses three important aspects of sustainable development: infrastructure, industrialization and innovation. Infrastructure provides the basic physical systems and structures essential to the operation of a society or enterprise. Industrialization drives economic growth, creates job opportunities and thereby reduces income poverty. Innovation advances the technological capabilities of industrial sectors and prompts the development of new skills.
strategies and planning, as these efforts help to raise awareness and build human and institutional capacity for climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning. Furthermore, the development of baseline indicators opens the way for the creation of mechanisms for building capacity for effective climate-change-related planning and management in least developed countries and small island developing States. Ports are an important component of physical infrastructure and facilitate over 80% of global freight flows. Port operations are highly energy-intensive activities and thus should play an integral part in the development of high-quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure that can support future economic development. Upgrading and retrofitting port infrastructure to make it sustainable will increase resource-use efficiency and boost the adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes. In consequence, a discussion on energy consumption and efficiency and on monitoring and best-practice evaluation and implementation can make a meaningful contribution to efforts to attain at least three of the Sustainable Development Goals.
energy consumption pattern in detail. Issue No. 329 of the FAL Bulletin benchmarked energy consumption in 13 container terminals in Latin America using an activity-based cost approach developed by Lin et al. (2001). This approach makes it possible to: (a) determine how much energy is being consumed in specific areas of operation; and (b) allocate a given level of energy consumption to a specific unit within a process or process cluster. In Issue No. 329, the following process clusters within a container terminal were identified: quay cranes, lighting, buildings, cooling (reefer containers), horizontal container handling and “other” (cf. Froese and Toeter, 2013). While it was possible to assign levels of energy consumption to different process clusters in the case of electricity,
a certain share of energy consumption remained undefined, and the data were not detailed enough to permit the assignment of fossil fuel consumption levels to the corresponding process clusters. As of now, no integrated approach or recognized set of indicators has been developed for container terminals. A main limitation of existing research is the absence of reliable,
detailed data. The existing literature generally relies on average and standard consumption figures to estimate overall energy consumption or to derive emission estimates (Geerlings and van Duin, 2011). The issue of energy consumption in terminals can be addressed from two different perspectives: (a) an aggregate approach, in which containers are seen as consuming energy while being handled; and (b) one in which equipment is seen as consuming energy while handling containers. The latter comes closer to the idea of an activity-based approach (Lin et al., 2001; Wilmsmeier et al., 2013). The different types of equipment being operated in a terminal are a relevant factor if the activity-based approach is being used. Diagram 1 depicts the framework for the research on energy consumption in container terminals presented in this issue of the FAL Bulletin.
B. Output indicators
An analysis of energy consumption requires a detailed
understanding of the portions of a terminal’s energy bill
represented by the different container types (Wilmsmeier
et al., 2014). To be able to identify the energy consumption
levels and profiles of different container types, an activitybased cost approach is recommended because this
approach makes it possible to: (a) determine what area
of operation is consuming what amount of energy; and
(b) establish a set of detailed indicators.
The following energy activity clusters have been
considered here: vertical operations (quay cranes),
horizontal operations (e.g. reach-stacker (RS) cranes,
rubber-tyred gantry (RTG) cranes, rail-mounted gangry
(RMG) cranes, etc.), lighting, buildings and cooling
(reefers). Time is another important factor when it
comes to measuring energy consumption and setting
indicators for energy efficiency because of: (a) the
seasonality of certain types of traffic (e.g. reefers);
(b) variations in the dwell time of different container
types (e.g. import and export containers); and (c) ship
calling patterns, all which can trigger significant variations
and peaks in energy consumption.
Even though the literature on energy consumption in
container terminals is quite limited, some work has been
done on the energy consumption of specific types of cargo
handling equipment from an operational perspective. This
research indicates that busbar-powered RTGs equipped
with online braking can reduce energy consumption by
up to 60% (Yang, Chang and Wei-Min, 2013). In general,
however, the researchers who have worked in this area do
not share a systemic view of energy consumption beyond
the effect of technical advancement. One example is the
findings reported on the impact of electric rubber-tyred
gantries on green port performance (Yang, Chang and
Wei-Min, 2013).
Containers are most commonly referred to in a rather
general way in the literature. When it comes to the
consideration of containers as a variable, however, it has
to be recognized that containers are multi-dimensional
variables, since one container may have multiple
properties. These properties include: full/empty, length,
height, trade direction and type of container (Monios
and Wilmsmeier, 2013). Given the different dimensions of
the variable “container”, the operational processes and
related activities conducted in a terminal differ as well.
Empty containers are less time-critical than full containers,
which is reflected in their dwell times (Merckx, 2005).
Likewise, reefer containers tend to have a significantly
shorter dwell time than other containers.
No comments