COST EFFECTIVENESS OF FIVE EMISSION REDUCTION STRATEGIES

FOR INLAND RIVER TUG AND TOWBOATS

Andrew Papson*
ICF International
620 Folsom Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94107
Tel: +1 415 677 7163
Fax: +1 415 677 7177
apapson@icfi.com

Seth Hartley
ICF International
620 Folsom Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94107
Tel: +1 415 677 7164
Fax: +1 415 677 7177
shartley@icfi.com

Lou Browning
ICF International
Post Office Box 1678
Aptos, CA 95001-1678
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: +1 831-662-3683
lbrowning@icfi.com

*Corresponding Author

Submission Date: November 15, 2009

Word Count: 6690 words plus 3 tables & figures. 7440 total words.

Submitted for presentation at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board and
publication in the Transportation Research Record.
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 2

COST EFFECTIVENESS OF FIVE EMISSION REDUCTION STRATEGIES

FOR INLAND RIVER TUG AND TOWBOATS

Andrew Papson, Seth Hartley, Lou Browning

ABSTRACT
Waterborne transit is one of the safest and most efficient forms of goods movement. The tug and tow
industry transports over 800 million tons of cargo each year, and is a vital component of the U.S.
intermodal freight transportation network. However, emissions from tugboat operations contribute to air
quality impacts on the Nation’s inland river waterways and ports, at a cost to public health and welfare.
While ports and vessel operators can mitigate these environmental impacts with technological and
operational strategies, the effectiveness and cost of each strategy varies greatly. This study analyzes the
cost effectiveness of five tugboat emission reduction strategies, including (1) vessel engine repowering,
(2) vessel speed reduction, (3) biodiesel, (4) diesel particulate filters and (5) selective catalytic reduction.
Each strategy is evaluated for its emissions benefits, costs to the tugboat industry, ports, and government
agencies, and overall cost effectiveness in reducing emissions of NOX, CO, PM10, and CO2. Application
to the Ports of St. Louis and Houston show that the most cost-effective strategy varies by port, depending
on characteristics of the local tugboat fleet. The results of this study can be applied by public agencies and
private operators when considering investments in tugboat emission reduction measures.
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 3

INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been promoting sustainability, performance
improvement, and pollution reduction through collaborative exchange of sector experts and essential
stakeholders. EPA’s Sector Strategies Program (SSP), in partnership with the American Association of Port
Authorities (AAPA), has used pilot findings on Environmental Management Systems (EMS) pilot assistance
projects and other sources to assist ports with achieving greater port sustainability, while EPA Office of
Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) has developed baseline emission inventories to help guide both ports
and regulatory agencies on current emissions by sector and help target emissions reduction programs. Funding
for this project was provided by EPA Regions 6 and 7.
Tug and towboats are an important part of the ports sector of SSP, transporting over 800 million
tons of cargo each year (circa 2002), including over 60 percent of U.S. grain exports along the Nation’s
inland river systems. However, like other aspects of the goods-movement system, this economic
workhorse contributes to local air pollution, damaging public health and welfare. Most vessels in the tug
and tow fleet are driven by diesel engines, the exhaust from which contains large amounts of nitrogen
oxides, particulate matter and toxic air contaminants (1). These pollutants have been connected to
decreased water quality, elevated cancer risks and heart attacks, regional smog, and other issues. (2), (3).
The goal of this study is not to address the impact of tug emissions as compared to other modes of goods
movement, but rather to analyze the cost-effectiveness of strategies to reduce those emissions.
Because many tug and towboats are powered by older, unregulated engines, the vessels emit high
levels of NOX, CO, and PM10. In addition, all tugboats are a source of CO2 emissions. Along the 11,000 miles
of the U.S. inland river system, particularly in the region of the Blue Skyways Collaborative (4), high tug and
towboat activity has raised concern over their emissions and relationship to poor air quality. This report
investigates and evaluates the total costs of current and emerging methods to mitigate these emissions. It is
intended to help tug and towboat operators, local ports authorities, regulatory agencies, and other interested
parties identify and implement cost effective strategies to reduce tug and towboat emissions.
This study analyzes five emission reduction strategies, comprising (1) vessel engine repowering,
(2) vessel speed reduction (VSR), (3) biodiesel (B100), (4) diesel particulate filters (DPF), and (5)
selective catalytic reduction (SCR). The effectiveness of each strategy is calculated for two key ports in
the Blue Skyways Collaborative region: St. Louis, MO, and Houston, TX. The costs and benefits of each
approach are derived from published and, where available, officially accepted performance measurements
and costs for each of the five selected strategies, and are then applied in an annualized, fleet-wide
approach to estimate the cost effectiveness of each approach. Effectiveness is reported for four pollutants:
NOX, CO, PM10, and CO2. The benefits of each strategy are measured in comparison to a baseline of 500
ppm Sulfur Nonroad, Locomotive and Marine (NRLM) diesel without additional emission controls. While
the tugboat industry is currently shifting from 500 ppm to 15 ppm NRLM fuel in accordance with EPA
regulations (5), the baseline of 500 ppm is maintained here since it is the basis for the emission reduction
values applied here.
Results show that the cost-effectiveness of each strategy varies as much as eight-fold between
ports, due to the characteristics of the local tugboat fleet. In the Port of St. Louis, with larger, older
tugboats, reduction strategies are much more effective at reducing emissions, whereas in the Port of
Houston, with smaller, newer tugboats, reduction strategies have less impact for equivalent cost.
Each reduction strategy is effective against a subset of pollutants. Since none of the strategies
analyzed here reduce all the pollutants of interest, the most effective way to reduce emissions at inland
river ports is to apply a bundle of strategies to target all pollutants.
Of the five strategies considered, vessel repowering is most effective at reducing NOX, while
DPFs are most effective in reducing PM10. For CO, DPFs are the most effective strategy in St. Louis,
while biodiesel is most effective in Houston, where DPFs are less effective due to the less powerful
tugboat fleet. In addition, VSR and biodiesel are the only strategies that reduce CO2 emissions, the former
by increasing vessel fuel economy, and the latter by replacing conventional fuels with renewable fuels.
This study was largely motivated by concerns among interested parties—particularly EPA
Regions 6 and 7 and the Blue Skyways Collaborative—related to the amount of activity from tug and
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 4

