“In Europe, environmentally friendly practices are requested from ports, but grant funds are created for the establishment of these facilities. Furthermore, port authorities, which are public institutions present in most European countries, carry out these investments. Almost all shore-to-ship power supply facilities in the EU have been established by port authorities and handed over to terminal operators for operation. In our country, however, the entire investment is expected to be made by our ports, which are the terminal operators; it is not possible for the public to establish or support these facilities,” said TÜRKLİM Chairman of the Board Hamdi Erçelik, emphasizing that this situation creates a disadvantage in competition and pressure on costs in our ports.
Can we learn about the scope of the green port transformation in Turkey and what you, as TÜRKLİM, have undertaken in this process?
The green port transformation on the path to combating climate change and environmentally sensitive shipping encompasses strategic, technical, operational, collaboration, measurement, and development processes.
In its strategic component
· The establishment of an environmental culture in a managerial sense,
· Ensuring public-private sector communication, preparing the necessary legislation,
In its technical component
· Electrification of lifting and handling equipment within the port facility and external equipment such as tugs and land vehicles,
· Supplying energy to ships during their port stay through shore-side electricity,
· Charging for land vehicles,
· Ensuring that the energy used in the port is obtained from renewable sources,
· If sufficient opportunity exists within the port, meeting self-consumption from own production through /rooftop solar power plants (SPP), wind power plants (WPP), or SPP installation at a suitable location.
In the operational component
· Digital cargo tracking and documentation,
· For port facilities, land vehicles transferring and receiving cargo to/from ships with minimum energy,
· Handling cargo with minimum energy consumption through optimal placements in cargo stacking, such as container storage,
· Classifying all port waste and sending it to waste disposal facilities,
· Using energy-efficient systems in port administration buildings,
· Keeping marine pollution emergency response systems active,
· Water resources management, rainwater collection,
Collaborations
· Within the scope of ports being a contact point between ship and land transport, fast loading for energy savings of ships
· Coordination of land vehicle access to the port area, use of rail systems,
· Collaborations with the port surroundings, collaborations with local governments
Measurement and Development
· Measurement of port air emissions, their reduction over the years
· Measurement of port seawater quality, sedimentation measurements
· Measurement of port air quality,
· Port noise pollution measurements, creating environmental noise maps and noise prevention
As TÜRKLİM, we are active in the areas of legislation development, data collection and analysis, information sharing, dissemination of best practices, and personnel training.
What are the environmental transformation goals of Turkish ports with their 2030-2050 visions?
The environmental transformation goals of Turkish ports are formed by following our country’s Paris Agreement targets, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) 2050 vision, and the requirements and goals of the European Union, our country’s most important partner in trade, and specifically the Green Deal.
In this framework, both our national and international targets can be summarized as achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and keeping marine pollution and air pollution to a minimum.
To what extent is the EU Green Deal decisive in green port practices?
Within the scope of the EU Green Deal, the inclusion of maritime transport in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), the fuel transition in maritime (FuelEUMaritime), support for alternative fuel infrastructures (AFIR), and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) are the EU Green Deal components that directly affect ports. Due to the international nature of shipping, Turkish ports are indirectly following the roadmap provided by the EU Green Deal. These regulations not only provide rules that ports must comply with but also create support mechanisms. For example, project grants for port transformation are provided from the resources created by ETS and AFIR. In 2023 alone, €109 million in support was provided from the CEF (Connecting Europe Facility) fund for the installation of facilities to supply electricity from shore to ships (cold ironing or onshore power supply – OPS) in ports. The amount of grants provided by the EU for the green transformation of ports reaches several billion euros annually.
For our country’s ports, however, compliance with EU Green Deal criteria is demanded, but there are no green transformation grant supports. Turkey should create its own green transformation funds and initiate grant support for the green transformation of the entire maritime sector with these funds.
What are the standout features of green and smart ports? When we compare the integration and cost processes of green ports with the return on investment, what kind of picture do we see?
