Activity 1: Mapping of Port Container Terminal Energy Profile GREENCRANES

Transcription

1 Activity 1: Mapping of Port Container Terminal Energy Profile Speaker: José Andrés Giménez GREENCRANES GREEN Technologies and Eco-Efficient Alternatives for CRANES and Operations at Port Container Terminals Project code: 2011-EU S TEN-T Annual Call 2011 Intermediate InfoDay Valencia, 29 th May 2013 Consortium:

2 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY HOW MUCH ENERGY? WHERE IS THE ENERGY? 3. CARBON FOOTPRINT 4. CONCLUSIONS Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 2

3 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY HOW MUCH ENERGY? WHERE IS THE ENERGY? 3. CARBON FOOTPRINT 4. CONCLUSIONS Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 3

4 Introduction Port Container Terminals have been studied with the aim of obtaining their energy profiles and the global carbon footprint produced, taking into account the activities carried out by the whole group of machinery and equipment involved. The aim is to characterise PCTs energy profiles by means of the evaluation of the energy performance of their activities and processes, thus quantifying their impact in terms of GHG emissions. How much energy is consumed? Where is the energy consumed???? Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 4

5 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY HOW MUCH ENERGY? WHERE IS THE ENERGY? 3. CARBON FOOTPRINT 4. CONCLUSIONS Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 5

6 Methodology Study developed taking as a reference the years 2011 and 2012 Classification of port machinery and equipment considering technical specifications Electrical consumption by type of machine and equipment Fuel consumption by type of machine and equipment Calculation of associated Green-House Gas Emissions (GHG) derived from electrical and fuel consumption expressed in CO 2eq Activity 1: Energy Profile Base Scenario Activity 2: Evaluation of Alternatives How much can we improve the base scenario? Activity 3: Pilots and Demonstrations Feasibility Demonstration Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 6

7 Methodology Container Terminal Machinery and Equipment Ship-to-Shore Crane Reefer Containers Offices Lightning Rubber Tyred Gantry Crane (RTG) Terminal Tractor Reach Stacker Empty Forklift Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 7

8 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY HOW MUCH ENERGY? WHERE IS THE ENERGY? 3. CARBON FOOTPRINT 4. CONCLUSIONS Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 8

9 How Much Energy? Electrical Consumption Activity 1. Mapping of Port Container Terminals Energy Profile 12,522,629 kwh (43%) 11,006,280 kwh (37%) 80% 4,801,013 kwh (15%) 1,815,477 kwh (5%) 30,145,399 kwh / year (30.1 GWh / year) X 3,000 (10,000 kwh / year) Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 9

10 How Much Energy? Fuel Consumption Activity 1. Mapping of Port Container Terminals Energy Profile 4,049,138 L (58%) 2,245,147 L (32%) 90% 611,460 L (9%) 80,819 L (1%) 6,986,564 L / year X 5,000 (1,300 L / year) Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 10

11 How Much Energy? Energy Efficiency vs. Operations How does energy efficiency affect costs in port operations? 2,60 L / mov 1,18 L / mov 685,000 L 685,000 1,100, ,799 mov 755,538 mov RTG A.1 RTG A.2 RTG B.1 RTG B.2 RTG C.1 RTG C.2 Energy efficiency criteria can be considered as one more decision-making instrument within the general operative model of TPCs Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 11

12 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY HOW MUCH ENERGY? WHERE IS THE ENERGY? 3. CARBON FOOTPRINT 4. CONCLUSIONS Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 12

13 26B 26A Activity 1. Mapping of Port Container Terminals Energy Profile Where is the Energy? > Movements Movements TOS < Movements 1F 2F 3F 4F 5F 6F 7F 8F 9F 10F 1E 2E 3E 4E 5E 6E 7E 8E 9E 10E 11E 12E 13E 14E 15E 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7D 8D 9D 10D 11D 12D 13D 14D 15D 1C 2C 3C 4C 5C 6C 7C 8C 9C 10C 11C 12C 13C 14C 15C 1B 2B 3B 4B 5B 6B 7B 8B 9B 10B 11B 12B 13B 14B 15B 1A 2A 3A 4A 5A 6A 7A 8A 9A 10A 11A 12A 13A 14A 15A 22B 22A 23B 23A 24A 24B 29A Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 13