towboats throughout the region and the ensuing amount of air pollutants emitted. It is intended to identify
technologies and strategies that can be used to mitigate tug and towboat emissions, particularly in the
Blue Skyways region and provide a basis for regulatory agencies and tug and tow operators to engage to
help mitigate these emissions.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TUGBOAT FLEET

The most comprehensive and current source of inventory data for towboats is maintained by the US Army
Corps of Engineers Navigation Data Center (NDC) (6). That database lists approximately 5,000 towboats
in the US, specifying the engine power and base of operation for each vessel. Of the 3,304 tugboats
operating along the Mississippi River and Gulf of Mexico, 50 percent have engines rated less than 1000
horsepower (HP), and 75 percent have engines rated less than 2,000 HP. Tugboats in this region have
lifetimes greater than 40 years, with 79 percent of tugs built or rebuilt at least 25 years ago.
EPA’s 1999 Lakes and Rivers Inventory (7) summarizes tug, tow, and pushboat activity along the
Great Lakes and inland river waterways in 1995. Of the top 60 lake and river ports in this study, the Port
of St. Louis had the second most frequent tug and push boat trips, with 29,939 trips annually, although it
ranked the highest of any port in the Blue Skyways Collaborative region. A companion 1999 study
summarized similar data for the largest deep-sea ports in the Nation (8). Of the top 95 deep sea ports, the
Port of Houston ranked third with 16,704 tug and push boat trips in 1995.

SELECTION OF PORTS FOR EMISSION ANALYSIS

The benefits of each tugboat emission reduction strategy will vary by port, depending on the age, power,
and activity characteristics of each location’s tugboat fleet. In order to capture the cost-effectiveness of
each mitigation strategy, costs and benefits were calculated at two selected ports: the Port of St. Louis, an
inland Mississippi river port, and the Port of Houston, a coastal port. Detailed tugboat inventory and
operational data were collected for each port, in order to characterize the tugboat fleet at that location. In
addition, a baseline inventory of tugboat emissions was established to demonstrate the benefits of each
emission reduction strategy. The baseline tugboat emissions inventory is presented in Table 1. It should
be noted that the emissions shown in Table 1 are activity based, and are designed to serve as a baseline
for demonstration of reduction strategy effectiveness; they should not be considered as a comprehensive
evaluation of regional emissions.
The tugboat characteristics at the ports of St. Louis and Houston vary in ways that impact the
effectiveness of each mitigation strategy. The two ports handle different types of tugboats, including
integrated tug-barge vessels, ocean tugboats, and river tugboats. In addition, each port has a different
proportion of harbor tugboats vs. line-haul tugboats. Finally, the age and size distribution of the vessel
fleet varies at each port. These factors influence the benefits and cost of each mitigation strategy.

