Endresen Et Al-2007-Journal of Geophysical Research - Atmospheres (1984-2012)

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 112, D12301, doi:10.
1029/2006JD007630, 2007
A historical reconstruction of ships fuel consumption and emissions

yvind Endresen,1 Eirik Srgard,2 Hanna Lee Behrens,1 Per Olaf Brett,1
and Ivar S. A. Isaksen3
Received 7 June 2006; revised 10 February 2007; accepted 29 March 2007; published 16 June 2007.
[1] Shipping activity has increased considerably over the last century and currently
represents a significant contribution to the global emissions of pollutants and greenhouse

gases. Despite this, information about the historical development of fuel consumption
and emissions is generally limited, with little data published pre-1950 and large deviations
reported for estimates covering the last 3 decades. To better understand the historical
development in ship emissions and the uncertainties associated with the estimates,
we present fuel-based CO2 and SO2 emission inventories from 1925 up to 2002 and
activity-based estimates from 1970 up to 2000. The global CO2 emissions from ships in
1925 have been estimated to 229 Tg (CO2), growing to about 634 Tg (CO2) in 2002. The
corresponding SO2 emissions are about 2.5 Tg (SO2) and 8.5 Tg (SO2), respectively.
Our activity-based estimates of fuel consumption from 1970 to 2000, covering all
oceangoing civil ships above or equal to 100 gross tonnage (GT), are lower compared to
previous activity-based studies. We have applied a more detailed model approach,
which includes variation in the demand for sea transport, as well as operational and
technological changes of the past. This study concludes that the main reason for the large
deviations found in reported inventories is the applied number of days at sea. Moreover,
our modeling indicates that the ship size and the degree of utilization of the fleet,
combined with the shift to diesel engines, have been the major factors determining yearly
fuel consumption. Interestingly, the model results from around 1973 suggest that the fleet
growth is not necessarily followed by increased fuel consumption, as technical and
operational characteristics have changed. Results from this study indicate that reported
sales over the last 3 decades seems not to be significantly underreported as previous
simplified activity-based studies have suggested. The results confirm our previously
reported modeling estimates for year 2000. Previous activity-based studies have not
considered ships less than 100 GT (e.g., today some 1.3 million fishing vessels), and we
suggest that this fleet could account for an important part of the total fuel consumption
(10%).
Citation: Endresen, ., E. Srgard, H. L. Behrens, P. O. Brett, and I. S. A. Isaksen (2007), A historical reconstruction of ships fuel
consumption and emissions, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D12301, doi:10.1029/2006JD007630.
1. Introduction
[2] Over the last 100 years the total fuel consumption and
emissions by the oceangoing civil world fleet has significantly increased as the fleet expanded by 72,000 motor
ships to a total of 88,000, with a corresponding increase in
tonnage from 22.4 to 558 million gross tonnage (GT)
(Lloyds Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1964
(year 1900), and world fleet statistics and statistical tables,
2000). This growth has been driven by increased demand
for passenger and cargo transport, with 300 Mt cargo
1
2
3
Det Norske Veritas, Hvik, Norway.

Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Bod, Norway.
Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Copyright 2007 by the American Geophysical Union.

0148-0227/07/2006JD007630
transported in 1920 [Stopford, 1997] and 5,400 Mt in

2000 [Fearnleys, 2002]. There is a significant delay in
building up the concentrations of some of the greenhouse
gases (e.g., CO2) and in the climate impact. Knowledge on
how ship emissions have developed over time is required to
quantify climate effects and trends, and to implement
effective regulations. Only limited information has been
published relatively to the historical development of fuel
consumption and emissions by the world fleet, and even for
the last 3 decades the estimates being presented differing
significantly.
[3] Smith et al. [2004] have reported an emission inventory covering the period before 1950. The validity of these
estimates may be questioned as the annual coal consumption figures appear to be substantially lower than reported in
the literature (coal used for shipping purposes in 1915 was
taken to be only 80 Kt instead of the 80 Mt that was
published by Annin [1920]). Eyring et al. [2005] have
D12301
1 of 17
D12301
ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION
reported simplified activity-based inventories from 1950 up

to 1992. After 1992, different approaches and assumptions
have been applied to estimate global shipping emissions,
but significant differences are apparent among these
reported emissions inventories. This study has therefore
established an historical time series of marine fuel sales to
oceangoing ships from 1925 to 2002, and used a fuel-based
approach to estimate the emissions of CO2 and SO2.
[4] It is an ongoing scientific debate regarding the reliability of marine bunker sale statistics to be used for
estimates of fuel-based ship emissions [Corbett and Koehler,
2003, 2004; Eyring et al., 2005; Endresen et al., 2003,
2004, 2005]. Activity-based estimates reported by Corbett
and Koehler [2003] and Eyring et al. [2005] are significantly higher compared to historical sales data covering the
last decades. Moreover, the variation over time between
reported sales and estimated consumption does not correspond. It has been argued that underreporting of sales
explains the large differences [Corbett and Koehler, 2003;
Eyring et al., 2005]. An alternative explanation could be
that changes in structure, technology and activity of the
expanding world fleet have to be better captured in the
activity-based models. It has recently been questioned if
the assumed activity level for the fleet is representative
[Endresen et al., 2004], and especially for medium and
smaller ships (which dominate by number). This study
argues that any activity-based approach must take into
account variation in the demand for sea transport and
operational and technical changes over the years, to better
represent the real fuel consumption and corresponding
emissions. To better examine these factors this work has
established an improved activity-based modeling approach
to estimate fuel consumption for the oceangoing civil world
fleet larger or equal to 100 GT. This model is applied to the
period 1970 to 2000, and limited to the main engines of the
nonmilitary fleet. The estimated fuel consumption is then
compared with historical marine sales data, to investigate if
marine sales data reported over the last 30 years are
representative and could be used as proper bases for
emissions estimates.
[5] In this study we first present a description and discussion of the developed CO2 and SO2 emissions inventories
for the period 1925 to 2002 (section 2). We describe the
activity-based model developed, the input data applied and
the modeled fuel consumption for the last 3 decades in
section 3. Section 4 compares the modeled fuel consumption
for the last 3 decades with marine sales data. In section 5,
major findings are summarized and discussed.
2. Fuel-Based Emissions Inventory: 19252002

[6] This section presents estimates from 1925 up to 2002
of global CO2 and SO2 emissions from oceangoing civil
ships by combining estimates for marine fuel sales of coal
and oils with their respective fuel-based emissions factors.
2.1. Methodology
[7] Detailed methodologies for constructing ship emission inventories based on fuel sales have been published by
the Atmospheric Emission Inventory Guidebook [European
Monitoring Evaluation Program/Core Inventory of Air
D12301
Emissions (EMEP/CORINAIR), 2002]. The emissions are

calculated by means of
Eg; j Sj eg; j ;
where Eg,j denotes the emissions of individual exhaust

compound g (g = 1 = CO2, g = 2 = SO2) from burning fuel
type j ( j = 1 = diesel, j = 2 = heavy fuel, j = 3 = coal),
kg emissions/year; Sj denotes the total sales of fuel type j,
kg fuel/year; and eg,j denotes the emission factor for exhaust
compound g in relation to fuel type j, kg emissions/kg fuel.
[8] The emission estimates presented in this study are
based on bunker sales data (marine oil and coal) obtained
from several sources (section 2.2), and average fuel-based
emission factors assumed representative for the different
time periods (section 2.3).
2.2. Marine Sales
[9] Data exists for sales of fuel to foreign bound ships
from 1925 to 1970, but assumptions have to be made for
the national sales. Data for the total marine sale exists
from 1971 up to 2002, except for the fishing fleet for
which separate sale estimates are made. The sources,
assumptions and inventories are presented below for two
periods (1) 1925 1970 and (2) 1971 2002. The sales
figures given in bold in Table 1 are used to estimate the
emissions for the period. Note that no data is available for
the World War II period.
2.2.1. Period I: 1925 1970
[10] The international marine sale figures from 1925 up to
1970 are based on coal and oil statistics reported by
Darmstadter et al. [1971] and United Nations (UN)
[1957 1979]. These data cover sales to foreign bound ships
and aircrafts, irrespective of flag [Darmstadter et al., 1971;
UN, 1957 1979]. It is expected that sales to oceangoing
military vessels in international operations are included in
the presented inventory. However, no data is available for
oceangoing military vessels in national services. This sale is
small compared to sales to the nonmilitary fleet, according
to estimates reported by Endresen et al. [2003], and is not
included in this work. As national fuel sales to the nonmilitary fleet are not included, the total oil and coal sale for this
period is estimated on the basis of ratios between national
sales versus international, which can be established for
years when data is available. The calculated average ratio
between IEA sales figures of national bunker (category:
internal navigation) and international bunker (category:
international marine bunkers) figures for the period 1971
to 2002 is calculated to be 0.27 (i.e., national sales is on
average 27% of the international sales). However, the
estimated national sales do not include the fishing fleet as
IEA reports this sale under the agriculture category for
this period. A separate estimate for the fishing fleet is given
in section 2.2.2 and indicates that the fishing fleet consumes
some 10% of the total sales. Assuming that these ratios also
are representative for the period 1925 to 1970, the total sale
(Total) is calculated by means of
Total Int National Fishing Int 0:27 Int 0:1 Total:
2
2 of 17
D12301
D12301
Table 1. Reported Worldwide Marine Sales of International Marine Bunkers (Oil and Coal) for the Period 1925 2000 and Estimated
SO2 and CO2 Emissions (Equation (1))a
Year
1925
1929
1933
1937
1938
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
International
Bunkers as
Coal,b Mt
International
Bunkers as
Oil, Mt
International
Bunkers as
Coal,b Mt
UN
EWE
UN
41.6
41.0
27.8
30.7
28.0
75
Estimated
Emissions, Tg
Total
Estimated Sales
as Oil,d Mt
SO2
CO2
17.4
21.9
19.1
23.6
21.4
66.0
71.8
54.7
63.9
58.1
2.5
2.8
2.2
2.6
2.4
229
247
187
217
198
48.5
3.8
3.7
3.8
3.9
4.0
4.4
4.8
5.2
5.0
4.9
5.5
6.0
6.1
6.3
6.9
261
248
255
259
262
289
315
336
319
317
350
381
385
403
439
IEAc
EWE
National
Sales, Mt
68
2.2
1.5
1.2
1.1
1.2
47.9
50.7
52.9
53.9
60.3
66.7
72.0
68.9
69.1
76.9
84.4
85.5
89.6
97.5
81.2
87.4
90.3
92.8
101.6
80.6
76.7
79.3
80.8
81.7
90.4
98.6
105.4
100.1
99.7
110.1
120.2
121.4
127.1
138.4
1.2
101.6
104.2
144.1
7.2
457
6.9
7.4
7.9
7.2
7.6
7.0
7.2
7.6
438
472
500
459
480
497
513
542
7.3
6.7
6.9
6.8
6.7
7.0
5.8
6.9
7.5
8.7
8.5
521
487
501
496
498
504
439
523
552
638
634
12.2
9.16
7.76
6.16
5.70
5.35
4.47
3.80
2.86
2.22
1.60
1.08
0.79
0.70
0.79
8.0
7.2
4.5
1965
0.70
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
0.71
0.51
0.31
0.33
0.34
0.23
0.20
0.16
97.3
105.0
111.6
102.4
107.1
112.8
114.2
121.3
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2002
0.11
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
115.1
101.5
102.5
95.9
95.7
59.9
67.0
77.9
110.3
115.5
122.0
30.6
30.0
31.7
138.0
148.7
157.8
144.8
151.5
156.8
161.9
170.9
113.4
105.0
108.6
108.5
109.2
110.4
93.9
116.9
129.9
150.2
149.0
34.3
33.2
33.5
32.2
32.2
32.7
30.7
31.6
26.8
30.8
30.9
164.2
153.6
157.9
156.4
157.1
159.0
138.5
165.0
174.2
201.2
199.9
a
The sales data are reported by Darmstadter et al. [1971], UN [1957 1979], and IEA [1971 2002]. The sales figures given in bold are used to estimate
the emissions for the period.
b
Coal equivalents, based on UN [1957 1979] for 1960.
c
Only the category international bunkers.
d
Oil equivalents, using 1/1.416 as conversion factor from coal to oil equivalents [UN, 1998].
[11] Table 1 shows the estimated total figures for the