14 26B 26A Activity 1. Mapping of Port Container Terminals Energy Profile Where is the Energy? FC RTG > Movements KWh ( L / mov) j i mov RTG i (%) j fc RTG i ( L / mov) Movements KWh < Movements KWh 1F 2F 3F 4F 5F 6F 7F 8F 9F 10F 1E 2E 3E 4E 5E 6E 7E 8E 9E 10E 11E 12E 13E 14E 15E 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7D 8D 9D 10D 11D 12D 13D 14D 15D 1C 2C 3C 4C 5C 6C 7C 8C 9C 10C 11C 12C 13C 14C 15C 1B 2B 3B 4B 5B 6B 7B 8B 9B 10B 11B 12B 13B 14B 15B 1A 2A 3A 4A 5A 6A 7A 8A 9A 10A 11A 12A 13A 14A 15A 22B 22A 23B 23A 24A 24B 29A Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 14

15 26B 26A Activity 1. Mapping of Port Container Terminals Energy Profile Where is the Energy? > KWh KWh < KWh 1F 2F 3F 4F 5F 6F 7F 8F 9F 10 F 1E 2E 3E 4E 5E 6E 7E 8E 9E 10E 11E 12E 13E 14E 15 E 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7D 8D 9D 10D 11D 12D 13D 14D 15D 1C 2C 3C 4C 5C 6C 7C 8C 9C 10C 11C 12C 13C 14C 15C 1B 2B 3B 4B 5B 6B 7B 8B 9B 10B 11B 12B 13B 14B 15B 1A 2A 3A 4A 5A 6A 7A 8A 9A 10A 11A 12A 13A 14A 15A 22B 22A 23B 23A 24A 24B 29 A Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 15

16 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY HOW MUCH ENERGY? WHERE IS THE ENERGY? 3. CARBON FOOTPRINT 4. CONCLUSIONS Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 16

17 Carbon Footprint Carbon Footprint is a useful indicator for all kinds of organizations to measure their environmental impact in terms of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) Energy Consumption CO 2 Emissions CO 2eq Emissions Carbon Footprint Emissions Coefficients CH 4 and N 2 O Production Kg. CO 2eq / TEU Electricity Fuel Port (Country) g. CO2 / KWh Tonne CO2 / Tep Koper (Slovenia) 550 3,07 Livorno (Italy) 634 2,96 Valencia (Spain) 335 3,06 Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 17

18 Carbon Footprint Calculation. Results Activity 1. Mapping of Port Container Terminals Energy Profile 18,00 Carbon Footprint Electricity and Fuel Kg. CO 2eq / TEU 16,00 14,00 12,00 10,00 8,00 6,00 4,00 2,00 0, * Kg. CO2eq from Electricity Kg. CO2eq from Fuel TOTALS NCTV, TDT AND KOPER RTGs 35% Terminal Tractors 22% Reefer Containers 13% 70% Carbon Footprint (Electricity) 4.15 Kg CO2eq / TEU Carbon Footprint (Fuel) 7.57 Kg CO2eq / TEU 11.7 Kg CO 2eq / TEU Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 18

19 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY HOW MUCH ENERGY? WHERE IS THE ENERGY? 3. CARBON FOOTPRINT 4. CONCLUSIONS Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 19

20 Conclusions Port Container Terminals are huge energy consumers, especially on those energy sources based on fossil fuels. Average values show a yearly fuel consumption of nearly 7 million fuel litres (in form of diesel oil) and 30 GWh of electricity consumption including the three participant terminals. From the economic point of view, the general increase of energy prices is affecting port installations, representing every day more a significant cost which reduces their competitiveness. In terms of environmental impact, the use of the current fuels in a non-stop operative model generates a great amount of GHG emissions, with an estimation of nearly 25,000 CO 2eq tonnes derived from the use of diesel oil at the three participant PCTs in Concerning social impact, port installations are usually located near populated cities and urban areas, especially in the Mediterranean. Port operations affects nearby population as direct GHG emissions (derived from diesel oil) are locally deployed, not only CO 2, but also other pollutant and toxic gases like N 2 O, Sulphur compounds and suspension particles. Efforts to reduce fuel consumption and GHG emissions produced by RTGs, yard tractors and reach stackers are strongly recommended. Green Technologies and Eco-efficient Alternatives for Cranes and Operations at Port Container Terminals Page 20

21 For more information: THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION! GREENCRANES, AN ACTION DEVELOPED THANKS TO: Consortium: