Measuring in-use ship emissions with international and U.S. federal methods

Regulatory agencies have shifted their emphasis from measuring emissions during certification cycles to measuring emissions during actual use. Emission measurements in this research were made from two different large ships at sea to compare the Simplified Measurement Method (SMM) compliant with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) NOx Technical Code to the Portable Emission Measurement Systems (PEMS) compliant with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1065 for on-road emission testing. Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon dioxide (CO2), and carbon monoxide (CO) were measured at load points specified by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to compare the two measurement methods. The average percentage errors calculated for PEMS measurements were 6.5%, 0.6%, and 357% for NOx , CO2, and CO, respectively. The NOx percentage error of 6.5% corresponds to a 0.22 to 1.11 g/kW-hr error in moving from Tier III (3.4 g/kW-hr) to Tier I (17.0 g/kW-hr) emission limits. Emission factors (EFs) of NOx and CO2 measured via SMM were comparable to other studies and regulatory agencies estimates. However, EFPM2.5 for this study was up to 26% higher than that currently used by regulatory agencies. The PM2.5 was comprised predominantly of hydrated sulfate (70–95%), followed by organic carbon (11–14%), ash (6–11%), and elemental carbon (0.4–0.8%). Implications This research provides direct comparison between the International Maritime Organization and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reference methods for quantifying in-use emissions from ships. This research provides correlations for NOx, CO2, and CO measured by a PEMS unit (certified by U.S. EPA for on-road testing) against IMO's Simplified Measurement Method for on-board certification. It substantiates the measurements of NOx by PEMS and quantifies measurement error. This study also provides in-use modal and overall weighted emission factors of gaseous (NOx, CO, CO2, total hydrocarbons [THC], and SO2) and particulate pollutants from the main engine of a container ship, which are helpful in the development of emission inventory.

[1]  James J. Corbett,et al.  Effects of ship emissions on sulphur cycling and radiative climate forcing over the ocean , 1999, Nature.

[2]  Jan S Peterson,et al.  U.s. Code of Federal Regulations. , 2003, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[3]  Carl Ensfield,et al.  Evaluation and comparison of portable emissions measurement systems and federal reference methods for emissions from a back-up generator and a diesel truck operated on a chassis dynamometer. , 2007, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  J. Troe,et al.  UV absorption study of the dissociation of SO2 and SO in shock waves , 1984 .

[5]  Per Capita,et al.  About the authors , 1995, Machine Vision and Applications.

[6]  Zang-Ho Shon,et al.  Influence of ship emissions on ozone concentrations around coastal areas during summer season , 2010 .

[7]  Juha Vattulainen,et al.  Experimental Determination of SO2, C2H2, and O2 UV Absorption Cross Sections at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures , 1997 .

[8]  Gabriel Somesfalean,et al.  Concentration evaluation method using broadband absorption spectroscopy for sulfur dioxide monitoring , 2006 .

[9]  Raymond S. Nickerson,et al.  Protection of the Environment , 2008 .

[10]  J J Corbett,et al.  Mitigating the health impacts of pollution from oceangoing shipping: an assessment of low-sulfur fuel mandates. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[11]  John V. Crable and David G. Taylor,et al.  NIOSH manual of analytical methods , 2013 .

[12]  A. Nenes,et al.  ISORROPIA: A New Thermodynamic Equilibrium Model for Multiphase Multicomponent Inorganic Aerosols , 1998 .

[13]  Axel Lauer,et al.  Assessment of near-future policy instruments for oceangoing shipping: impact on atmospheric aerosol burdens and the earth's radiation budget. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[14]  A. Syty.  Determination of sulfur dioxide by ultraviolet absorption spectrometry , 1973 .

[15]  J Wayne Miller,et al.  Primary particulate matter from ocean-going engines in the Southern California Air Basin. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[16]  Christopher A. Laroo,et al.  On-road comparison of a portable emission measurement system with a mobile reference laboratory for a heavy-duty diesel vehicle , 2009 .

[17]  P Nelson,et al.  Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships , 1999 .

[18]  M. Key.  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; occupational exposure to inorganic lead: request for comments and information; republication--NIOSH. Request for comments and information relevant to occupational exposure to inorganic lead. , 1997, Federal register.

[19]  A. Nenes,et al.  ISORROPIA II: a computationally efficient thermodynamic equilibrium model for K + –Ca 2+ –Mg 2+ –NH 4 + –Na + –SO 4 2− –NO 3 − –Cl − –H 2 O aerosols , 2007 .

[20]  Sune Svanberg,et al.  All-diode-laser ultraviolet absorption spectroscopy for sulfur dioxide detection , 2005 .

[21]  David R. Cocker,et al.  Emissions from main propulsion engine on container ship at sea , 2010 .

[22]  David R. Cocker,et al.  In-use gaseous and particulate matter emissions from a modern ocean going container vessel , 2008 .

[23]  J Wayne Miller,et al.  Benefits of two mitigation strategies for container vessels: cleaner engines and cleaner fuels. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[24]  K. R. Arrigo,et al.  Impacts of Atmospheric Anthropogenic Nitrogen on the Open Ocean , 2008, Science.