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

1029/2006JD007630, 2007

A historical reconstruction of ships’ fuel consumption and emissions

Øyvind Endresen,1 Eirik Sørgård,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, Ø., E. Sørgård, 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 transported in 1920 [Stopford, 1997] and 5,400 Mt in

[2] Over the last 100 years the total fuel consumption and
emissions by the oceangoing civil world fleet has signifi-
cantly 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)
(Lloyd’s 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
Det Norske Veritas, Høvik, Norway.
2
Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Bodø, Norway.
3
Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Copyright 2007 by the American Geophysical Union.
0148-0227/07/2006JD007630
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 inven-
tory covering the period before 1950. The validity of these
estimates may be questioned as the annual coal consump-
tion 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 reli-
ability 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 signifi-
cantly higher compared to historical sales data covering the
last decades. Moreover, the variation over time between
reported sales and estimated consumption does not corre-
spond. 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 dis-
cussion 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: 1925–2002
[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 emis-
sion inventories based on fuel sales have been published by
the Atmospheric Emission Inventory Guidebook [European
Monitoring Evaluation Program/Core Inventory of Air
2 of 17
D12301
Emissions (EMEP/CORINAIR), 2002]. The emissions are
calculated by means of
Eg; j ¼ Sj  eg; j ; ð1Þ
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 nonmil-
itary 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 þ National þ Fishing ¼ Int þ 0:27  Int þ 0:1  Total:
ð2Þ
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION 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
International International
International Bunkers as Bunkers as Total Estimated
Bunkers as Coal,b Mt Oil, Mt National Estimated Sales Emissions, Tg
Year Coal,b Mt UN EWE UN EWE IEAc Sales, Mt as Oil,d Mt SO2 CO2
1925 41.6 17.4 66.0 2.5 229
1929 41.0 21.9 71.8 2.8 247
1933 27.8 19.1 54.7 2.2 187
1937 75 30.7 23.6 63.9 2.6 217
1938 28.0 21.4 58.1 2.4 198
1949 68
1950 12.2 48.5 80.6 3.8 261
1951 9.16 47.9 76.7 3.7 248
1952 7.76 50.7 79.3 3.8 255
1953 6.16 8.0 52.9 59.9 80.8 3.9 259
1954 5.70 53.9 81.7 4.0 262
1955 5.35 7.2 60.3 67.0 90.4 4.4 289
1956 4.47 66.7 98.6 4.8 315
1957 3.80 4.5 72.0 77.9 105.4 5.2 336
1958 2.86 68.9 100.1 5.0 319
1959 2.22 69.1 99.7 4.9 317
1960 1.60 2.2 76.9 81.2 110.1 5.5 350
1961 1.08 1.5 84.4 87.4 120.2 6.0 381
1962 0.79 1.2 85.5 90.3 121.4 6.1 385
1963 0.70 1.1 89.6 92.8 127.1 6.3 403
1964 0.79 1.2 97.5 101.6 138.4 6.9 439

1965 0.70 1.2 101.6 104.2 144.1 7.2 457

1966 0.71 97.3 138.0 6.9 438

1967 0.51 105.0 148.7 7.4 472
1968 0.31 111.6 157.8 7.9 500
1969 0.33 102.4 144.8 7.2 459
1970 0.34 107.1 151.5 7.6 480
1971 0.23 112.8 110.3 30.6 156.8 7.0 497
1972 0.20 114.2 115.5 30.0 161.9 7.2 513
1973 0.16 121.3 122.0 31.7 170.9 7.6 542

1974 0.11 115.1 113.4 34.3 164.2 7.3 521

1975 0.04 101.5 105.0 33.2 153.6 6.7 487
1976 0.03 102.5 108.6 33.5 157.9 6.9 501
1977 0.02 95.9 108.5 32.2 156.4 6.8 496
1978 0.01 95.7 109.2 32.2 157.1 6.7 498
1980 110.4 32.7 159.0 7.0 504
1985 93.9 30.7 138.5 5.8 439
1990 116.9 31.6 165.0 6.9 523
1995 129.9 26.8 174.2 7.5 552
2000 150.2 30.8 201.2 8.7 638
2002 149.0 30.9 199.9 8.5 634
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 ‘‘inter-
national 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 esti-
mated 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 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION 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
(Lloyd’s 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. Lloyd’s
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 corre-
sponds 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 con-
tent 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 com-
monly 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 [Lloyd’s 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 emis-
sions (equation (2)) using the sale numbers (section 2.2) in
combination with the emission factors per tonne oil and coal

4 of 17
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION 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 oil-
fired 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 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.

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].
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 im-
proved cargo handling in ports. For instance, the volume of

5 of 17
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION
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
6 of 17
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 illus-
trates 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].
Lloyd’s fleet data [Lloyd’s 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) (Lloyd’s
Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1961). By 1970
these numbers had decreased to 4,425 and 3,534 ships
respectively (15% by number) (Lloyd’s Register of Ship-
ping, 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 (Lloyd’s 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,
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION 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 2.4.2. Uncertainty

(measured in tonne miles per deadweight (total carrying [20] The uncertainties in our estimated sales figures are
capacity)). By 1985 this had nearly halved, and a few years significant. Reliable inventories are probably best devel-
later it increased by 40% [Stopford, 1997]. More efficient oped by comparing the different modeling approaches and
and specialized ships have also pushed their way into the the different data sets that are available. This extends our
marked (e.g., the first deep sea cellular container ship in knowledge base and improves our understanding of the
1965 [Stopford, 1997]). The specialized ships have different governing processes. The inventory presented in this study
operational and technological characteristics, which results aims to cover sales in oil equivalents to all oceangoing ships
in a particular logistic efficiency and energy and emission worldwide (Table 1). However, the marine sales for the
profiles. For example, passenger ships have on average 2.2 period 1925 to 1970 is likely to be slightly underestimated,
main engines per ship, while the large passenger ships have as sales to the oceangoing military fleet in national services
5.7 main engines per ship (greater than 100,000 GT) [LRF, are not included. Our best estimate today is that the data
2005]. The civil world fleet have on average 1.3 main after 1970 should be within a range of ±15%, while the data
engines per ship (above or equal to 100 GT) [LRF, 2005]. before 1970 should be within a range of ±25%. Under-
Engine capacity is not likely to be fully exploited at all reporting by some countries has been [Endresen et al.,
times, resulting in a lower fuel consumption in practice than 2003] and may still be a problem. The national sales
what might be expected on the basis of the power installed. reported by IEA from 1971 to 2002, also include sales to
It is reasonable to expect that these effects are likely to have smaller ships operating on inland waterways. This fleet is
different impacts on the total fleet within the period 1970 – reported to account for 42,000 engine powered ships
2000 and so we have included most of them in the fleet and 38,000 push-towed vessels in 1992 [Organisation for
modeling approach outlined in section 3. 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.
Table 2. Reported Specific Fuel Consumption (SFC) for Different
[21] The variation in carbon content for marine oil prod-
Engine and Fuel Types
ucts is small [Energy Information Administration, 1994].
Reported SFC The uncertainty in the average CO2 emission factor for
Engine Type Ib./S.H.P.ha g/kWh marine oils is less than ±5%. This is in line with Skjølsvik et
Diesel ships 0.36b – 0.47c 200 – 240d,e al. [2000]. The assumed carbon content in coal for marine
Turbine purposes is reported to be 70.4% [SNAME, 1983]. We
Oil 0.75b 290 – 305d,e expect the error in the assumed carbon content for coal to
Coal 1.125b – 2.4c,f
Steam engine
be within ±10%. Taking into account uncertainties in sales
Oil 0.9b 700d numbers, it is expect that the uncertainties in the CO2
Coal 1.35b – 1.54c emissions after 1970 should be within a range of ±20%,
a
Ib-pound = 0.45359237 kg; S.H.P., shaft horse power; 1 H.P = 0.7457 kW; while the estimates before 1970 should be within a range of
h, hour.
b
±30%. Limited data exists for average sulphur content of
Le Mesurier and Humphreys [1935]. marine oil up to 1990. This is supported by the fact that the
c
Baker [1915].
d
SNAME [1988], average figures.
use of residual fuel in marine diesel engines dates to the
e
Cooper [2002]. 1940s. Prior to the 1940s, residual fuels for navigational
f
At low speeds, while for high speeds 1.2 Ib./S.H.P.hr. purposes had been used by steam ships [Cullen, 1997]. We