period 1925 up to 1970, as well as the reported international
sales (Int) used as input to equation (2).
2.2.2. Period II: 1971 2002
[12] Data for the total marine fuel sales exists for 1971 up
to 2002, but this does not include the fishing fleet. The
applied sales figures from 1971 up to 2002 are based on oil
statistics reported by International Energy Agency (IEA)
[1971 2002]. Our data is based on IEA categories international marine bunkers and internal navigation. The
sales to oceangoing military vessels are expected to be
included, as IEA defines the international marine bunkers
to cover those quantities delivered to seagoing ships of all
flags, including warships [IEA, 2001]. The fishing fleet sale
is reported in the IEA category agriculture [IEA, 2001]. It

is not possible to extract sales to fishing vessels from this
overall category and these sales figures are therefore estimated from the 34,379 MW main engine power that was
reported to be installed in the 1.3 million decked fishing
vessels in 1998 [Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO), 2006a]. This represents nearly
twice the power reported by Corbett and Koehler [2003]
(18,474 MW) for the fishing fleet larger than 100 GT, and
about 13% of the total main engine power of the oceangoing
civil world fleet larger than 100 GT. We may assume that
the main engine power installed is roughly proportional
with the sales to the fishing fleet. The entire fishing fleet
consumption in 1998 is then calculated to be of the order
3 of 17
D12301
D12301
Figure 1. Development of the world fleet of oceangoing civil vessels above or equal 100 GT and
transport work, 1900 2000 (not including the military fleet). (left) Development of size and tonnage
(Lloyds Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1964 (year 1900 1964), and world fleet statistics and
statistical tables, 1992 (year 1965 1992), 1995 (year 1993 1995) and 2000 (year 1996 and 2000).
(right) Development of average size (including also noncargo ships) and transport work (Btm, billion
tonne-miles) [Stopford, 1997; Fearnleys, 2002]. Note that no data are available for World War II.
10% of the total sales by assuming less days at sea for the
fishing fleet compared to the cargo ships [Endresen et al.,
2004] and by taking into account that some of the reported
IEA sales include military vessels. This study assumes that
the estimated 10% consumption by the entire fishing fleet in
1998 is representative for the period 1925 2002. Lloyds
fleet data for the years 1970 and 2000 shows little change in
the relative fraction by numbers of fishing vessels, but the
relative tonnage fraction was higher and the average vessel
size was lower in 1970 than in 2000. Global fishing fleet
data up to 1970 is not available, but the fish catch
statistics indirectly support our assumption. Fish catches
in 1938, 1950, 1970 and 2000 within marine waters was
19.3 Mt (reported by FAO, figures given by Aschehougs
Konversasjonsleksikon [1956]), 17.3 Mt, 59 Mt and 88 Mt
[FAO, 2006b], respectively and this development corresponds well with the total fleet development over this period
(Figure 1). On the basis of this assumption, the total sale
(Total) is calculated by equation (2). Table 1 shows the
estimated total figures for the period 1971 to 2002, as well
as the reported international (Int) and national (National)
IEA sales data used as input to equation (2).
2.2.3. Discussion of the Data Sources
[13] We find a good match between international oil fuel
sales reported by Darmstadter et al. [1971] and IEA [1971
2002] with reference to 1965 and 1971, respectively. The
match between international oil fuel sales reported by UN
and IEA is generally good for the period 1971 to 1978, and
by UN and EWE from 1953 to 1965 (Table 1). However,
the 1977 and 1978 sales reported by UN are lower than IEA
data. The IEA data does not include fuel sales to aviation,
indicating that for this time period the reported fuel sales to
aircraft is likely to be insignificant in both the EWE and the
UN data. This is supported by the fact that airplanes do not
use coal or heavy fuel oils, and that EWE states that the
reporting of aviation fuel sales appear to be incomplete.
Thus we assume that the aviation fuel included in UN and
EWE data is small or negligible, and that the sources give
representative data for sale to international shipping. It is
important to recognize that IEA and UN define international
bunker differently. UN includes only sales to foreign bound

ships, while IEA defines the international marine bunkers
to cover those quantities delivered to seagoing ships of all
flags, including warships [IEA, 2001]. The good match
between international bunker sales reported by UN and
IEA indicates that the IEA international bunker category
mainly includes sale to ships in international operations.
2.3. Emission Factors for CO2 and SO2
[14] We have used a factor of 3.17 tonnes CO2 per tonne
oil consumed [EMEP/CORINAIR, 2002] and 2.58 tonnes
CO2 per tonne coal consumed to model emissions to air.
The emission factor for coal is calculated by combining
the molecular weight ratio of CO2 to C (44/12), with
0.704 tonnes C/tonne fuel [Society of Naval Architects
and Marine Engineers (SNAME), 1983]. The sulphur content varies over time, as pointed out by Endresen et al.
[2005]. We have assumed a global average of 2.5% sulphur
for marine oils up to 1970. From 1971 up to 1995, a global
average of 2.7% sulphur is assumed for heavy fuel and
0.5% for distillates. Global values reported by Endresen et
al. [2005] are applied from 1996 to 2001. For year 2002
global weighted sulphur contents (heavy fuel and distillates)
are applied [Endresen et al., 2005]. The globally weighted
average content for heavy fuels is found to be 5% higher
than the average (arithmetic mean) sulphur content commonly used. The likely reason for this is that larger bunker
stems are mainly of high-viscosity heavy fuel, which tends
to have higher sulphur values compared to lower-viscosity
fuels [Endresen et al., 2005]. Smith et al. [2004] reports a
sulphur content in coal of 1.1%, and we assume this value to
be representative for the entire period. The relation between
burned sulphur and generated SO2 is 2.0 kg SO2/kg S
(derived from the chemical equation [Lloyds Register of
Shipping, 1995; EMEP/CORINAIR, 2002]).
2.4. Modeling of Ship CO2 and SO2 Emissions
[15] Figure 2 shows the calculated CO2 and SO2 emissions (equation (2)) using the sale numbers (section 2.2) in
combination with the emission factors per tonne oil and coal
4 of 17
D12301
D12301
Figure 2. Development of CO2 and SO2 ship emissions,

based on estimated sales of marine fuel (Table 1), 1925
2002 (including the fishing and military fleet). Note that no
data are available for World War II.
consumed (section 2.3). Ship emissions are estimated at
229 Tg (CO2) in 1925, growing to about 634 Tg (CO2) in
2002. The corresponding SO2 emissions are 2.5 Tg (SO2)
and 8.5 Tg (SO2).
2.4.1. Factors Determining Development in Worldwide
Fuel Sales
[16] This study expects that the demand for sea transport,
technical and operational improvements as well as changes
in the fleet composition and size will explain most of the
development in fuel consumption by the fleet during the last
100 years. The coal sale peaked in 1913 (80 Mt coal is
reported by Annin [1920]), and dominated up to around
1920, as the fleet grew and steamers replaced sail ships
(Table 1) [Fletcher, 1997]. After 1920, the oil sale started to
dominate the emissions, as coal gradually was replaced by
marine oils, following the shift to diesel engines and oilfired steam boilers (Table 1) [Fletcher, 1997; Corbett,
2004]. Increased focus on fuel economy [Kofoed, 1926],
and a shift from coal to oil, combined with depressions in
both the world economy and the sea borne trade in the
Figure 3. Reported IEA [1971 2002] sales of marine oil

products (Mt) worldwide (including the IEA categories
international marine bunkers and internal navigation,
but not sales to the fishing fleet) versus world sea borne
trade (Mt cargo), 1971 2000 [Stopford, 1997; Fearnleys,
2002].
Figure 4. (top) Fleet data for cargo ships versus noncargo

ships, (middle) trade volumes of oil and dry bulk versus
average haul for oil tanker and dry bulk ships, and (bottom)
fleet productivity for cargo ships (tanker and cargo fleet)
versus non trading tonnage.
1930s [Stopford, 1997] (e.g., some 21% of the fleet was out
of service in 1932) partly explain the gradual reduction in
sales from around 1925 (Table 1) toward the Second World
War.
[17] Table 1 illustrates the significant increase in marine
sales after the Second World War and up to 1973. The main
reasons for this significant growth was the demand for sea
transportation, as the sea borne trade grew from around
500 Mt in 1949 to 3,233 Mt in 1973 [Stopford, 1997] (i.e.,
more than a sixfold increase). The growth in sea borne
transport was not reflected by a corresponding growth in
the fleet by vessel numbers (i.e., a twofold increase) or
tonnage (3.5-fold increase), indicating the influence of
modern, larger and more efficient cargo ships, with improved cargo handling in ports. For instance, the volume of
5 of 17
D12301
Figure 5. (top) Daily main engine fuel consumption,

