Alexandria Engineering Journal (2019) 58, 19–25

H O S T E D BY
Alexandria University

Alexandria Engineering Journal

www.elsevier.com/locate/aej
www.sciencedirect.com

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Quantification of the exhaust emissions from

seagoing ships in Suez Canal waterway
A. El-Taybany, M.M. Moustafa *, M. Mansour, Adel A. Tawfik

Naval Architecture and Marine Eng. Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Port Said University, Port Fuad 42526, Egypt

Received 17 December 2017; revised 26 June 2018; accepted 3 November 2018

Available online 27 February 2019

KEYWORDS Abstract This study aimed to quantify the exhaust emissions from seagoing ships and evaluate the
Suez Canal; relevance of shipping as an air polluter in Suez Canal area. Suez Canal and Port Said authority’s
Shipping emissions; databases and engine manufactures are used to collect technical information about seagoing ships
Air pollution; passing the Canal. To overcome the lake of data, correlations have been developed for each ship
Emission factor; category to predict the power of the auxiliary engines as a function of the power of the main
Emission rate engines.
In this study, exhaust pollutants are estimated based on two models developed by the maritime
industry. Also, ships emissions are predicted for each ship category at different modes of operation.
Then, the predicted emissions are correlated and expressed as a function of the numbers of ships
passing the canal and their net tonnage.
The results indicated that the average emissions from seagoing ships passing Suez Canal were
evaluated to be 8.16 million tons annually with a potential increase in the future. Also, container
ships are the main source of air pollution amongst other ship categories and mainly responsible
about 48–59% of the air pollution. This study may be used to inform future Egyptian policies that
target shipping emissions and crossing dues.
Ó 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria
University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction sely related to a set of parameters representing the use of the

engine such as propulsion and auxiliary machineries, type of
Although shipping is supported the overwhelming majority of fuel, temperature of combustion, cruising speed and phase of
world global trade and is widely acknowledged as being envi- navigation (cruise, hoteling and maneuvering) [3]. Shipping
ronment friendlier than other transport modes, shipping is a emissions (NOX, SOX, CO, CO2, HC, PM) are important con-
significant air pollution source in ports, canals and coastal tributors to several major environmental problems [4,5]. Also,
areas [1,2]. Ships emissions from marine power plants are clo- greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are contributing to climate
change, while non-GHG emissions can cause acid rain, damage
* Corresponding author. to monuments, a reduction of agricultural fields, water contam-
E-mail address: moustafa3875@eng.psu.edu.eg (M.M. Moustafa). ination, modification of soil biology and deforestation [6].
Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria Different studies noticed that the global annual range from
University. ship emissions have been between 813 & 912 Million tons
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2018.11.016
1110-0168 Ó 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
20 A. El-Taybany et al.

Nomenclature and abbreviations

Aux auxiliary engines LNG liquefied natural gas

a coefficient specific to each air contaminant LF load factor
b coefficient specific to each air contaminant MDO marine diesel oil
C correlation constant M/C main engines
CO carbon monoxide N correlation constant
CO2 carbon dioxide NOX nitrogen oxides
d constant specific to each ship category NO2 nitrogen dioxide
E engine emission, g NS number of ships
ENTE environmental and engineering consultancy NT net tonnage, tons
EPA environmental protection agency P engines power, kW
Ea annual ship emissions, tons/year PM particulate matter
EF emission factor, g/(kW h) PAux auxiliary engines power, kW
ER emission rate, g/h PM/C main engines power, kW
ET total annual emissions, tons/year SC Suez Canal
e constant specific to each ship category SCA Suez Canal Authority
GHG greenhouse gas SOX sulphur oxides
HC hydrocarbons Ta activity duration, h
IMO international maritime organization x coefficient specific to each air contaminant