7 of 17
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION D12301

Table 3. Input Data to Equation (3), Modeling Main Engine Fuel 1970– 2000 for all oceangoing civil ships above or equal to
Consumption for the World Fleet of Oceangoing Civil Ships 100 GT is then estimated by
Larger or Equal to 100 GT, Period 1970 – 2000 (Presented per
Decade)a


Fi; s ¼ bi; s  t  p  m per ship
 ni; s  N number of ships
; ð3Þ
Parameter Variable 1970 1980 1990 2000
Time at sea, days t 215 162 167 181 where Fi,s denotes the total fuel consumption of average
Average main engine size, kW p 2032 2452 2705 3251
Average engine load ( – ) m 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7
ships with main engine type i burning fuel type s, kg fuel/
Number of active ships (103) N 52.3 71.7 76.2 86.8 year; bi,s denotes the average specific fuel consumption for
% main engine powered by an average ship with main engine type i burning fuel type s,
Diesel n1,1 0.64 0.68 0.88 0.94 kg fuel/kWh; t denotes the average number of operating
Steam, oil n2,1 0.34 0.32 0.12 0.06 hours at sea per year for an average ship (see equation (5),
Steam, coal n2,2 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average SFCb below), h/year; p denotes average installed main engine
at sea for main power for an average ship, kW; m denotes the average main
engine, g/kWh engine load for an average ship; ni,s denotes the fraction of
Diesel b1,1 240 234 228 221 the average ships in the fleet with main engine type i
Steam, oil b2,1 363 344 329 329
Steam, coal b2,2 807 0 0 0
burning fuel type s (see equation (4), below); and N denotes
a the total number of active average ships in the fleet (i.e., not
Note that yearly input data is used in the modeling.
b
SFC, specific fuel consumption. 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
judge the error in sulphur content in oil to be within ±20% numbers applied in our modeling are given year by year.
up to 1990, and within ±10% after 1990. It is expected that 3.1.1. Number of Active Average Ships, Diesel
the total uncertainties in the SO2 emissions after 1990 and Steam Powered
should be within a range of ±20%, while the estimates [25] As outlined above, the number of average ships
before 1990 should be within a range of ±30%. We realize corresponds to the total number of ships reported in the
that the modeling is based on a number of assumptions world fleet of oceangoing civil ships above or equal to
regarding average sulphur and carbon content (coal) and the 100 GT (Figure 1, left). The total number of ships and GT in
results should therefore be interpreted carefully. the fleet from 1970 to 2000 is based on fleet statistics
(Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, world fleet statistics and
3. Activity-Based Fleet Modeling, 1970–2000 statistical tables, 1992 (year 1970 – 1992), 1995 (year
1993– 1995) and 2000 (year 1996 and 2000)). The fraction
[22] This section presents an improved activity-based of the average ships (ni,s) in the fleet with main engine type i
modeling approach that uses high-resolution time series as burning fuel type s is calculated on the basis of the
input data to estimate fuel consumption for the oceangoing following equation:
civil world fleet larger or equal to 100 GT. Modeling is
made for the period 1970 to 2000, and only for the main Di; s
ni; s ¼ ; ð4Þ
engines. Historical data available is limited, and do not D1;1 þ D2;1 þ D2;2
allow for detailed modeling, such as the baseline approaches
reported by Corbett and Koehler [2003], Endresen et al. where Di,s denotes the total tonnage in the fleet with engine
[2003] and others (e.g., breakdown on ship types and sizes). type i burning fuel type s, GT.
Simplifications and assumptions are therefore made. How- [26] The tonnage in the fleet with engine type i burning
ever, compared to past activity-based modeling studies fuel type s is based on yearly fleet data from Lloyd’s
[Eyring et al., 2005; Corbett and Koehler, 2003], this study Register of Shipping (statistical tables, 1972 – 1975 and
has developed and applied a more detailed approach, which 1977– 1984). From 1985 to 1992 the yearly fleet data is
includes the variation in the demand for sea transport, as only available for the steam powered tank and bulk fleet
well as operational and technological changes. (Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1985 –
1990, and world fleet statistics and statistical tables, 1991,
3.1. Modeling Approach 1992). However, we have assumed that the tanker and bulk
[23] The average ship size approach applied in this study fleets are representative for the total steam tonnage, as they
assumes an equal size for the total number of ships in the were the dominating ships by tonnage. Fleet data is not
world fleet of oceangoing civil ships larger or equal to available for the steam powered segment from 1993 on-
100 GT, and calculates the average size of the ships by ward, and the changes in the steam tonnage are estimated by
dividing total tonnage with the total number of ships. The interpolation between the 1992 tonnage and the actual
fuel consumption for an average ship is estimated on the tonnage in 2004 [LRF, 2005]. The percentage of the coal
basis of average characteristics of installed main engine fired tonnage is available from Corbett [2004] up to 1960.
power, main engine load, bunker fuel consumed per power Detailed fleet data from Lloyd’s is available for the years
unit (kW) (depends on propulsion and fuel type) and days at 1961, 1962 and 1963 (Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, statis-
sea (based on demand for sea transport). The fuel consump- tical tables, 1961– 1963), but no data is available thereafter
tion is calculated separately for the diesel and steam ships, according to our information. A linear reduction from 3.3%
as steam ships have a significantly higher fuel consumption of the coal fired tonnage in 1963 to zero in 1979 is assumed,
(Table 2). The main engine fuel consumption for the period on the basis of the development of coal sales (Table 1). It