(middle) installed main engine power, and (bottom)
operation speed for crude oil tankers with diesel engines
built in the periods 1956 to 1979 and 1980 to 2005 [LRF,
2005 2006].
cargo transported per tonne fuel sold significantly increased

in this period (see Figure 3). Note that the transports of
passengers, important up to around 1960, have had an
influence on the volume transported per tonne fuel sold.
We expect that passenger ships, the largest ship type in the
fleet up to around 1960 [Aschehougs og Gyldendals store
Norske Leksikon, 1999], account for some of the coal
consumption for this period and before. For instance, the
annual number of European emigrants transported to the US
increased from 350,000 around 1890 to around 1.4 million
in 1910 [Aschehougs Verdenshistorie, 1982]. The largest of
D12301
the old passenger liners such as the Olympic and the Titanic
burned on average 620 tonnes of coal per day at 21.7 knots
(Encyclopaedia Titanic, Daily fuel consumption for Titanic
and Olympic, available at http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.
org/discus/messages/5919/6509.html, visited 2005).
[18] The marine sales decreased from around 1973 to 1983,
followed by a nearly steady growth up to 2002 (Table 1 and
Figure 3). The main reasons for the decrease were the
slowdown in world sea borne trade (Figures 3 and 4), the
reduction in sailing distances (Figure 4), improved energy
efficiency of the fleet (e.g., phasing out of steam ships) and
a reduction in speed (and installed power) within some
dominating segments (Figure 5). World economy generates
most of the demand for sea transport, through either the
import of raw materials for manufacturing industry, or trade
in manufactured products [Stopford, 1997]. Figure 3 illustrates that development in bunker sale follow development
in seaborne trade with a correlation of r = 0.92 for the period
1975 to 2000. The correlation between transport work
(measured in tonne miles, Figure 1) and fuel sale for the
same period is even better (r = 0.97) (Figure 6, right),
indicating that the average length of haul, not surprisingly,
is affecting the sales. However, the correlation between
these variables is lower (r = 0.88) for the period 1971 to
2000 (Figure 6, left), indicating that other factors also were
important, especially between 1971 and 1975. For instance,
the transport work by the old passenger fleet is not included,
as well as effects of changed operational speed and shift to
diesel powered ships. The typical operational speed has also
varied widely over time, which significantly influences the
power requirements. For example Very Large Crude oil
Carriers typically operated at 10 knots when freight rates
were low in 1986, but this increased to 12 knots when the
rates were higher in 1989 [Stopford, 1997]. A reduction in
the average operating speed by 2 3 knots below design
speed may halve the daily fuel consumption of the cargo
fleet [Stopford, 1997; Wijnolst and Wergeland, 1997].
Lloyds fleet data [Lloyds Register Fairplay (LRF),
2005 2006] also indicates a reduction in installed power
and operational speeds for diesel powered crude oil carriers
built after 1980, followed by a significant reduction in fuel
consumption (Figure 5). The annual fuel consumption by
the fleet is also strongly affected by the installed propulsion
systems (engine, gear, shaft, propeller arrangement), as
modern diesel engines have about half the daily fuel
consumption compared to the old inefficient steam engines
with the same power outtake (Table 2). The shift to modern
marine diesel engines has typically occurred in periods with
high oil prices. For instance in 1961, there were still over
10,000 steam engine powered ships and 3,536 steam turbine
powered ships in operation (36% by number) (Lloyds
Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1961). By 1970
these numbers had decreased to 4,425 and 3,534 ships
respectively (15% by number) (Lloyds Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1970). By 1984 only 1,213 ships
were steam engine powered and 1,743 turbine powered
ships (4% by number) remained in service (Lloyds Register
of Shipping, statistical tables, 1984).
[19] The decrease in marine sales from around 1973 is
also explained by the decline in both sea borne transport of
oil (represented about 50% of the sea borne trade) and the
average sailing distances (Figure 4, middle). For instance,
6 of 17
D12301
D12301
Figure 6. Correlation between reported IEA [1971 2002] sales of marine oil products worldwide (Mt)
(including the IEA categories international marine bunkers and internal navigation, but not sales the
fishing fleet) and transport work (billion tonne miles (Bmt)) [Stopford, 1997; Fearnleys, 2002]. (left)
Period 1971 2000. The correlation is 0.88. (right) Period 1975 2000. The correlation is 0.97.
crude oil tankers reached a peak in productivity in 1972
(measured in tonne miles per deadweight (total carrying
capacity)). By 1985 this had nearly halved, and a few years
later it increased by 40% [Stopford, 1997]. More efficient
and specialized ships have also pushed their way into the
marked (e.g., the first deep sea cellular container ship in
1965 [Stopford, 1997]). The specialized ships have different
operational and technological characteristics, which results
in a particular logistic efficiency and energy and emission
profiles. For example, passenger ships have on average 2.2
main engines per ship, while the large passenger ships have
5.7 main engines per ship (greater than 100,000 GT) [LRF,
2005]. The civil world fleet have on average 1.3 main
engines per ship (above or equal to 100 GT) [LRF, 2005].
Engine capacity is not likely to be fully exploited at all
times, resulting in a lower fuel consumption in practice than
what might be expected on the basis of the power installed.
It is reasonable to expect that these effects are likely to have
different impacts on the total fleet within the period 1970
2000 and so we have included most of them in the fleet
modeling approach outlined in section 3.
Table 2. Reported Specific Fuel Consumption (SFC) for Different

Engine and Fuel Types
Reported SFC
Engine Type
Ib./S.H.P.ha
g/kWh
Diesel ships
Turbine
Oil
Coal
Steam engine
Oil
Coal
0.36b 0.47c
200 240d,e
0.75b
1.125b 2.4c,f
290 305d,e
0.9b
1.35b 1.54c
700d
a
Ib-pound = 0.45359237 kg; S.H.P., shaft horse power; 1 H.P = 0.7457 kW;
h, hour.
b
Le Mesurier and Humphreys [1935].
c
Baker [1915].
d
SNAME [1988], average figures.
e
Cooper [2002].
f
At low speeds, while for high speeds 1.2 Ib./S.H.P.hr.
2.4.2. Uncertainty
[20] The uncertainties in our estimated sales figures are
significant. Reliable inventories are probably best developed by comparing the different modeling approaches and
the different data sets that are available. This extends our
knowledge base and improves our understanding of the
governing processes. The inventory presented in this study
aims to cover sales in oil equivalents to all oceangoing ships
worldwide (Table 1). However, the marine sales for the
period 1925 to 1970 is likely to be slightly underestimated,
as sales to the oceangoing military fleet in national services
are not included. Our best estimate today is that the data
after 1970 should be within a range of 15%, while the data
before 1970 should be within a range of 25%. Underreporting by some countries has been [Endresen et al.,
2003] and may still be a problem. The national sales
reported by IEA from 1971 to 2002, also include sales to
smaller ships operating on inland waterways. This fleet is
reported to account for 42,000 engine powered ships
and 38,000 push-towed vessels in 1992 [Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development, 1997]. The engine
powered ships are small (300 Dwt) and represent around
2% of the cargo capacity of the oceangoing fleet. Thus it is
assumed that the sale to this segment is small.
[21] The variation in carbon content for marine oil products is small [Energy Information Administration, 1994].
The uncertainty in the average CO2 emission factor for
marine oils is less than 5%. This is in line with Skjlsvik et
al. [2000]. The assumed carbon content in coal for marine
purposes is reported to be 70.4% [SNAME, 1983]. We
expect the error in the assumed carbon content for coal to
be within 10%. Taking into account uncertainties in sales
numbers, it is expect that the uncertainties in the CO2
emissions after 1970 should be within a range of 20%,
while the estimates before 1970 should be within a range of
30%. Limited data exists for average sulphur content of
marine oil up to 1990. This is supported by the fact that the
use of residual fuel in marine diesel engines dates to the
1940s. Prior to the 1940s, residual fuels for navigational
purposes had been used by steam ships [Cullen, 1997]. We
7 of 17
D12301
Table 3. Input Data to Equation (3), Modeling Main Engine Fuel

Consumption for the World Fleet of Oceangoing Civil Ships
Larger or Equal to 100 GT, Period 1970 2000 (Presented per
Decade)a
Parameter
Time at sea, days
Average main engine size, kW
Average engine load ( )
Number of active ships (103)
% main engine powered by
Diesel
Steam, oil
Steam, coal
Average SFCb
at sea for main
engine, g/kWh
Diesel
Steam, oil
Steam, coal
Variable
1970
1980
1990
2000
t
p
m
N
215
2032
0.7
52.3
162
2452
0.7
71.7
167
2705
0.7
76.2
181
3251
0.7
86.8
n1,1
n2,1
n2,2
0.64
0.34
0.02
0.68
0.32
0.00
0.88
0.12
0.00
0.94
0.06
0.00
b1,1
b2,1
b2,2
240
363
807
234
344
0
228
329
0
221
329
0
Note that yearly input data is used in the modeling.