[7–9]. Emissions from shipping currently represent 3% of the
world’s total emissions and the industry’s share is increasing
[10]. Therefore, a continued increase in marine transport with-
out any significant gains in energy efficiency may result in ship-
ping being responsible for 6% of the world’s GHG emissions
by 2020 and 15% by 2050 [10]. Recently inventories of ship
emissions are effective ways for monitoring trends and priori-
tizing policy- making for protecting the atmospheric environ-
ment at any region [11].
Many studies have been carried out to estimate the quantity
of emissions from ships [12]. The existing methods of ships
emissions estimation depend mainly upon the application of
ship activity-based or fuel-based methodologies [1]. Earlier
inventories relied mainly on fuel-based emission factors.
Recently, there is a general agreement in the marine sector that
the use of fuel-based emission factors for vessels without direct
fuel consumption data is not preferred. In this paper, emissions
from a vessel are estimated based on two models used by the
maritime industry. The first model is the US Environmental
Protection Agency model (EPA) and the other is the European
Commission as done by the Environmental and Engineering
Consultancy (ENTEC).
Nowadays, more than 17,000 ships are passing Suez Canal
(SC), annually [13]. These ships release a huge amount of
exhaust emissions which have a strong effect on climate change
and significant impact on the health of the people who live in
the surrounding area. Thus, the main objective of the present
paper is to quantify emissions from seagoing ships and evaluate
the busiest transporting cargo waterways not only in Egypt but
also all over the world. SC is located in Egypt, West of the
Sinai Peninsula. It connects Port Said on the Mediterranean
Sea with the port of Suez on the Red Sea. Many human activ-
ities and people exist on the sides of the canal and they are
affected by the movement reaction of seagoing ship in the
canal. Therefore, as a result of the rapid economic develop-
ment of the Suez Canal region and the importance of marine
transportation, more concerns have been focus on the air qual-
ity along SC waterway to reduce the significant impact of the
emitted exhaust pollutants from seagoing ships on the human
health within the surrounding area. The present study covers
the last eight years started from 2009 up to 2016. Fig. 1 shows
number of ships which were passed Suez Canal during that
period [13].
3. Data collections
The ships examined in the present study were typical and actu-
ally seagoing vessels passed SC in the above mentioned period.
Domestic boats and units (tugs, ferries, fishing and charter
boats, etc.) aren’t considered due to its low contribution of
the total exhaust emissions. In this paper, seagoing ships pass-
ing SC are classified in eight ship categories; see Table 1 [13].
Ships Passing Suez Canal (2009-2016)
18500
Number of Ships

the relevance of shipping as an air polluter in Suez Canal area. 18000

Also, this study aims to collect the necessary information which
may be considered as a base for any action may be taken by the 17500
Egyptian Government in the future to reduce the exhaust emis- 17000
sions from seagoing ships in Suez Canal waterway.
16500

2. Study area and period 16000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Years
Suez Canal (SC) is the shortest link between East and the West
and it plays an important role in worldwide trade. SC is one of Fig. 1 Ship passed SC (2009–2016).
Quantification of the exhaust emissions from seagoing ships 21

Table 1 Number of ships passed SC per category (2009–2016).

Ship category Year
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Container ships 6080 6852 7179 6332 6014 6128 5433 5414
Bulk carriers 3166 2781 2601 2936 2873 3051 2646 2801
Ro–Ro ships 263 270 255 284 266 228 372 461
LNG 525 855 1083 800 649 614 610 575
Tankers 3479 3550 3509 3639 3593 4053 3945 4292
General cargo 1862 1618 1395 1415 1385 1259 1527 1662
Passenger ships 106 100 96 85 76 67 68 70
others 903 963 670 692 715 744 757 683

It is very hard to get the complete vessel characteristics

Tankers
(number, categories, dimensions, sailing speed, auxiliary and 3.4

× 10 3
Auxiliary Engines Power
propulsion power) for each ship. However, few sample data-
sets for each ship category have been collected from main y = 1402.7 x 0.0656
administration of Suez Canal Authority (SCA) in Port Said 3

[ kW ]
Branch. This study was carried out in details to predict emis-
sions based on the collected ships for each ship category. Then, 2.6
it can be generalized and extrapolated to cover all seagoing
ships which were passed SC during the study period.
2.2
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
4. Prediction of auxiliary engines power × 10 3
Main Engines Power [ kW ]
Power of the auxiliary engines (PAux) is one of the most impor-
Fig. 3 Machinery power versus Auxiliary power for tankers.
tant missing data for many ships. Therefore, as a preliminary
step to overcome the lake of these data, a set of simple corre-
lations are developed for each ship category to predict the Bulk Carriers
power of the auxiliary engines (PAux) as a function of the 3
Auxiliary Engines Power

× 10 3

power of the main engines (PM/C) within a maximum deviation

of ±6%. These correlations are established as follows: 2.5

N
[ kW ]