8 of 17
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION D12301

Table 4. Input Data to Equation (5), Modeling Time at Sea for the where q denotes the total yearly sea borne trade of ships in
World Fleet of Oceangoing Civil Ships Larger or Equal to 100 GT, the fleet, tonnes/year; l denotes of average length of haul
Period 1970 – 2000 (Presented per Decade)a (with cargo), nautical miles (nm); d denotes average dead
Parameter Variable 1970 1980 1990 2000 weight tonnage (Dwt) of ships in the fleet, Dwt; v denotes
Average haul,b nm l 4380 4606 4307 4236
the average operational speed of ships in the fleet, nm/h;
Average speed,c knots v 13.9 14.2 14.1 14.4 h denotes the average utilization of cargo capacity of ships
Total GT (106) 227.5 420.0 423.6 558.1 in the fleet, tonnes/Dwt; and a denotes the ballast factor,
Average ship size, Dwt d 9920 16226 15889 17150 defined as the average number of days in ballast relative to
Seaborne transport,d Mt q 2433 3606 3977 5434 days sailing with cargo.
Utilization of Dwt ( – ) h 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
Ballast factor ( – ) a 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 [29] Input data for the different terms in equation (5) is
a
Note that yearly input data is used in the modeling.
described below and given per decade in Table 4. Average
b
The average haul length (l) from 1970 to 2000 is based on Fearnleys operational speed (v) is derived from data collected for
[2002] and Stopford [1997]. 37,193 cargo and passenger ships in the Lloyd’s 2006 fleet
c
d
Based on data collected from Lloyd’s fleet database. database [LRF, 2005 – 2006]. The average operation speed
Based on Fearnleys [2002] and Stopford [1997]. 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
should be recognized that other engine types are represented sea borne trade volumes (q) for 1970 to 1995 are based on
in the oceangoing civil world fleet (e.g., gas turbine), but Stopford [1997], while data for the period 1996 to 2000 are
these types are negligible by tonnage and number when based on Fearnleys [2002] (Figure 3). The average sailing
compared with steam and diesel. Thus we have not taken distances (l) are calculated by dividing the total transport
them into account in this study. work (tonne miles) by the total sea borne trade volumes.
[27] The number of average active ships (N  ni,s) is From 1970 to 2000 these data are based on Fearnleys
calculated by subtracting the number of average ships [2002] and Stopford [1997].
corresponding to the nontrading tonnage. The number of [30] Relatively little information is available about the
ships out of service is distributed on engine and fuel average time spent in ballast. Ideally, a ship should com-
categories according to the relative tonnage of the fleet with plete all voyages with cargo. However, many trades require
main engine type i burning fuel type s. The development in return voyages without cargo. For example, a crude oil
laid up tonnage and tonnage used for storage from 1970 to tanker typically transports a single cargo load between two
1995 is based on Stopford [1997], and on data from ports, then returns to its point of origin or another port
Fearnleys [2002] thereafter. The number of active average without cargo. Wijnolst and Wergeland [1997] indicates that
sized steam ships (N  n2,s) will then reflect the total amount it is not likely for the tanker fleet that the average ballast
of tonnage (in service) for the steam powered fleet (D2,s), factor will be less than 0.8, and it will hardly ever exceed 1.
while number of active average sized diesel ships (N  n1,1) Tracking data reported for 453 Very Large Crude oil
will reflect the total amount of tonnage (in service) for the Carriers in 1991 illustrated a ballast factor of 0.81. Other
diesel powered fleet (D1,1). ship types such as general cargo and container ships, often
3.1.2. Time at Sea sail with some cargo and some ballast and have limited time
[28] The operational profile is derived by combining in ballast, but are frequently not fully laded. For about 100
yearly fleet and trade data. This deviates from recent smaller cargo ships operating on a regional basis (most
modeling studies that estimate days at sea on the basis of ships around 3,500 Dwt), the ballast factor is reported to be