SFC, specific fuel consumption.
judge the error in sulphur content in oil to be within 20%

up to 1990, and within 10% after 1990. It is expected that
the total uncertainties in the SO2 emissions after 1990
should be within a range of 20%, while the estimates
before 1990 should be within a range of 30%. We realize
that the modeling is based on a number of assumptions
regarding average sulphur and carbon content (coal) and the
results should therefore be interpreted carefully.
3. Activity-Based Fleet Modeling, 19702000

[22] This section presents an improved activity-based
modeling approach that uses high-resolution time series as
input data to estimate fuel consumption for the oceangoing
civil world fleet larger or equal to 100 GT. Modeling is
made for the period 1970 to 2000, and only for the main
engines. Historical data available is limited, and do not
allow for detailed modeling, such as the baseline approaches
reported by Corbett and Koehler [2003], Endresen et al.
[2003] and others (e.g., breakdown on ship types and sizes).
Simplifications and assumptions are therefore made. However, compared to past activity-based modeling studies
[Eyring et al., 2005; Corbett and Koehler, 2003], this study
has developed and applied a more detailed approach, which
includes the variation in the demand for sea transport, as
well as operational and technological changes.
3.1. Modeling Approach
[23] The average ship size approach applied in this study
assumes an equal size for the total number of ships in the
world fleet of oceangoing civil ships larger or equal to
100 GT, and calculates the average size of the ships by
dividing total tonnage with the total number of ships. The
fuel consumption for an average ship is estimated on the
basis of average characteristics of installed main engine
power, main engine load, bunker fuel consumed per power
unit (kW) (depends on propulsion and fuel type) and days at
sea (based on demand for sea transport). The fuel consumption is calculated separately for the diesel and steam ships,
as steam ships have a significantly higher fuel consumption
(Table 2). The main engine fuel consumption for the period
D12301
1970 2000 for all oceangoing civil ships above or equal to

100 GT is then estimated by

Fi; s bi; s t p m per
ship
ni; s N

number of ships
where Fi,s denotes the total fuel consumption of average

ships with main engine type i burning fuel type s, kg fuel/
year; bi,s denotes the average specific fuel consumption for
an average ship with main engine type i burning fuel type s,
kg fuel/kWh; t denotes the average number of operating
hours at sea per year for an average ship (see equation (5),
below), h/year; p denotes average installed main engine
power for an average ship, kW; m denotes the average main
engine load for an average ship; ni,s denotes the fraction of
the average ships in the fleet with main engine type i
burning fuel type s (see equation (4), below); and N denotes
the total number of active average ships in the fleet (i.e., not
laid up and used as storage).
[24] Input data for the different terms in equation (3) is
described below and given in Table 3. It should be noted
that table figures are only given every tenth year, while the
numbers applied in our modeling are given year by year.
3.1.1. Number of Active Average Ships, Diesel
and Steam Powered
[25] As outlined above, the number of average ships
corresponds to the total number of ships reported in the
world fleet of oceangoing civil ships above or equal to
100 GT (Figure 1, left). The total number of ships and GT in
the fleet from 1970 to 2000 is based on fleet statistics
(Lloyds Register of Shipping, world fleet statistics and
statistical tables, 1992 (year 1970 1992), 1995 (year
1993 1995) and 2000 (year 1996 and 2000)). The fraction
of the average ships (ni,s) in the fleet with main engine type i
burning fuel type s is calculated on the basis of the
following equation:
ni; s
Di; s
;
D1;1 D2;1 D2;2
where Di,s denotes the total tonnage in the fleet with engine
type i burning fuel type s, GT.
[26] The tonnage in the fleet with engine type i burning
fuel type s is based on yearly fleet data from Lloyds
Register of Shipping (statistical tables, 1972 1975 and
1977 1984). From 1985 to 1992 the yearly fleet data is
only available for the steam powered tank and bulk fleet
(Lloyds Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1985
1990, and world fleet statistics and statistical tables, 1991,
1992). However, we have assumed that the tanker and bulk
fleets are representative for the total steam tonnage, as they
were the dominating ships by tonnage. Fleet data is not
available for the steam powered segment from 1993 onward, and the changes in the steam tonnage are estimated by
interpolation between the 1992 tonnage and the actual
tonnage in 2004 [LRF, 2005]. The percentage of the coal
fired tonnage is available from Corbett [2004] up to 1960.
Detailed fleet data from Lloyds is available for the years
1961, 1962 and 1963 (Lloyds Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1961 1963), but no data is available thereafter
according to our information. A linear reduction from 3.3%
of the coal fired tonnage in 1963 to zero in 1979 is assumed,
on the basis of the development of coal sales (Table 1). It
8 of 17
D12301
Table 4. Input Data to Equation (5), Modeling Time at Sea for the
World Fleet of Oceangoing Civil Ships Larger or Equal to 100 GT,
Period 1970 2000 (Presented per Decade)a
Parameter
Variable
1970
1980
1990
2000
Average haul,b nm
Average speed,c knots
Total GT (106)
Average ship size, Dwt
Seaborne transport,d Mt
Utilization of Dwt ( )
Ballast factor ( )
l
v
4380
13.9
227.5
9920
2433
0.8
0.7
4606
14.2
420.0
16226
3606
0.8
0.7
4307
14.1
423.6
15889
3977
0.8
0.7
4236
14.4
558.1
17150
5434
0.8
0.7
d
q
h
a
Note that yearly input data is used in the modeling.

The average haul length (l) from 1970 to 2000 is based on Fearnleys
[2002] and Stopford [1997].
c
Based on data collected from Lloyds fleet database.
d
Based on Fearnleys [2002] and Stopford [1997].
b
should be recognized that other engine types are represented

in the oceangoing civil world fleet (e.g., gas turbine), but
these types are negligible by tonnage and number when
compared with steam and diesel. Thus we have not taken
them into account in this study.
[27] The number of average active ships (N ni,s) is
calculated by subtracting the number of average ships
corresponding to the nontrading tonnage. The number of
ships out of service is distributed on engine and fuel
categories according to the relative tonnage of the fleet with
main engine type i burning fuel type s. The development in
laid up tonnage and tonnage used for storage from 1970 to
1995 is based on Stopford [1997], and on data from
Fearnleys [2002] thereafter. The number of active average
sized steam ships (N n2,s) will then reflect the total amount
of tonnage (in service) for the steam powered fleet (D2,s),
while number of active average sized diesel ships (N n1,1)
will reflect the total amount of tonnage (in service) for the
diesel powered fleet (D1,1).
3.1.2. Time at Sea
[28] The operational profile is derived by combining
yearly fleet and trade data. This deviates from recent
modeling studies that estimate days at sea on the basis of
engine manufactures data for large engines and tracking
studies. The development of the yearly total number of days
at sea sailing with cargo for the fleet is estimated on the
basis of number of voyages required for an average cargo
ship (with an average utilization of cargo capacity) to
transport the yearly reported worldwide total cargo volumes, combined with average voyage time calculated from
reported average length of haul and assumed average
operational speed. We have only considered the cargo
carrying fleet when estimating days at sea, and assumed
that days at sea for cargo and noncargo ships are equal.
Noncargo ships normally have less days at sea as indicated
by Endresen et al. [2004], and this assumption may bias our
fuel consumption estimates toward being too high, compared to the real situation. The development of the yearly
average number of days at sea (t) (with cargo and in ballast
condition) of the active average cargo ships is calculated by
means of

t

1a
l

N
v voyage

time

q
d h number
;
of voyage
D12301
where q denotes the total yearly sea borne trade of ships in

the fleet, tonnes/year; l denotes of average length of haul
(with cargo), nautical miles (nm); d denotes average dead
weight tonnage (Dwt) of ships in the fleet, Dwt; v denotes
the average operational speed of ships in the fleet, nm/h;
h denotes the average utilization of cargo capacity of ships
in the fleet, tonnes/Dwt; and a denotes the ballast factor,
defined as the average number of days in ballast relative to
days sailing with cargo.
[29] Input data for the different terms in equation (5) is
described below and given per decade in Table 4. Average
operational speed (v) is derived from data collected for
37,193 cargo and passenger ships in the Lloyds 2006 fleet
database [LRF, 2005 2006]. The average operation speed
for a given year is based on data for all ships the actual year
and all older ships in the database. The total yearly reported
sea borne trade volumes (q) for 1970 to 1995 are based on
Stopford [1997], while data for the period 1996 to 2000 are
based on Fearnleys [2002] (Figure 3). The average sailing
distances (l) are calculated by dividing the total transport
work (tonne miles) by the total sea borne trade volumes.
From 1970 to 2000 these data are based on Fearnleys
[2002] and Stopford [1997].
[30] Relatively little information is available about the
average time spent in ballast. Ideally, a ship should complete all voyages with cargo. However, many trades require
return voyages without cargo. For example, a crude oil
tanker typically transports a single cargo load between two
ports, then returns to its point of origin or another port
without cargo. Wijnolst and Wergeland [1997] indicates that
it is not likely for the tanker fleet that the average ballast
factor will be less than 0.8, and it will hardly ever exceed 1.
Tracking data reported for 453 Very Large Crude oil
Carriers in 1991 illustrated a ballast factor of 0.81. Other
ship types such as general cargo and container ships, often
sail with some cargo and some ballast and have limited time
in ballast, but are frequently not fully laded. For about 100
smaller cargo ships operating on a regional basis (most
ships around 3,500 Dwt), the ballast factor is reported to be
around 0.2 [Wilson EuroCarriers, 2005]. In the modeling,
these ships are forced to transport all cargo nearly fully
laden, and then spend time in ballast. On an annual basis, it
is expected that this simplification, may give representative
number of days at sea, as well as cargo volumes transported.
Taking into account the fact that larger ships dominate the
transported volumes at sea [Stopford, 1997], the average
ballast factor (a) is assumed to be 0.7 (i.e., days with ballast
is 70% of the number of days with cargo) for all ship types.
[31] Wijnolst and Wergeland [1997] reports that utilization of cargo capacity in practice hardly exceeds 0.95, but
may become as low as 0.65. The utilization of cargo
capacity of bulk ships and oil tankers larger than 50,000 Dwt
in 2001 is reported by Behrens et al. [2003] to be 0.91 and
0.87, respectively. These ships account for almost 55% of
the sea borne trade in 2000 [Fearnleys, 2002], and will of
course then have a large impact on the average factor. We
acknowledge that general cargo and container ships have a
lower utilization of the cargo capacity, and that the average
density of cargo could make volume the limiting factor. For
instance, data reported by Johnsen [2000] for a dry cargo
ship with carry capacity of about 5,200 tonnes, indicate that
9 of 17
D12301
the ships on average were loaded at 4,000 tonnes. Of this,