Tug and Tow Emissions in the St. Louis Area

The NDC database supplied data on the tugboat fleet operating in the St. Louis region. Since the level of
detail of this source extends to the regional level rather than the port level, the St. Louis tug fleet was
approximated by those vessels registered with a base of operations in the St. Louis area, which includes
both tugs that operate within the Port of St. Louis and tugs that pass through the region without stopping.
Of all the vessels identified by the NDC database, 214 tug and tow vessels met these criteria. This data set
was stratified by vessel power and engine age to create a dataset suitable for emissions inventory
calculations, including engine tier and category structure. It was assumed that vessels with total installed
power below 1,500 HP are harbor tugs, while those above 1,500 HP are inland river/line-haul vessels.
Further, it was assumed that vessels with total installed power above 2,000 HP utilize Category 2 engines,
while those below 2,000 HP utilize Category 1 engines.
St. Louis tugboat activity and emissions were based on adjusted values published by EPA (7),
specifically tailored to activity at the ports in St. Louis. However, updated values were used for load factors,
average auxiliary power and other parameters documented by EPA in the recent Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA) (9), in order to be consistent with current rulemaking. These factors were combined with the
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 5

vessel activity calculated above to estimate main and auxiliary annual operation, which were then combined
with the most current emission factors available for NOX, CO, PM10, and CO2 from the current Best
Practices in Port Emission Inventories document (10) and the most recent Puget Sound Inventory (11). The
final results provided an estimate of annual tug and tow emissions in the St. Louis area. The resulting
tugboat emissions for St. Louis are shown in Table 1.

Tug and Tow Emissions in the Houston Area

Due to differences in data availability, tugboat activity and emission levels were calculated for the Port of
Houston using a different methodology than applied for the Port of St. Louis. Here, current tugboat
emissions were taken directly from a recent emissions inventory published by the Port of Houston
Authority (PHA) for data year 2007 (12). The inventory disaggregated emissions by vessel type including
tugboats. Houston tugboat emissions are shown in Table 1.
While the PHA emissions inventory data adequately describes the baseline port tugboat
emissions, additional information about tugboat characteristics and activity were also required to calculate
the effectiveness of emissions reduction strategies. This vessel-specific information was sourced from the
NDC database, using vessel identification numbers supplied by the PHA inventory report for the local
tugboat fleet. From this data, total emissions were disaggregated by vessel installed power and engine
age, as done for St. Louis.

TABLE 1 Tugboat Baseline Emissions Inventory for the Ports of Houston and St. Louis1
(Tons/year)
Port Vessel Type NOX CO PM10 CO2
Port of Houston Assist 782 101 46 50,880
Towboat 1,610 412 63 123,626
Total 2,391 514 108 174,506
Port of St. Louis Assist 112 17 4 7,809
Towboat 4,464 420 253 248,560
Total 4,576 437 257 256,369
1Port of St. Louis inventory: 2005 data year; Port of Houston inventory: 2007 data year

ANALYSIS OF TUG/TOWBOAT EMISSION REDUCTION STRATEGIES

This paper analyzes the cost-effectiveness of five tugboat emission reduction strategies, chosen based on
an overview of strategy effectiveness, feasibility, and relative ease of implementation. These include (1)
vessel engine repowering, (2) VSR, (3) use of biodiesel, (4) DPF and (5) SCR, each of which is discussed
below for both ports of interest. Each strategy is characterized in terms of total emission benefits, capital
and operating costs, and cost effectiveness at each port (13), based on the tugboat activity and baseline
emissions established above. All cost-effectiveness values are calculated for the 2005 baseline year.