engine manufactures data for large engines and tracking around 0.2 [Wilson EuroCarriers, 2005]. In the modeling,
studies. The development of the yearly total number of days these ships are ‘‘forced’’ to transport all cargo nearly fully
at sea sailing with cargo for the fleet is estimated on the laden, and then spend time in ballast. On an annual basis, it
basis of number of voyages required for an average cargo is expected that this simplification, may give representative
ship (with an average utilization of cargo capacity) to number of days at sea, as well as cargo volumes transported.
transport the yearly reported worldwide total cargo vol- Taking into account the fact that larger ships dominate the
umes, combined with average voyage time calculated from transported volumes at sea [Stopford, 1997], the average
reported average length of haul and assumed average ballast factor (a) is assumed to be 0.7 (i.e., days with ballast
operational speed. We have only considered the cargo is 70% of the number of days with cargo) for all ship types.
carrying fleet when estimating days at sea, and assumed [31] Wijnolst and Wergeland [1997] reports that utiliza-
that days at sea for cargo and noncargo ships are equal. tion of cargo capacity in practice hardly exceeds 0.95, but
Noncargo ships normally have less days at sea as indicated may become as low as 0.65. The utilization of cargo
by Endresen et al. [2004], and this assumption may bias our capacity of bulk ships and oil tankers larger than 50,000 Dwt
fuel consumption estimates toward being too high, com- in 2001 is reported by Behrens et al. [2003] to be 0.91 and
pared to the real situation. The development of the yearly 0.87, respectively. These ships account for almost 55% of
average number of days at sea (t) (with cargo and in ballast the sea borne trade in 2000 [Fearnleys, 2002], and will of
condition) of the active average cargo ships is calculated by course then have a large impact on the average factor. We
means of 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
1þa l q
t¼   ; ð5Þ instance, data reported by Johnsen [2000] for a dry cargo
N v voyage time d  h number of voyage ship with carry capacity of about 5,200 tonnes, indicate that

9 of 17
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION
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 ocean-
going civil ships in the Lloyd’s 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 accord-
ing to the tonnage. In 1961, the steam engines accounted for
41% of the steam tonnage (Lloyd’s Register of Shipping,
statistical tables, 1961). This is reduced to 8% in 1970
10 of 17
D12301
(Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, statistical tables, 1970), 2%
in 1984 (Lloyd’s 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 recommenda-
tions 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, Flodström [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 Lloyd’s 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 UK’s
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 under-
represented 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 in-
creased 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, trans-
porting 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,
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION 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 trans-
portation, 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 com-
modity 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 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION
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 sepa-
rately, we expect that the uncertainty will be significantly
reduced. However, the method fails for service ships (non-
cargo). 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 con-
sume 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.
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
[40] We expect that in the future the actual service speed
will be estimated on the basis of AIS (automatic identifica-
tion 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
Lloyd’s 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. Dalsøren 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,
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION D12301