the average exploited capacity is reported to be 76%
(considering different trading routs). Data for container
ships serving U.S. trade [PIERS/Journal of Commerce,
2005], indicate a utilization rate of the container capacity
of about 70% on average. Important to note is that the
utilization rate of the container capacity will typical be
higher than the average utilization of the cargo capacity.
Clearly the utilization of cargo capacity varies for different
ship types, as well as for year considered (depending on the
marked). We assume that 0.8 is representative for the
average utilization of the cargo capacity (h) for all cargo
ships types.
3.1.3. Specific Fuel Consumption and Engine Load
[32] The main engine specific fuel consumption (bi,s) is
based on data reported in the literature and engine data
reported for individual ships. The main engine specific fuel
consumption for an average diesel ship (b1,1) is estimated
for different periods (up to 1970; up to 1980;. . .; up to
2000), combining installed main engine power and the daily
fuel consumption reported for 16,465 diesel powered oceangoing civil ships in the Lloyds 2004 fleet database [LRF,
2005]. A similar calculation is made for the 770 steam
turbine powered cargo and passenger ships running on oil
[LRF, 2005 2006]. The daily fuel consumption is normally
given at full power (85% MCR: Maximum Continuous
Rating). We have therefore assumed in the calculation of
specific fuel consumption (Table 3) that utilized power is
85% of installed power.
[33] It is important to recognize that no differentiation is
made between steam engines and turbine engines. We have
defined average steam ships using oil (b2,1) or coal (b2,2).
Steam engines have higher fuel consumption compared to
turbine engines, as illustrated in Table 2. However, limited
data is available on specific fuel consumption for old
steamers, and especially for the steam engines. Both steam
engines and steam turbines burning coal were phased out of
the fleet around 1970. We have therefore established typical
constant averages specific fuel consumption for these ships.
Riksheim [1982] compared the fuel consumption of a diesel
powered ship of 142,000 Dwt delivered in 1981, with a coal
fired steam turbine ship with the same hull dimension, shaft
power and services speed. He reported that the coal fired
solution used more than 3 times the fuel by weight,
compared to the diesel solution (64 tonnes oil per day
versus 198 tonnes coal per day or 140 tonnes of oil
equivalents). The data in Table 2 also illustrates that
turbines running on coal typically use 3 3.5 times more
fuel per unit power production, compared to the diesel
engines. Thus we assume for all years that turbine engines
fuelled by coal consume 800 g/kWh.
[34] Table 2 indicates that steam engines running on oil
consume 700 g/kWh, while steam engines using coal have
slightly higher fuel consumption than turbine engines using
coal. Thus, for steam engines using oil and coal we have
assumed a fuel consumption of 700 g/kWh and 900 g/kWh,
respectively. For average steam ships using oil (b2,1) or coal
(b2,2), we have estimated the specific fuel consumption
using these specific consumptions with a weighting according to the tonnage. In 1961, the steam engines accounted for
41% of the steam tonnage (Lloyds Register of Shipping,
statistical tables, 1961). This is reduced to 8% in 1970
D12301
(Lloyds Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1970), 2%

in 1984 (Lloyds Register of Shipping, statistical tables,
1984) and assumed 0% in 1990. The estimated weighted
specific fuel consumptions (b2,1) and (b2,2) are then applied
in the modeling. Table 3 shows the applied averages (only
given per decade).
[35] We assume an average main engine load of 70%
MCR, when including slow cruise, port maneuvering and
ballast sailings. This assumption is based on recommendations by Endresen et al. [2003, 2004] and Corbett and
Koehler [2004]. The average engine load (m) is assumed for
all ships and all years. However, the average main engine
load and speed varies a lot for different ship types. For
instance, Flodstrom [1997] reports an average load of 80%
MCR based on data from 82 ships. Bulk vessels tend to
have slightly lower average values (72% MCR), while tank
vessels have higher (84% MCR). The load was ranging
from about 60% MCR up to 95% MCR for the 82 different
ships. This illustrates large variations in required engine
output and average operational speed.
3.1.4. Installed Main Engine Power
[36] From 1978 to 2000 the yearly average main engine
power (p) is estimated from Lloyds fleet database [LRF,
2005]. The average installed power for a given year is
calculated using a similar approach as for operational speed.
Up to 1978 the change in average power is assumed to
follow the development for ships larger that 2,000 Dwt
reported by Eyring et al. [2005] (based on data from UKs
trade magazine The Motor Ship). We believe that this
better represents the development of average power in the
fleet up to 1978, compared to application of detailed fleet
data available, where larger merchant ships could be underrepresented because of scrapping after some 25 30 years
(not included in the fleet database). Our calculated average
power figures per ship correspond to the data reported for
1990, 1995 and 2000 by Eyring et al. [2005]. However, our
estimate for 1980 is about 10% lower, compared to Eyring
et al. [2005].
3.2. Modeled Fuel Consumption
[37] Figure 7 shows the modeled fuel consumption by
means of equation (3) for the world fleet from 1970 to 2000.
Our results show that the fuel consumption can be modeled
by including the major changes in technology, fleet structure
and operational factors. Our modeling differentiates on
engine and fuel types, and Figure 7 (as well as Figure 8)
illustrates that these effects are important around 1970, and
should be included in historical fleet modeling. The increased fuel consumption from 1970 to 1973 (1974) is
explained with increased demand for sea transport (i.e.,
number of days at sea, Figure 9), as well as long sailing
distances with cargo (Figure 4, middle). The latter have
reduced number of port calls and consequently reduced total
time in port (more time at sea). For the tanker fleet, transporting 50% of the sea borne trade around 1970, the average
distance was about 6,600 nautical miles (nm) in the mid
1970s, before rapidly falling to a level of 4,600 nm in the
mid 1980s (Figure 4, middle). The reasons was that after the
oil crisis in 1973, the USA in particular, but also European
importers, started to import more from other, Non-OPEC
sources, or increased their own production as was the case
for United Kingdom and Norway [Wijnolst and Wergeland,
10 of 17
D12301
D12301
Figure 7. Modeled main engine fuel consumption for the oceangoing civil world fleet above or equal to
100 GT separated on main engine and fuel types, 1970 2000 (not including the military fleet). The
modeled fuel consumption (black) is mostly lower than the estimated worldwide marine bunker sales
(red) (including the entire fishing fleet).
1997]. The variation in trade patterns for oil is therefore an
important factor determining demand for crude oil transportation, as well as fuel consumption by this fleet segment
and the entire fleet.
[38] The results show that growth in the fleet is not
necessarily followed by increased fuel consumption. For
instance, the stagnation and decline from around 1973 to
1983 in fuel consumption is explained with decrease in
number of days at sea (Figure 9), combined with reduction
of average sailing distances (oil tankers), increasing number
of ships laid up (Figure 4) and the rapid shift to diesel
powered ships. The stagnation and decline around 1973 in

oil transportation (Figure 4), the largest individual commodity trade by sea, is explained with the very high oil
prizes resulting in shift back to coal as fuel for power
stations [Stopford, 1997]. Around 1985, when the laid up
tonnage was reduced and most of the ships in the fleet were
diesel powered, the stagnation in fuel consumption can
mainly be explained by a slow down in sea borne trade
(Figures 3 and 4). After 1990, the fuel consumption has
almost followed the development in sea born trade and fleet
growth (Figure 4 versus Figure 7).
Figure 8. Sensitivity analyses, considering alternative input data. Modeling is made for all oceangoing
civil ships above or equal to 100 GT, 1970 2002.
11 of 17
D12301
Figure 9. Estimated average number of days at sea for the

oceangoing cargo fleet, 1970 to 2000.
3.2.1. Discussion
[39] Our results indicate that better activity data on a
yearly basis over time is required when fleet modeling is
used to determine the actual fuel consumption for the entire
world fleet. If our method for estimating days at sea is
extended to cover the main cargo shipping segments separately, we expect that the uncertainty will be significantly
reduced. However, the method fails for service ships (noncargo). Yearly tracking data (e.g., movement data available)
for such vessels would then increase the reliability in model
results. Lack of actual service speed data for the fleet
significantly influences the uncertainty as the specific consume is speed-dependent and because the service speed
defines number of days at sea required to carry out the
transport demand. It is recommended that reported days at
sea are applied with care since the model results are
particularly sensitive to this parameter.
D12301
[40] We expect that in the future the actual service speed