Cost Effectiveness Calculation Methodology Overview

For each of the five strategies considered here, cost-effectiveness was estimated using a modified version
of the methodology of the Carl Moyer program implemented by the California Air Resources Board. This
program seeks to fund cost-effective capital investments, as measured in dollars per ton of avoided
emissions of a specified pollutant (14). In summary, this method calculates the annualized capital cost
plus annual operations and maintenance costs, divided by the annual reduction of individual pollutants.
The cost analysis presented here encompasses up-front capital costs as well as ongoing
maintenance and operation costs on a per-vessel basis. The cost-effectiveness of a strategy at a particular
port represents the costs and benefits that would accrue if the strategy were applied to all eligible vessels
in the fleet. While the costs are presented on a per-vessel basis, this analysis does not address how the
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 6

costs should be shared among vessel operators, port authorities, and government agencies. Finally, this
analysis does not capture indirect economic benefits such as those associated with a reduction in adverse
health and welfare effects associated with elevated pollution levels.

Emission Reduction Strategy 1: Vessel Repowering

Engine replacement with newer, higher performing models is a common method of obtaining reduced
operating emissions. Older vessel Tier 0 engines have higher emissions per horsepower-hour (hp-hr) than
newer engines. Due to the long average lifetime of tug and tow engines (13 and 23 years for Category 1
and 2 propulsion engines, respectively (9)), the majority of the population remains Tier 0.
This strategy envisions early repowering of all Tier 0 engines with current (Tier 2) engines.
Because this strategy would be applied to a tug boat in place of a less-extensive engine rebuild, the cost of
this strategy is just the cost differential, or price premium, of engine repowers vs. engine rebuilds.

Emission Benefits
The Port of Los Angeles No Net Increase Task Force estimates that repowering harbor craft engines can
reduce NOX and PM10 emissions by an average of 60 percent and 25 percent, respectively (15). To
estimate reductions from vessel repowering, these relative reductions presented in the No Net Increase
report were applied to the emissions from Tier 0 main engines only. This translates to an average per
vessel reduction of 1.4 and 0.03 tons per year of NOX and PM10, respectively, in the Port of Houston. In
St. Louis, the average annual, per vessel reductions are 11 and 0.2 tons for NOX and PM10, respectively.
Table 2 contains emissions benefits of vessel repowering for all four pollutants considered here.

Costs
An ARB regression analysis calculates the cost of repowering harbor craft engines at $245 per
horsepower for migrating from Tier 0 to Tier 2 engines (16). This factor was applied to the port vessel
inventories to determine the cost of repowering all vessels with Tier 0 engines (i.e., those built in 1999
and earlier). However, as this strategy is considered an alternative to major engine rebuilds, a similar
estimate of cost for rebuild of the same engines was also calculated using ARB values. The resulting cost
difference between repowering and rebuilding was used as the net cost for the strategy. Because the size
and number of Tier 0 engines varies at each harbor, the resulting net cost for an average Tier 0 vessel
varied from $280,000 in Houston to $670,000 in St. Louis.

Cost Effectiveness
An annualized cost value was calculated by amortizing the costs of vessel repowering over the expected
vessel lifetime at each port, determined by a weighted average of vessel engine lifetimes. Cost
effectiveness was then calculated using the annualized cost effectiveness method. Table 3 shows the
resulting cost-effectiveness values for repowering the entire fleet of Tier 0 vessels. The results show that
the benefits of repowering are more pronounced in St. Louis as compared to Houston, given the
differences in fleet composition; Houston tends to have more new, smaller tugs than St. Louis.
While the total cost of repowering Tier 0 vessels with Tier 2 engines is high, its cost-effectiveness
for reducing NOX emissions is competitive with other strategies. Notably, repowering is the most cost-
effective strategy for reducing NOX, at a cost of $4,792 and $18,145 per ton at the Ports of St. Louis and
Houston, respectively. This strategy will not mitigate CO2 emissions, since fuel consumption is
considered independent of engine tier, nor CO, since Tier 2 regulations do not apply to this pollutant.

Emission Reduction Strategy 2: Vessel Speed Reduction

Due to the nonlinear nature of the propeller law (17), a small reduction in operating speed can result in a
comparatively large reduction in fuel consumption, and thus emissions. The effects of speed reduction can
be significant: reducing speeds by 10 percent has been estimated to produce more than a 25 percent fuel
savings, with accompanying emission benefits (18). Further, case studies of tugboat operation show that
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 7

operating the engine in the top 10 to 15 percent of maximum load consumes additional fuel without
increasing hull speed, and also accelerates wear on engine components (19), (20), (21).
Under a VSR program, the cruise speeds are reduced to decrease engine load. Because engine
load, and thus emissions (NOX in particular), increases with vessel speed, slower speeds usually result in
lower main engine emissions. The analysis of tugboat activity above reveals that vessel free-flow speeds
generally range from about 5 to 9 knots for inland river and harbor tugs, and about 12 to 16 knots for
ocean-going tugs (22).
This emission reduction strategy is applied in St. Louis as a 20 percent reduction of tugboat cruise
speed from an average of 6.9 knots to an average of 5.6 knots. This strategy is not applied at the Port of
Houston, since the required time-in-mode data is not available, as discussed above.