PAux ¼ C  PM=C ð1Þ 2

C and N are constants and obtained as shown in Figs. 2–4 for 1.5 y = 0.8501 x 0.3892
containers ships, tankers and bulk carriers, respectively.
The values of auxiliary power as a function of propulsion 1
machinery power may differ within the same group of ships 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
× 10 3
due to the ship machinery layout and arrangement. The value Main Engines Power [ kW ]
of auxiliary power is strongly related to propulsion power in
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) carriers due to the electric Fig. 4 Machinery power versus Auxiliary power for bulk
power required for natural gas re-liquefaction plant. The same carriers.
trend is observed in RO-RO ship due to the big electric con-
sumption in refrigerated trucks which need more electric load
during operation. 5. Emissions prediction methodologies

Containers Ships Generally, the ship is operating in four different modes. The
10
Auxiliary Engines Power

first one is the approaching and docking in ports, the second

× 10 3

8 y = 0.0005 x 1.442 is the hoteling or berthing in port, the third is the departure
and arrival in port and the last one is the cruising mode
6 [14,15]. Therefore, in the present study, emissions from ship’s
[ kW ]

4 engines are predicted assuming that the operating mode of

2 all ships passing SC is the maneuvering mode as a general case
without applied specific condition for port departure and
0 arrival.
15 25 35 45 55 65 75 × 10 3 Suez Canal length is about 193.0 km and according to the
Main Engines Power [ kW ] navigation regulation in the Canal, the allowable sailing speed
is 13.0 km/h for tankers and 14.0 km/h for all other types of
Fig. 2 Machinery power versus auxiliary power for container ships [13]. According to the type of ship and canal specifica-
ships. tion, the ship crossing time can be estimated.
22 A. El-Taybany et al.

5.1. EPA methodology 5.3. Comparison between EPA and ENTEC

In EPA method, Eq. (2) is used to estimate the emission
amount (E) of certain pollutant from the ship’s engines [16,17].
E ¼ P  LF  Ta  EF
Where, E is engine emission (g), P is engine power (kW), LF is
the load factor for main and auxiliary engines, Ta is the activity
duration (h) and EF is the emission factor (g/kW.h). Emission
factor (EF) may be estimated by using Eq. (3) [18].
EF ¼ a  ðLF Þx þ b
where: a, b and x are the dimensional less coefficients specific to
each air contaminant and are tabulated as shown in Table 2 [18].
5.2. ENTEC methodology
A simple emissions prediction example for containers ship is
presented in Table 4 for propulsion machinery and auxiliary
ð2Þ engines. The comparison among the estimated emission rates
using both methodologies revealed that there are some differ-
ences among their values. Where, the estimated emissions rates
using EPA for NOx and HC usually lower than those esti-
mated using ENTEC model. However, the estimated emissions
rate using EPA for CO2 usually higher than that estimated
ð3Þ using ENTEC model.
Also, ships emissions (NOx, CO2, HC) predictions for 15
containers ships are carried out using EPA and ENTEC, see
Fig. 5. This figure shows that, the estimated ships emissions
using EPA method are 15% higher than that obtained by
ENTEC.

In the present paper, the European Commission Model as 6. Prediction of ship emissions and correlations
known by ENTEC [18] is used to estimate the emission rate
(ER) of each pollutant from ship’s engines during passing SC In this section, ships emissions predictions are carried out
channel for the purpose of comparison and verification. Eq. according to the maneuvering mode of operation for both
(4) is applied to estimate ER (g/h) as a function of engine propulsion machinery and auxiliary engines. Moreover, the
power and emission factor [18]. present study assumes that all the ship machinery is running
ER ¼ P  EF ð4Þ with Marine Diesel Oil (MDO) with low sulfur content when
passing through Suez Canal. Also, load factor is taken equal
Emission factors in g/kW h regarding engine/fuel type for to 1 and 0.4 for propulsion machinery and auxiliary engines,
main and auxiliary engines in ship maneuvering mode are tab- respectively.
ulated as shown in Table 3 [18]. EPA emission model is used to estimate the exhaust gases
(PM, NOx, NO2, CO, CO2, HC) emitted from the collected
Table 2 Marine engine emission factor coefficients. ships for each ship category. These predictions are based on
sailing speed, the power of ship propulsion machinery and
Pollutant x a b
auxiliary, SC net tonnage, engine specifications and ship par-
PM 1.5 0.0059 0.2551 ticulars. After calculating the total air emissions (tons/trip)
NOx 1.5 0.1255 10.4496 from each ship during its trip in SC, the average annual values
NO2 1.5 0.18865 15.5247
of ships emission (tons/ship) are estimated for each ship cate-
CO 1 0.8378 Not significant
gory. The output for each ship categories is estimated and tab-
CO2 1 44.1 648.6
HC 1.5 0.0667 Not significant ulated as shown in Table 5.