will be estimated on the basis of AIS (automatic identification systems) tracking data for individual oceangoing ships.
Such data also makes it possible to indirectly estimate the
engine power utilization per ship (and for fleet segments) by
combining recorded service speed with installed main
engine power for each individual ship (available from
Lloyds fleet databases). AIS is primarily an anticollision
system, and is designed to be capable of automatically
providing position and identification information about the
ship to other ships and to coastal authorities [U.S. Coast
Guard, 2002]. The International Maritime Organisation
(IMO) requires AIS to be fitted aboard all international
ships of certain size. Dalsren et al. [2007] also report that
in the future local and regional ship emission inventories
(geographical distribution of emissions) will be based on
AIS statistics.
[41] The model has been applied to periods before 1970
as well. However, the presented approach fails around 1960,
when the world fleet still transported large numbers of
passengers (see equation (5)). It was not until 1958 that
airplanes transported more transatlantic passengers than
large passenger ships [Hansen, 2004]. Another problem is
the fact that about half the US fleet of 28 million GT was
laid up in 1949. This was the US reserve fleet and
represented some 17% of the total world fleet by tonnage
[Aschehougs Konversasjonsleksikon, 1951]. Also, historical
shipping data for this period is limited. This illustrates some
of the challenges that have to be considered when modeling
fuel consumption before 1970.
3.2.2. Comparison With Other Studies
[42] Our new estimate for year 2000 is some 30 Mt higher
than previously reported by Endresen et al. [2003] (Table 5).
The main reason for the deviation, is that our new modeling
estimates also include about 45,000 noncargo ships, not
considered by Endresen et al. [2003]. It is interesting that
these two models using different approaches and data sets,
Figure 10. Distribution of main engine (ME) power (%) within the predefined size categories for the
year 2004, cargo and noncargo fleet [LRF, 2005].
12 of 17
D12301
D12301
Table 5. Comparison of Reported Fuel Consumption for the Oceangoing World Fleet
This Study
Year
Fuel Baseda
Modeledb
Eyring et al. [2005]
1970
1980
1995
2000
2001
152
159
174
201
111
129
164
195
124c
213c
240c
Corbett and Koehler [2003]
Endresen et al. [2003, 2005]
166d 200e
280f
289g
a
Estimates based on equation (2). The coal sales converted to oil equivalents by using 1/1.416 as conversion factor [UN,
1998]. Estimates for sales to the fishing fleet (section 2.2) are included.
b
Estimates based on equation (3). Cover fuel consumption by the main engines in the oceangoing civil world fleet above or
equal to 100 GT. The coal consumption is converted to oil equivalents by using 1/1.416 as conversion factor [UN, 1998].
c
Simplified activity-based modeling, covers oceangoing ships above or equal to 100 GT (unclear if fuel consumption by the
large military ships and auxiliary engines are included).
d
Fleet modeling, covers the world civil cargo fleet (oceangoing) above or equal to 100 GT.
e
Estimated sales of marine fuel, based on IEA and EIA data.
f
Detailed activity-based modeling, covers oceangoing ships above or equal to 100 GT (the civil fleet 254 Mt (includes
noncargo fleet), the noncargo fleet 46.2 Mt, the military fleet 9.4 Mt (1300 navy ships), and auxiliary engines 16.3 Mt).
g
Detailed activity-based modeling, covers oceangoing ships above or equal to 100 GT (the civil fleet 248 Mt (includes
noncargo fleet), the noncargo fleet 45 Mt, and the military fleet 41 Mt)).
give nearly similar results, if the consumption by noncargo

ships is taken into account. The detailed activity-based
estimates for the world fleet (civil) reported by Corbett
and Koehler [2003] and Eyring et al. [2005] are still a factor
of 1.25 (50 Mt) higher (Table 5). However, Corbett and
Koehler [2004] also considered alternative input data to the
activity-based modeling, and pointed out that the fuel
consumption could be up to 16% lower. This implies that
the two studies are within the same range when the
uncertainty bounds are taken into account.
[43] Eyring et al. [2005] also reported simplified activitybased fuel consumptions estimates for 1950, 1960, 1970,
1980 and 1995, and assumed that interpolation between
these periods would reflect the development. They also
interpolated between the simplified 1995 estimate and the
detailed estimate for year 2001. Our modeled fuel estimates
are significantly lower than reported by Eyring et al. [2005]
for the period 1980 2000. The main reasons for the large
deviation are probably that they have assumed the number
of days at sea significantly higher than we estimate and
include less key influencing factors, compared with our
model. Note that their assumed number of days at sea is
about 90 days higher for year 1995 than the estimate
provided by this study (179 days). The sensitivity modeling
indicates more than two times higher fuel consumption for
some years (e.g., 1983), if the major effects are not included
and if days at sea are assumed equal to 270 (Figure 8). This
shows that results from simplified activity-based models are
sensitive to key input factors. Our model estimates for 1970,
1980, and 1995 are about 10 15 Mt higher than reported by
Eyring et al. [2005], if the days at sea is increased to 270
and held constant, and the laid up tonnage is set to zero
(Figure 8). This illustrates that the two simplified models
gives nearly the same response with similar input data.
However, Eyring et al. [2005] have not reported detailed
input data for these reference years (e.g., assumed engine
load, specific fuel consumption) and some consumption by
military ships and the auxiliary engines could have been
included. In addition, their model do not take into account
laid up tonnage, and do not differentiate on engine and fuel
types. Direct comparison is therefore difficult.
3.2.3. Uncertainty in the Estimates

[44] The uncertainty in each parameter of equation (3),
including main assumptions, is addressed below with an
estimate for the uncertainty in total fuel consumption. The
weakness of the average ship modeling approach compared
to more detailed modeling approaches (separates on ship
sizes and types) is that our simplified approach uses average
characteristics, separating on only steam and diesel powered
ships. The uncertainties in our estimates arise from both
uncertainties in the applied averages, as well as the simplified method. The methodology does not include secondorder effects among parameters in equation (3). Moreover, it
should be noted that our model do not take into account the
technical development on antifouling systems [Evans,
2000] which likely have influenced fuel consumption and
emissions over the past 100 years.
[45] The detailed activity-based approaches, identify size
and type categories with common characteristics. The fuel
consumption is then calculated for each category by applying characteristic factors for each category in combination
with total power installed within this category. The total fuel
consumption is based on a sum over all categories. Detailed
input data is required for this approach and such data is
generally not available to derive a historical inventory. We
then have to simplify by establishing averages that are
representative for one large category covering all ships in
the fleet. The applied averages are not weighted with power
installed or energy production, introducing an uncertainty.
For example, small cargo ships have compared to large
cargo ships relatively less installed power, less days at sea
with a higher specific fuel consumption and lower average
engine load (e.g., large number of voyages, requires more
often part loads in port areas). The actual lower specific fuel
consumption for larger ships implies that our model results
in a too high overall fuel consumption as the larger ships
dominate trade, tonnage and installed effect (Figure 10).
Number of days at sea is based on a demand covered by a
number of ships of average size. Larger ships will be more
energy efficient and smaller ships less energy efficient. We
therefore expect that our model results will overestimate the
total consumption as the larger ships actually have more
13 of 17
D12301
days at sea at a higher efficiency than the smaller ships (less

days at sea with a corresponding lower efficiency). The
average engine load is actually higher on larger ships than
smaller ships. Our model will then likely underestimate the
overall fuel consumption as larger ships dominate by trade
and tonnage. The net effect of the nonlinear effects is
consequently not straight forward to estimate.
[46] The assumed number of days at sea is important, and
we have therefore performed a sensitivity analysis based on
modeling the energy consumption (kWh) of the year 2004
civil world fleet [LRF, 2005]. The production within defined
size categories is calculated by combining the installed
power (Figure 10) with the number of days at sea reported
for the different size categories. We used the number of days
at sea reported for the 5 categories by Endresen et al. [2004]
for cargo ships (199 days for <9999 GT; 196 days for
10,000 24,999 GT; 205 days 25,000 49,999 GT; 219 days
for 50,000 99,999 GT; 240 days for >100,000 GT). The
total energy consumption for the entire fleet is then calculated by summing up for all categories. A corresponding
modeling was made by using a calculated average (arithmetic mean) for these categories (= 212 days). The deviation was only 3%, and the constant average profile gave the
highest estimate. However, most of the installed power for
the noncargo ships originates from the category less than
9,999 GT (Figure 10), and they have typically on average
less days at sea. The contribution from noncargo ships on
the overall average operational profile was taken into account
by assuming 150 days (some data given by Endresen et al.
[2004]) at sea on average (instead of 199 days) for the
lowest category. A similar modeling was repeated. This
exercise resulted in a deviation of 7% compared with our
baseline model, and the constant average profile gave the
highest estimate.
[47] It is important to recognize that the cargo fleet
(including passenger ships), that account for 80% of the
installed power (Figure 10), normally have higher engine
utilization (load) and number of days at sea, compared to
noncargo ships [Endresen et al., 2004]. The energy production (kWh) by the cargo fleet will then be higher than 80%,
and could be as high as 90%. Corbett and Koehler [2003]
reported typical average specific fuel consumption by cargo
and noncargo ships to be respectively 206 and 221 g/kWh,
with reference to year 2001. By weighting according to
installed power, a weighted average of about 209 g/kWh is
obtained. We have applied a value of 220 g/kWh for year
2000, indicating that our model will overestimate the fuel
consumption around year 2000. However, the fleet composition with respect to old ships with old engines varies over
time and they are normally in operation for several decades
(e.g., the average age for civil fleet was 22.4 years in 2006
[LRF, 2005 2006]), with unknown status and maintenance
condition. Our somewhat higher specific fuel consumption
takes the effect of old engines into account (see section 3.1.3).
[48] It is difficult to estimate the uncertainty because of
limited technical and operational data over the decades. It is
important to notice that some of the effects (e.g., engine
load versus specific fuel consumption) will drive results in
opposite directions, thus giving a representative average
although the uncertainty in each parameter is significant.
Our applied averages seem to reflect the cargo fleet and we
therefore claim that the simplified approach will give
D12301
reasonable estimates. Including the noncargo fleet in the