Ports have significantly reduced their own waste and emissions. They operate with instruments such as the conversion of cargo handling equipment to electric systems and waste control. The largest sources of emissions are ships at anchor and at berth, the tugs serving these ships, and the land vehicles entering the port. At this stage, ports are expected to support the reduction of emissions from ships and land vehicles. From a maritime perspective, it is desired that by supplying electricity to ships at berth or even at anchor, they shut down their generators in port areas, eliminating air emissions, and that all ship waste is collected by ports and transferred to waste reception facilities. Ports are making investments in rules that are mandatory for ships. However, ports face problems in non-mandatory areas. For example, taking electricity from the port is not mandatory for ships; if high-cost shore-to-ship power supply facilities are built, ships not using these facilities could lead to idle investments. Therefore, the establishment of these facilities will be delayed unless mandatory use is imposed on both parties.
Another role of ports in the green transformation is to form energy hubs. Wind turbines that will generate electricity at sea are unthinkable without ports. During the installation phase, these turbines can only be integrated at onshore facilities, and throughout their entire life cycle, they require ports for logistics, maintenance, repair, and even decommissioning. Biofuels, LNG, ammonia, hydrogen, and other fuels proposed as alternative fuels for ships in the coming period must either be produced in port facilities or stored in port facilities.
How is the carbon footprint of ports calculated?
Can you explain the emission measurement systems and which standards they are based on? On the other hand, is the impact of environmental investments on carbon emissions measured concretely?
Various standards are used in carbon footprint calculations in ports. Primarily, the International Standard Organization ISO 14064-1 stands out as the certification method used. In emission calculations, these are respectively called scope 1, 2, and 3: the port’s direct greenhouse gas emissions, greenhouse gas emissions resulting from energy used, and the indirect greenhouse gas emissions of operations. The basic emission measurement system is to measure the amount of energy used in all 3 scopes and calculate the emission using the emission factor of the energy source. Considering the sea and land vehicles in the port area, direct emission measurements are not possible; instead, energy measurements provide more reliable information. If environmental investments are made with green loans, objective measurement and evaluation, even third-party measurements, can be preferred.
How do Turkey’s ports compare to examples in Europe in terms of environmental practices? Do green port practices make Turkish ports stand out globally in terms of competitiveness, or do they just create cost pressure?
In Europe, environmental practices are required from ports, but grant funds are created for the establishment of these facilities. Furthermore, port authorities, which are public institutions found in most European countries, carry out these investments. Almost all shore-to-ship power supply facilities in the EU were established by port authorities and given to terminal operators for operation. In our country, however, all investment is expected to be made by our ports, which are terminal operators; it is not possible for the public to establish or support these facilities. This situation leaves our ports, which are on land allocated for a period, at a competitive disadvantage and increases cost pressure.
Shipping’s share of carbon emissions is 3%, and within that, the share of port operations is around 25%. Despite such low emissions, how do you evaluate the high-cost environmental investments made in ports? We would like to ask immediately afterwards: ports are transforming, ships are transforming, but hinterland transportation is still carried out with diesel trucks and old railway infrastructure. Doesn’t this situation overshadow the impact of the environmental effort in ports?
The 3% share of shipping in global greenhouse gas emissions is a rate that cannot be ignored. The maritime sector, acting more proactively than all other sectors, has committed to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050. It is the first sector globally to make this commitment. In contrast, the fact that the transformation in the road transport sector has not yet started can be attributed to these modes being governed only by national rules. Shipping, as an international sector, can act more quickly and in a more environmentally friendly manner.
We would also like to ask: electric port equipment is presented as environmentally friendly. However, electricity production still largely comes from fossil fuels. Under these conditions, can these technologies be considered “green”?
Whether the electricity used is green depends entirely on the source. In our country, approximately half of the electricity production is met from hydroelectric, solar, wind, and geothermal sources; in this case, approximately 25% less greenhouse gas emissions are achieved compared to fossil fuel use.
Also, a significant portion of our ports have solar power plants (SPP), they can generate their own electricity needs. Some of our ports have wind power plant (WPP) projects, but there are restrictions regarding /WPP installation sites because they are not licensed producers. For example, while it is possible for licensed producers to install WPPs on forest land, there are obstacles in front of ports as unlicensed producers. Apart from electricity generation for self-consumption, it is possible to purchase IREC or YEK-G certified electrical energy from the grid; in these cases, it may be possible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero.