Table 3 Emission factors (g/kW h) for main engines in maneuvering mode.

Engine type Fuel type Main engines Auxiliary engines
NOx CO2 HC SFC NOx CO2 HC SFC
Slow speed diesel engine Marine diesel oil 13.6 647 1.8 204 — — — —
Medium speed diesel engine Marine diesel oil 10.6 710 1.5 223 13.9 690 0.4 217
High speed diesel engine Marine diesel oil 9.6 710 0.6 223 10.9 690 0.4 217

Table 4 Emission rates using EPA and ENTEC methodologies.

Engines Fuel type Load factor Operation mode Air pollutants Emission rate (kg/h)
EPA ENTEC
Main engines Marine diesel oil 100% Maneuvering mode NOx 876 1089
CO2 60,702 51,796
HC 13 144
Auxiliary engines Marine diesel oil 40% Maneuvering mode NOx 31.72 32.7
CO2 2078.1 2070
HC 0.2 1.2
Quantification of the exhaust emissions from seagoing ships 23

Containers Ships Ship Emissions ( Ea ) and SC Net Tonnage

900 ( Container Ships )
5.2 600

Net Tonnage [Million Tons]

Sum of Air Polluants [Tons]

Emission [Million Tons]

800
560
700 4.8
( NOX , CO2 , HC )

520
600
500 4.4 480

400 440
4
300 Emission 400
EPA Net Tonnage
200 ENTEC 3.6 360

2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
100
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 x103
Years
Main Engine Power [ kW ]
Fig. 6 Ship emissions and SC net tonnage for container ships
Fig. 5 Emissions values using EPA and ENTEC for containers (2009–2016).
ships.

Now, the annual ship emission (tons/year) for each ship

category can be predicted based on the annual numbers of
ships (NS) passing SC and average emission value (tons/ship)
for each ship category which are shown in Table 2 and Table 5,
respectively. Fig. 6 shows the predicted values of annual ship
emissions (Ea) for container ships during the study period.
Also, referring to the Suez Canal Authority (SCA) annual
reports, Fig. 6 shows the annual recorded values of the net ton-
nage (NT) of container ships passed SC during the same period
[13].
Then, the annual emissions (Ea) from this ship category are
expressed as a function of the annual numbers of container
ships (NS) passing SC and the corresponding values of net ton- Fig. 7 Annual emissions correlation for container ships.
nage (NT) as shown in Fig. 7.
According to Fig. 7, annual emissions from container ships
can be predicted using Eq. (5). Where, ‘e’ and ‘d’ are constants
specific to container ships and are equal 1.45  104 and 1.258, Table 6 Values of a and b for each ship category.
respectively.
No. Ship category e d


Ea ¼ e  NS d  NT ð5Þ 1 Container ships 1.45  10 4
1.258
2 Bulk carriers 0.2065 0.412
These calculations are repeated to predict the annual emis-
3 Car carriers 3.2696 0.023
sions from the remaining ship categories and the results are 4 Ro–Ro ships 4.2062 0.1543
summarized as shown in Table 6. Also, total annual emissions 5 LNG 3.054 0.093
from all ship categories (ET) during the study period are pre- 6 Tankers 1.587  105 1.142
dicted and plotted as shown in Fig. 8. 7 General cargo 4.3957 0.2815
It is clear that, total annual emissions emitted from ships 8 Passenger ships 0.1142 1.207
are varied between 7.858 and 8.721 million tons annually. 9 Others 121.67 0.051
The total ship emissions in European sea areas, Baltic sea,

Table 5 Emission of the collected ships for each ship category.