modeling adds to the uncertainty as these ships have most of
the power installed below 5,000 GT (Figure 10) and operate
significantly different from cargo ships (e.g., engine load).
However, the energy production in this fleet segment is
significantly less than for the cargo ships (see above).
Taking this into account, we expect 10% as representative
for the error of using a simplified model versus a more
detailed approach (uncertainty related to the nonlinear
effects).
[49] The uncertainty in the applied averages arises from
the potential bias in data applied and error in average figures
due to a limited data material. Our estimates for the
uncertainty focus on the variable that account for the highest
potential uncertainty. It is assumed that the uncertainty
figures are independent and representative estimates for
standard deviations. The uncertainties in the calculated
averages are based on variation ranges reported in the
literature.
[50] The modeled fuel consumption is sensitive to the
applied installed engine power. Our year 2000 modeling of
total installed engine power for the entire fleet of oceangoing civil ships above or equal to 100 GT (281,000 MW)
corresponds very well with numbers reported by Corbett
and Koehler [2003] (280,000 MW). This result indicates a
low uncertainty in the calculated average power around year
2000. We expect the uncertainty in average engine power
per ship to be up to 10% around 1970 decreasing to nearly
zero for year 2000.
[51] The model results are also sensitive to the assumed
number of days at sea per ship. The uncertainty bound for
days at sea is calculated to be 15% considering typical
variations in the main input data. The largest contribution
results from the assumed cargo capacity utilization, followed
by the assumed ballast factor. We have evaluated our 2000
estimate (181 days at sea) with a calculated average activity
profile covering 3,431 AMVER cargo ships [Endresen
et al., 2004]. By weighting the reported days at sea for
each category (see above) by the actual power installed in
the year 2004 world fleet (for the same size categories)
(Figure 10), the weighted average number of days at sea is
calculated to 205 days. This is some 20 days higher than the
applied average. The deviation could be explained with the
fact that the AMVER fleet typically covers cargo ships,
mostly larger than 3,000 GT in international trade [Endresen
et al., 2003]. The average number of days would decrease if
smaller cargo ships also were included. An alternative
explanation is that the world sea borne trade may be 11%
higher in year 2000 than assumed. Our calculated 181 days
at sea is based on a trade estimate of 5434 Mt [Fearnleys,
2002], while Review of Maritime Transport [United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development, 2006] reports a
somewhat higher figure (5983 Mt). Our calculated average
number of days at sea then corresponds with the weighted
AMVER operation profile. This result indicates that we
probably slightly underestimate the average days at sea, if
we only consider the cargo fleet. However, operational data
indicates less days at sea for the noncargo fleet [Endresen et
al., 2004]. The expected bias will decrease up to 2000, as
the noncargo fleet have doubled by numbers from 1970 to
2000 (Figure 4). Our best estimate is that the combined
uncertainty related to the various input data is within 25%.
14 of 17
D12301
The total uncertainty in fuel consumption is estimated to be

about 30%, when the methodological uncertainties are
added.
[52] Auxiliary engines will also contribute to the total fuel
consumption and emissions for oceangoing civil ships
above or equal to 100 GT, but this is not included in
equation (3). Estimates presented indicate that the fuel
consumed by auxiliary engines in port and at sea may
amount to less than 10% of the total [Whall et al., 2002;
Corbett and Koehler, 2003]. Consequently, if auxiliary
engines were included, the modeled fuel consumption
should have been in the order of +5% higher. The model
estimates presented in this study are thus likely to be
approximately 15% too low because auxiliary engines and
all military ships and vessels less than 100 GT are excluded
(see section 4).
4. Marine Sales Versus Modeled Consumption

[53] Several activity-based studies have reported fuel
consumption without including oceangoing ships less than
100 GT. The fuel consumption by these ships is not
addressed in the literature, and could be significant. For
instance in 1998, the global number of engine powered
fishing vessels (decked) was about 1.3 millions vessels
[FAO, 2006a], while only some 23,000 of these vessels
were larger than 100 GT in year 2000 (Lloyds Register of
Shipping, world fleet statistics and statistical tables, 2000).
The fishing fleet less than 100 GT represents nearly half of
the installed power for the entire fishing fleet (see section
2.2.2). We may therefore assume that these vessels account
for half of the fuel demand of the fishing fleet (10 Mt
fuel). Norway has approximately 3,000 cargo and service
ships between 25 and 100 GT in coastal trade [Statistics
Norway, 2000]. We do not have data for the rest of the
world fleet less than 100 GT operating mainly in national
waters, but we assume that this part represents a consumption of at least the same order of magnitude as the
fishing fleet less than 100 GT. We also have to take into
account the consumption by the military fleet which
consumed some 5 Mt in 1996 [Endresen et al., 2003]
and the consumption by auxiliary engines (5% of the
total, see section 3.2.3). Consequently we expect our
activity modeling estimates for the period 1995 up to
2000 to be some 25 35 Mt less than the actual fuel
consumption for the entire worldwide oceangoing fleet.
We find that the estimated consumption is about 10% too
high for this period compared with total estimated sales
data. This indicates that the reported sales number for this
period may be representative, and not significantly underreported. However, the uncertainty in the activity-based
estimates is significant (section 3.2.3), as well as the
assumptions used to derive the added consumption of
25 35 Mt fuel.
[54] Several studies have questioned the reduction in
sales for given time periods without considering the important changes in the fleet. This has led to the assumption that
significant underreporting of sales can have occurred. However, this study illustrates that improved modeling, with the
use of high-resolution time series as input data, gives
corresponding trends in modeled fuel consumption and
D12301
sales numbers. Our results are supported by the general

changes in trade and the fleet activity (Figure 4).
5. Conclusion
[55] From 1910 to 2000, the oceangoing world fleet of
civil ships above or equal to 100 GT grew by number from
around 22,000 to 88,000 motor ships, by gross tonnage
from 37 to 558 millions, and by cargo transported from
about 300 Mt (year 1920) to 5,400 Mt. Oceangoing ships
had a yearly consumption of about 80 Mt of coal
(corresponding to 56.5 Mt heavy fuel oil) before the First
World War. This increased to a sale of about 200 Mt of
marine fuel oils in 2000 (including the fishing fleet), i.e.,
about a fourfold increase in fuel consumption. Of this sale,
international shipping accounts for some 70 80%. The
fuel-based ship emissions are estimated to 229 Tg (CO2)
in 1925, growing to about 634 Tg (CO2) in 2002. The
corresponding SO2 emissions are about 2.5 Tg (SO2) and
8.5 Tg (SO2). The CO2 emissions per tonne transported by
sea have been significantly reduced as a result of larger and
more energy efficient ships.
[56] We find that the development of fuel consumption
from 1970 up to 2000 can be modeled by including the
major changes in the fleet size, shift in fuels and propulsion,
technical improvements, changes in average operating
speed, average sailing distance and demand for sea transport. It is suggested that these key factors are included when
performing historical activity-based fleet modeling. The
variation in trade patterns over the years for oil is an
important factor determining demand for crude oil transportation (e.g., average sailing distances), as well as fuel
consumption by this fleet segment and the entire fleet. This
study concludes that the growth in the fleet is not necessarily followed by increased fuel consumption, as the
complex interaction among the key influencing variables
will determine the fuel consumption. We find that the
estimated fuel consumption corresponds fairly well with
the reported fuel sales from 1970 to 2000, when especially
the consumption by auxiliary engine power, ships less than
100 GT and all military ships are included. It is not possible
to conclude on the actual uncertainty or bias in the marine
sales data on the basis of our findings, but our results and
other studies indicate that underreporting may occur. However, our results indicate that the reported sales number for
this period may be representative and not significantly
underreported, as previous activity-based studies have suggested. Fuel consumption by ships less than 100 GT (e.g.,
about 1.3 millions fishing vessels today) is important to
include when comparing fuel sales with activity-based
estimates.
[57] Interestingly, our results here agree well with our
previous activity-based estimates for the year 2000 (if
consumption by 45,000 noncargo ships is taken into
account) that used an alternative approach and different data
sets. However, our simplified model estimates of fuel
consumption from 1980 to 2000 are significantly lower than
previously reported activity-based studies. By considering
alternative input data to our simplified activity-based model,
we conclude that the main reason for the large deviation
between activity-based fuel consumption estimates is the
15 of 17
D12301
number of days assumed at sea. Our results indicate that

improved activity data on a yearly basis are needed to
determine the actual energy demand for the entire world
fleet if a simplified activity-based model is to be
used. Such data will also significantly reduce the uncertainty for estimates based on more detailed activity-based
modeling.
[58] Acknowledgments. The preparation of this paper was cofunded
by the EU-project QUANTIFY (contract 003893). We sincerely acknowledge Kristin Rypdal at CICERO, Norway, for her support and input during
the work with this paper. We would also like to acknowledge Stephen
McAdam at DNV for significantly improving the paper.
References
Annin, R. E. (1920), Ocean Shipping, Elements of Practical Steamship
Operation, Century Co., New York.
Aschehougs Konversasjonsleksikon (1951), Aschehougs forlag (in Norwegian), vol. 15, paragraph 326, Oslo, Norway.
Aschehougs Konversasjonsleksikon (1956), Aschehougs forlag (in Norwegian), vol. 6, paragraph 698, Oslo, Norway.
Aschehougs og Gyldendals store Norske Leksikon (1999), Kunnskapsforlaget (in Norwegian), vol. 16, p. 144, Oslo, Norway.
Aschehougs Verdenshistorie (1982), Aschehougs forlag (in Norwegian),
vol. 12, p. 11, Oslo, Norway.
Baker, G. S. (1915), Ship Form, Resistance and Screw Propulsion, Constable and Co. Ltd., London.
Behrens, H. L., . Endresen, A. Mjelde, and C. Garmann (2003),
Environmental accounting system for Norwegian shippingEASNoS
phase 1, DNV Rep. 2002-1645, Det Norske Veritas, Hvik, Norway.
Cooper, D. (2002), Representative emission factors for use in quantification
of emissions from ships associated with ship movements between ports in
the European Community, ENV. C.1/ETU/2001/0090, IVL Swed. Environ. Res. Inst. Ltd., Stockholm, Sweden, May.
Corbett, J. J. (2004), Marine Transportation and Energy Use, Encyclopedia
of Energy, Elsevier, New York.
Corbett, J. J., and H. W. Koehler (2003), Updated emissions from
ocean shipping, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D20), 4650, doi:10.1029/
2003JD003751.
Corbett, J. J., and H. W. Koehler (2004), Considering alternative input
parameters in an activity-based ship fuel consumption and emissions
model: Reply to comment by yvind Endresen et al. on Updated emissions from ocean shipping, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D23303,
doi:10.1029/2004JD005030.
Cullen, W. P. (1997), Marine fuelsWorldwide sulphur levels, Det Norske
Veritas, Pet. Serv. Inc., Oslo, Norway.
Dalsren, S. B., . Endresen, I. S. A. Isaksen, G. Gravir, and E. Srgard
(2007), Environmental impacts of the expected increase in sea transportation, with a particular focus on oil and gas scenarios for Norway and
northwest Russia, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D02310, doi:10.1029/
2005JD006927.
Darmstadter, J., P. D. Teitelbaum, and J. G. Polach (1971), Energy in
the World Economy: A Statistical Review of Trends in Output, Trade,
and Consumption Since 1925, Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore,
Md.
Endresen, ., E. Srgard, J. K. Sundet, S. B. Dalsren, I. S. A. Isaksen, T. F.
Berglen, and G. Gravir (2003), Emission from international sea transportation and environmental impact, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D17), 4560,
doi:10.1029/2002JD002898.
Endresen, ., E. Srgard, J. Bakke, and I. S. A. Isaksen (2004),
Substantiation of a lower estimate for the bunker inventory:
Comment on Updated emissions from ocean shipping by James
J. Corbett and Horst W. Koehler, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D23302,
doi:10.1029/2004JD004853.
Endresen, ., J. Bakke, E. Srgard, T. F. Berglen, and P. Holmvang (2005),
Improved modelling of ship SO2 emissionsA fuel based approach,
Atmos. Environ., 39, 3621 3628.
Energy Information Administration (1994), Carbon coefficients used in this
report, in Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States, 1987
1992, DOE/EIA-0573, Appendix B, Energy Inf. Admin. Off. of Energy
Markets and End Use, U.S. Dep. of Energy, Washington, D. C., Oct.
European Monitoring and Evaluation Program/Core Inventory of Air Emissions (2002), Emission Inventory Guidebook, 3rd ed., Tech. Rep. 30, Eur.
Environ. Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark.
D12301
Evans, S. M. (2000), Marine antifoulants, in Seas at the Millennium, An