Table 5. Comparison of Reported Fuel Consumption for the Oceangoing World Fleet
This Study
Year Fuel Baseda Modeledb Eyring et al. [2005] Corbett and Koehler [2003] Endresen et al. [2003, 2005]
1970 152 111 124c
1980 159 129 213c
1995 174 164 240c
2000 201 195 166d – 200e
2001 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 activity-
based 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 simpli-
fied method. The methodology does not include second-
order 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 apply-
ing 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 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION
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 calcu-
lated by summing up for all categories. A corresponding
modeling was made by using a calculated average (arith-
metic mean) for these categories (= 212 days). The devia-
tion 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 produc-
tion (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 compo-
sition 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
14 of 17
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 oceango-
ing 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%.
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION
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 (Lloyd’s 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 con-
sumption 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 under-
reported. 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 impor-
tant changes in the fleet. This has led to the assumption that
significant underreporting of sales can have occurred. How-
ever, 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
15 of 17
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 trans-
port. 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 trans-
portation (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 neces-
sarily 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. How-
ever, our results indicate that the reported sales number for
this period may be representative and not significantly
underreported, as previous activity-based studies have sug-
gested. 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
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION
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 uncer-
tainty 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 acknowl-
edge 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 Norwe-
gian), vol. 15, paragraph 326, Oslo, Norway.
Aschehougs Konversasjonsleksikon (1956), Aschehougs forlag (in Norwe-
gian), vol. 6, paragraph 698, Oslo, Norway.
Aschehougs og Gyldendals store Norske Leksikon (1999), Kunnskapsfor-
laget (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, Con-
stable and Co. Ltd., London.
Behrens, H. L., Ø. Endresen, A. Mjelde, and C. Garmann (2003),
Environmental accounting system for Norwegian shipping—EASNoS
phase 1, DNV Rep. 2002-1645, Det Norske Veritas, Høvik, 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. Envir-
on. 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 Øyvind Endresen et al. on ‘‘Updated emis-
sions from ocean shipping’’, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D23303,
doi:10.1029/2004JD005030.
Cullen, W. P. (1997), Marine fuels—Worldwide sulphur levels, Det Norske
Veritas, Pet. Serv. Inc., Oslo, Norway.
Dalsøren, S. B., Ø. Endresen, I. S. A. Isaksen, G. Gravir, and E. Sørgård
(2007), Environmental impacts of the expected increase in sea transpor-
tation, 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, Ø., E. Sørgård, J. K. Sundet, S. B. Dalsøren, I. S. A. Isaksen, T. F.
Berglen, and G. Gravir (2003), Emission from international sea transpor-
tation and environmental impact, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D17), 4560,
doi:10.1029/2002JD002898.
Endresen, Ø., E. Sørgård, 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, Ø., J. Bakke, E. Sørgård, T. F. Berglen, and P. Holmvang (2005),
Improved modelling of ship SO2 emissions—A 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 Emis-
sions (2002), Emission Inventory Guidebook, 3rd ed., Tech. Rep. 30, Eur.
Environ. Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark.
16 of 17
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. Köhler, 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.
Flodström, 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
påvirke 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 forbrænding (in Norwegian), O. N.
Authens forlag, Tønsberg, 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.
Lloyd’s Register Fairplay (2005), The World fleet database for 2004
(all civil ocean-going ships above or equal to 100 GT), Redhill,
U. K.
Lloyd’s Register Fairplay (2005 – 2006), Extracts from the world merchant
fleet database for 2005 and 2006 (all civil ocean-going cargo and pas-
senger ships above or equal to 100 GT), Redhill, U. K.
Lloyd’s Register of Shipping (1995), Marine Exhaust Emissions Research
Programme, Lloyd’s Reg. Eng. Serv., London.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (1997), What
markets are there for transport by inland waterways?, report of the Hun-
dred 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.
Skjølsvik, K. O., A. B. Andersen, J. J. Corbett, and J. M. Skjelvik (2000),
Study on greenhouse gas emissions from ships, Rep. MT Rep. Mtoo A23-
038, 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 Vibra-
tion, 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)
D12301 ENDRESEN ET AL.: A HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION 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/)

H. L. Behrens, P. O. Brett, and Ø. Endresen, Det Norske Veritas,
Veritasveien 1, N-1322 Høvik, Norway. (oyvind.endresen@dnv.com)
I. S. A. Isaksen, Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, N-0315
Oslo, Norway.
E. Sørgård, Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, P. O. Box 815,
N-8001 Bodø, Norway.

17 of 17