No. Ship category Collected ships Total emission (tons) Average emission (tons/ship)
M/C Aux. Total
1 Container ships 15 9501.71 1030.32 10532.03 702.14
2 Bulk carriers 12 1960.12 197.56 2157.68 179.81
3 Car carriers 8 1169.2 168.25 1337.45 167.18
4 Ro–Ro ships 5 944.83 208.97 1153.8 230.76
5 LNG 12 1960.12 184.51 2144.63 178.72
6 Tankers 34 12414.79 4089.153 16503.94 485.41
7 General cargo 9 2834.784 500.256 3335.04 370.56
8 Passenger ships 4 1914.44 1566.36 3480.8 870.2
9 others 64 30752.16 10250.72 41002.88 640.67
24 A. El-Taybany et al.

Annual Ship Emissions ( ET ) in SC followed by tankers. Moreover, container category is mainly

Emissions [ Million Tons] (All Ship Categories) responsible of 48–59% of the total ship emissions.
9
7. Conclusions
8.6

8.2 Shipping is a significant source of pollution in ports and

7.8
7.4
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Years
Fig. 8 Annual ship emissions in SC (all ship categories).
North sea and Mediterranean sea for year 2011 were estimated
to be 121, 3.0, 1.2, and 0.2 million tons, respectively [10]. Also,
the average annual emissions from seagoing ships passing Suez
Canal were evaluated to be 8.16 million tons whereas the cor-
responding values in European sea are estimated to be 125.6
million tons annually.
Eq. (5) can be used to predict the total annual emissions in
SC as a function of the total numbers ships passing SC annu-
ally and the corresponding values of net tonnage. In this con-
dition, the values of the constants ‘e’ and ‘d’ can be taken equal
to 3  1010 and 1.7644, respectively, see Fig. 9.
Emission percentage for each ship category is predicted and
summarized as shown in Table 7. The results of this study indi-
cate that, container ships have the higher values of emissions
All Ship Categories (2009- 2016)
0.0115
Emission / Net Tonnage
coastal areas. The air pollution and emissions from seagoing
ships passing Suez Canal waterway is evaluated and assisted.
The ship emissions mainly depends on the type of propulsion
and auxiliary machineries, the specifications of used fuel, the
sailing and operating modes and the cruising speed.
As a preliminary step to overcome the lake of data, a set of
simple correlations has been developed for each ship category
to predict the power of the auxiliary engines as a function of
the power of the main engines within a maximum deviation
of ±6%. These correlations are generalized as follows:

N
PAux ¼ C  PM=C .
Two models developed by maritime industry are used to
estimate ships emissions based on fuel consumption and
installed machinery power taking into account main and aux-
iliary engines. If the fuel consumptions are known, the emis-
sions can be predicted with fuel related emission factors for
the different navigation phases (cruise, hoteling, maneuvering).
While, in case of fuel consumptions are missing, another
methodology is applied for computing emissions based on
installed power.
In Suez Canal database, tonnage information is widely
available. Therefore, in the present study, annual emissions
(Ea) from each ship category are expressed as a function of
the annual numbers of ships (NS) passing SC and the corre-
sponding values of net tonnage (NT). This methodology is pre-
ferred when detailed information is not available over a
methodology using the installed power or fuel consumption
of a vessel. The annual emissions is correlated and generalized

y = 3 E-10 x 1.7644 as follows: Ea ¼ e  ðNS Þd  NT .

0.0105 The output results of the study indicated that Suez Canal is
(ET/NT)

receiving annually 8.16 million tons of air pollutants, as an

average value of annual emissions during the study period.
0.0095
Also, container ships have the higher values of emissions fol-
lowed by tankers. Moreover, container category is mainly
0.0085 responsible about 48–59% of the total ship emissions in Suez
16 16.4 16.8 17.2 17.6 18 x 10 3
Canal waterway.
No. of Ship ( NS ) / Year In the future, this study may be considered as a base for any
action will be taken by the Egyptian government to reduce
Fig. 9 Total annual emissions correlation. exhaust emissions from seagoing ships during passing Suez

Table 7 Emissions percentages for each ship category (2009–2016).