Environmental Evaluation, vol. III, edited by C. Sheppard, chap. 124,
pp. 247 256, Pergamon, New York.
Eyring, V., H. W. Kohler, J. van Aardenne, and A. Lauer (2005), Emissions
from international shipping: 1. The last 50 years, J. Geophys. Res., 110,
D17305, doi:10.1029/2004JD005619.
Fearnleys (2002), Review 2001: The tanker and bulk markets and fleets,
Fearnresearch, Oslo, Norway. (Available at http://www.fearnleys.com/
index.gan?id=396&subid=0)
Fletcher, M. (1997), From coal to oil in British shipping, in The World of
Shipping, edited by D. M. Williams, section 10, pp. 153 171, Ashgate,
Brookfield, Vt.
Flodstrom, E. (1997), Energy and emission factors for ships in operation,
KFB Rep. 1997:24, Swed. Transp. and Commun. Res. Board, Swed.
Natl. Mar. Admin. and MariTerm AB, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2006a),
Global fishing fleet data base (1996 to 1998), FAO Fish. Global
Inf. Syst., Rome.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2006b), Global
capture production 1950 2004 data base, FAO Fish. Global Inf. Syst.,
Rome.
Hansen, L. E. (2004), Hvordan kan fusjonen mellom P&Q og Carnival
pavirke konkurransedynamikken i cruisemarkedet? (in Norwegian),
thesis, Norw. Sch. of Econ. and Bus. Admin., NHH, Bergen, Norway,
Oct.
International Energy Agency (1971 2002), Sale of marine fuel, categories
International marine bunkers and Internal Navigation, period 1971
to 2002, Paris.
International Energy Agency (2001), Oil information 2001, with 2000 data,
Paris.
Johnsen, T. (2000), Environmental comparison of transport chains for
paper: A case study, Rep. 2000-3295, Det Norske Veritas, Oslo,
Norway.
Kofoed, C. (1926), Kullforbruk og forbrnding (in Norwegian), O. N.
Authens forlag, Tnsberg, Norway.
Le Mesurier, L. J., and H. S. Humphreys (1935), Fuel Consumption and
Maintenance Costs of Steam- and Diesel-Engined Vessels, Northeast
Coast Inst. of Eng. and Shipbuilders, London.
Lloyds Register Fairplay (2005), The World fleet database for 2004
(all civil ocean-going ships above or equal to 100 GT), Redhill,
U. K.
Lloyds Register Fairplay (2005 2006), Extracts from the world merchant
fleet database for 2005 and 2006 (all civil ocean-going cargo and passenger ships above or equal to 100 GT), Redhill, U. K.
Lloyds Register of Shipping (1995), Marine Exhaust Emissions Research
Programme, Lloyds Reg. Eng. Serv., London.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (1997), What
markets are there for transport by inland waterways?, report of the Hundred and Eighth Round Table on Transport Economics, Econ. Res. Cent.,
Paris, 13 14 Nov.
PIERS/Journal of Commerce (1982), A capacity utilization analysis of the
U.S. container trade, On Board Rev., X, III.
Riksheim, J. B. (1982), The state of the art in coal fired ships, Trans.
Northeast Coast Inst. Eng. Shipbuilders, 98, 123 136.
Skjlsvik, K. O., A. B. Andersen, J. J. Corbett, and J. M. Skjelvik (2000),
Study on greenhouse gas emissions from ships, Rep. MT Rep. Mtoo A23038, Int. Mar. Organ., London, 15 Feb.
Smith, S. J., R. Andres, E. Conception, and J. Lurz (2004), Historical
sulfur dioxide emissions 1850 2000: Methods and results, PNNL
Res. Rep., PNNL-14537, Jt. Global Change Res. Inst., College Park,
Md.
Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (1983), A guide for a
coal fired boiler system, Tech. Res. Bull., 3-34, New York.
Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (1988), The Principles of
Naval Architecture, 2nd rev., vol. II, Resistance, Propulsion and Vibration, edited by E. V. Lewis, Jersey City, N. J.
Statistics Norway (2000), Maritime statistics 1998: Vessels in coastal trade
(in Norwegian with English summary), Oslo, Norway.
Stopford, M. (1997), Maritime Economics, 2nd ed., Routledge, London.
United Nations (1957 1979), World Energy Supplies, Ser. J, vol. 2, vol. 3,
vol. 4, vol. 6, vol. 10, vol. 13, vol. 17, vol. 22, New York.
United Nations (1998), 1996 Energy Statistic Yearbook, New York.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2006), Review of
Maritime Transport 2006, New York. (Available at http://www.unctad.
org/Templates/WebFlyer.asp?intItemID=3969&lang=1)
U.S. Coast Guard (2002), Universal shipborne Automatic Identification
System (AIS) transponder, Alexandria, Va. (Available at http://www.
navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/ais.htm)
16 of 17
D12301
Whall, C., et al. (2002), Quantification of emissions from ships associated

with ship movements between ports in the European community, Rep.
06177.02121, Entec, Northwich, U. K.
Wijnolst, N., and T. Wergeland (1997), Shipping, Delft Univ. Press, Delft,
Netherlands.
Wilson EuroCarriers (2005), Annual report 2005 (short sea operator in
Europe), Dreggen, Norway. (Available at http://www.wilsonship.no/)
D12301

H. L. Behrens, P. O. Brett, and . Endresen, Det Norske Veritas,

Veritasveien 1, N-1322 Hvik, Norway. (oyvind.endresen@dnv.com)
I. S. A. Isaksen, Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, N-0315
Oslo, Norway.
E. Srgard, Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, P. O. Box 815,
N-8001 Bod, Norway.
17 of 17

Endresen Et Al-2007-Journal of Geophysical Research - Atmospheres (1984-2012)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Endresen Et Al-2007-Journal of Geophysical Research - Atmospheres (1984-2012)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 112, D12301, doi:10.

A historical reconstruction of ships fuel consumption and emissions

represents a significant contribution to the global emissions of pollutants and greenhouse

Det Norske Veritas, Hvik, Norway.

Copyright 2007 by the American Geophysical Union.

transported in 1920 [Stopford, 1997] and 5,400 Mt in

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

reported simplified activity-based inventories from 1950 up

2. Fuel-Based Emissions Inventory: 19252002

Emissions (EMEP/CORINAIR), 2002]. The emissions are

where Eg,j denotes the emissions of individual exhaust

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

[11] Table 1 shows the estimated total figures for the

is reported in the IEA category agriculture [IEA, 2001]. It

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

bunker differently. UN includes only sales to foreign bound

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

Figure 2. Development of CO2 and SO2 ship emissions,

Figure 3. Reported IEA [1971 2002] sales of marine oil

Figure 4. (top) Fleet data for cargo ships versus noncargo

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

Figure 5. (top) Daily main engine fuel consumption,

cargo transported per tonne fuel sold significantly increased

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

Table 2. Reported Specific Fuel Consumption (SFC) for Different

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

Table 3. Input Data to Equation (3), Modeling Main Engine Fuel

Note that yearly input data is used in the modeling.

judge the error in sulphur content in oil to be within 20%

3. Activity-Based Fleet Modeling, 19702000

1970 2000 for all oceangoing civil ships above or equal to

where Fi,s denotes the total fuel consumption of average

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

Note that yearly input data is used in the modeling.

should be recognized that other engine types are represented

where q denotes the total yearly sea borne trade of ships in

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

the ships on average were loaded at 4,000 tonnes. Of this,

(Lloyds Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1970), 2%

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

powered ships. The stagnation and decline around 1973 in

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

Figure 9. Estimated average number of days at sea for the

[40] We expect that in the future the actual service speed

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

Eyring et al. [2005]

Corbett and Koehler [2003]

Endresen et al. [2003, 2005]

give nearly similar results, if the consumption by noncargo

3.2.3. Uncertainty in the Estimates

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

days at sea at a higher efficiency than the smaller ships (less

reasonable estimates. Including the noncargo fleet in the

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

The total uncertainty in fuel consumption is estimated to be

4. Marine Sales Versus Modeled Consumption

sales numbers. Our results are supported by the general

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

number of days assumed at sea. Our results indicate that

Evans, S. M. (2000), Marine antifoulants, in Seas at the Millennium, An

ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION

Whall, C., et al. (2002), Quantification of emissions from ships associated

H. L. Behrens, P. O. Brett, and . Endresen, Det Norske Veritas,