Close the left navigation

Environmental Health Economic Analysis Annotated Bibliography

Go Back

Details

Research article
Authors

Vaishnav P, Fischbeck PS, Morgan MG, and Corbett JJ

Journal

Environ Sci Technol

Summary
This study used two integrated assessment models to quantify the benefits of reducing air pollutant emissions (NOx, SO2, PM2.5, and CO2), that would occur if shore power were used by U.S. cargo and cruise ships in port. Researchers found, depending on the social costs of pollution assumed, an air quality benefit of $70-150 million per year could be achieved by retrofitting one quarter to two-thirds of all vessels that call at U.S. ports. They concluded that such a benefit could be produced at no net cost to society, but would require many ships to be quipped to receive shore power. These results suggest that policy makers could produce a net societal gain by implementing incentives and mandates to encourage a shift toward shore power.
Population

Not available

Health Outcomes

  • Not available

Health Outcome List:

  • Not available

Environmental Agents

List of Environmental Agents:

  • Air pollutants (nitrous oxide (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM 2.5/fine), carbon dioxide (CO2))

Source of Environmental Agents:

  • Hoteling emissions generated from ships in port

Economic Evaluation / Methods and Source

Type:

  • Cost-benefit analysis (CBA)

Cost Measures:

  • Cost to ship owners for retrofitting U.S. vessels to accept shore power
  • cost to U.S. ports of extending or expanding the power distribution network

Potential Cost Measures:

  • Cost to ship owners for retrofitting non-U.S. vessels to accept shore power
  • cost to non-U.S. ports of extending or expanding the power distribution network

Benefits Measures:

  • Monetary benefits for ship owners
  • environmental benefits as a result of reduced air pollutant emissions per kilowatt hour via shore power use

Potential Benefits Measures:

  • Not available

Location:

  • United States

Models Used:

  • Air Pollution Emission Experiments and Policy analysis (APEEP) model
  • Estimating Air Pollution Impacts Using Regression (EASIUR) method with the Comprehensive Air-Quality model with extensions (CAMx)

Models References:

  • References cited in publication — Air Pollution Emission Experiments and Policy analysis (APEEP) model (Muller et al., 2007 and http://www.econ.yale.edu/~nordhaus/Resources/muller_JEEM_Appendix.pdf)Estimating Air Pollution Impacts Using Regression (EASIUR) method with the Comprehensive Air-Quality model with extensions (CAMx) (Heo et al., 2016 and http://www.camx.com/files/camxusersguide_v6-20.pdf)

Methods Used:

  • Researchers used two integrated assessment models to quantify the benefits of reducing the emissions of air pollutants (NOx, SO2, PM2.5, and CO2) that would occur if shore power were used by cruise and cargo ships in port. They — 1) obtained data on cargo vessels (July 2013 to December 2014), port information for vessels, as well as information on cruise and port ships; 2) defined the costs and benefits of using shore power in mathematical equations; 3) obtained the value in dollars (per ton) for emitting pollutants (NOx, SO2, and PM2.5) using the APEEP and CAMx models; 4) conducted analysis assuming social costs obtained from both models; and 5) solved mixed-integer linear problems twice for each type of vessel, assuming the social costs of pollutants derived from APEEP and EASIUR.

Sources Used:

  • Fleetmon vessel traffic report for 20 U.S. ports (Fleetmon, JAKOTA Cruise Systems, 2015); Cold ironing cost effectiveness study (http://www.polb.com/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=7718); Applications of environmental valuation for determining externality costs (Matthews et al. 2000); Measuring the damages of air pollution in the United States (Muller et al., 2007); Evaluation of air quality impacts on society: Methods and application (Heo, 2015); Reduced-form modeling of public health impacts of inorganic PM2.5 and precursor emissions (Heo et al., submitted for review); Linking policy to statistical uncertainty in air pollution damages (Muller et al., 2011); additional sources cited in publication

Economic Citation / Fundings

Citation:

  • Vaishnav P, Fischbeck PS, Morgan MG, and Corbett JJ. Shore power for vessels calling at U.S. ports: benefits and costs. Environ Sci Technol. 2016. 50; 3.
  • Pubmed
  • DOI

NIEHS Funding:

  • Not available

Other Funding:

  • Center for Climate and Energy Decision Making (SES-0949710); Academic Funds through the Department of Engineering and Public Policy from the CIT Dean's Office