Ship category Ship exhaust emissions %
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Container ships 52.17 55.17 58.19 54.45 53.66 52.79 49.84 48.37
Bulk carriers 6.96 5.73 5.40 6.47 6.56 6.73 6.22 6.41
Car carriers 1.72 1.92 1.95 2.13 2.18 2.06 1.87 1.86
Ro–Ro ships 0.74 0.71 0.68 0.80 0.78 0.65 1.12 1.35
LNG 1.15 1.75 2.23 1.75 1.47 1.35 1.42 1.31
Tankers 20.64 19.76 19.66 21.64 22.16 24.14 25.02 26.51
General cargo 8.43 6.88 5.97 6.42 6.52 5.72 7.39 7.84
Passenger ships 1.13 1.00 0.96 0.91 0.84 0.72 0.77 0.78
others 7.07 7.07 4.95 5.43 5.82 5.85 6.34 5.57
Quantification of the exhaust emissions from seagoing ships
Canal waterway. Also, it may be used to inform discussions
with the IMO regarding the future direction of marine emis-
sions reduction policy.
References
[1] E.T. Ernestos, Ship emissions and their externalities for Greece,
Atmos. Environ. 44 (2010) 2194–2202.
[2] M. Viana, P. Hammingh, A. Colette, X. Querol, B. Degraeuwe,
I. Vlieger, J. van Ardenne, Impact of maritime transport
emissions on coastal air quality in Europe, Atmos. Environ. J.
90 (2014) 96–105.
[3] H. List, Fuel for tomorrow: Future availability and acceptability
of world energy resources suitable for the marine, power
generation and locomotive, applications, 25th CIMAC World
Congress on Combustion Engine Technology, Vienna, 2007.
[4] P.S. Yau, S.C. Lee, J.J. Corbett, C. Wang, Y. Cheng, K.F. Ho,
Estimation of exhaust emission from ocean-going vessels in
Hong Kong, Sci. Total Environ. 431 (2012) 299–306.
[5] M.M. El Gohary, The future of natural gas as a fuel in marine
gas turbine for LNG carriers, Proc. IMechE Part M: J. Eng.
Maritime Environ. 226 (2012) 371–377.
[6] Ø. Buhaug, J. Corbett, Ø. Endresen, V. Eyring, Second IMO
GHG - Case Study 2009, International Maritime Organization,
London, 2009.
[7] J.J. Corbett, H.W. Koehler, Updated emissions from ocean
shipping, J. Geophys. Res. 108 (D20) (2003) 4650.
[8] Ø. Endresen, E. Sørgard, J. Sundet, S. Dalsøren, I. Isaksen, T.
Berglen, Emission from international sea transportation and
environmental impact, J. Geophys. Res. 108 (2003) 14.1–14.22.
[9] V. Eyring, H.W. Köhler, J.V. Aardenne, A. Lauer, Emissions
from international shipping: 1. The last 50 years, J. Geophys.
Res. 110 (2005) D17305.
25
[10] J. Helfre, P.A. Boot, Emission reduction in the shipping
industry: Regulations, exposure and solutions. www.
sustainalytics.com/sites/default/files/shippingemissionsjuly2013.
pdf., 2013.
[11] C. Wang, J.J. Corbett, The costs and benefits of reducing SO2
emissions from ships in the US West Coastal waters, Transp.
Res. Part D, Transp. Environ. 12 (2007) 577–588.
[12] A.A. Banawan, M.M. El Gohary, I.S. Sadek, Environmental
and economical benefits of changing from marine diesel oil to
natural-gas fuel for short-voyage high-power passenger ships,
Proc. IMechE Part M: J. Eng. Maritime Environ. 224 (2010)
103–113.
[13] Suez Canal Authority Website, Navigation Statistics Annual
Reports. http://www.Suez canal.gov.eg/English/Downloads/
Pages/default.aspx?folder=Navigation%20Reports/Annual%
20Reports%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B., 2017.
[14] C. Deniz, Y. Durmusßoǧlu, Estimating shipping emissions in the
region of the Sea of Marmara, Turkey. Sci. Total Environ. 390
(2008) 255–261.
[15] G. Lonati, S. Cernuschi, S. Sidi, Air quality impact assessment
of at-berth ship emissions: Case-study for the project of a new
freight port, Sci. Total Environ. 409 (2010) 192–200.
[16] SENES Consultants Limited, Review of Methods Used in
Calculating Marine Vessel Emission Inventories. AIR
Improvement Resource, Inc., 38108 Final Report, 2004.
[17] R.A.O. Nunes, M.C.M. Alvim-Ferraz, F.G. Martins, S.I.V.
Sousa, The activity-based methodology to assess ship emissions
– A review, Environ. Pollut. J. 231 (2017) 87–103.
[18] M.J. Dolphin, M. Melcer, Estimation of ship dry air emissions,
Nav. Eng. J. 120 (2009) 27–36.