Emission Benefits
To estimate reductions from reduced vessel speeds, the functional relationship between speed and emission
reduction described above is applied to the 20 percent vessel cruising speed reduction. This resulted in a 36
percent decrease in NOX and CO2 emissions, but only for emissions from main engines operating in cruise
mode. Because the reductions only occur in cruise, this strategy does not effect emissions from auxiliary
engines. Total emission benefits for this strategy are presented in Table 2. Since emission factors for PM10
and CO are not as well characterized as that of NOX for this strategy, no values are presented for these
pollutants.

Costs
The costs to include for a VSR program are not as direct as in other strategies, since the cost is not monetary
but rather takes the form of a time penalty. There are no capital costs, unless there is a monitoring program
set up, as done at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach (23), or if monitoring equipment is installed on
the vessels. However, these are not necessary to reduce speeds. There are operations and maintenance
(O&M) costs associated with delay and the added hourly cost of vessel operation. There may also be net
economic benefits due to reduced fuel consumption and engine wear. In this analysis, only the costs of
delay are considered.
The costs of time delay in vessel operations can have a significant impact to tugboat operating
budgets, especially for harbor tug operators. This cost was calculated by determining an expected tariff
rate schedule for tug operations to the calculated total annual delay from the strategy. Based on a typical
rate schedule for tugboats on the lower Mississippi River, an average for St. Louis was estimated by
weighting the rate schedule by the annual operating hours and horsepower. The result was an average
delay cost of $744 per hour. This was converted to an equivalent amount of tug and tow trips and
expected delay due to reduced speeds in the St. Louis area, which produced an overall, annual delay cost
of about $15.6 million.

Cost Effectiveness
The cost effectiveness of this strategy, as defined by the coupling of annualized cost and the expected
emission benefits, was determined using the annualized cost effectiveness method described above. Table
3 shows the resulting cost-effectiveness values for reducing the cruise speeds for the entire St. Louis
tugboat fleet. Of the strategies considered, VSR is the most expensive strategy for reducing NOX at the
Port of St. Louis, at a cost of $12,299 per ton, but the most effective strategy for reducing CO2 emissions
at either port, at a cost of $221 per ton.

Emission Reduction Strategy 3: Adoption of Biodiesel (B100)

A biofuel strategy can reduce tugboat emissions by substituting cleaner-burning biofuel blends in place of
standard NRLM diesel fuel. While neat biodiesel is more expensive than a blended fuel, it has far greater
emission benefits. This strategy replaces diesel fuel with 100 percent pure (also known as neat or B100)
biodiesel for the entire fleet operating in each harbor.
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 8

Biodiesel is a renewable fuel that can be manufactured from new and used vegetable oils and
animal fats. Biodiesel is safe and biodegradable and reduces emissions of PM10 and CO, although at high
concentrations it slightly increases NOX emissions (24). Biodiesel also provide significant fuel-cycle CO2
reductions.
Studies by HARC indicate marine vessel main engines converting to biofuels could reduce PM10
emissions 35-45% and auxiliary engines could have overall emission reductions of up to 50% (25).
BioMer (26) observed in-use emission reductions for marine transport of 65 and 18 percent for CO and
PM10, respectively, for B100. These numbers are comparable to the values from the Puget Sound Marine
Inventory of 35 and 32 percent for CO and PM10 (27). EPA’s list of verified retrofit technologies (28)
estimates emission reductions of as high as 47 percent for both PM10 and CO. Finally, the west coast
diesel collaborative estimates lifecycle CO2 reductions of 22 percent for B100 (29).

Emission Benefits
Tests conducted by EPA show that engines operating on B100 emit 47 percent less CO and 47 percent
less PM10 when compared to 500 ppm NRLM diesel. However, NOX emissions may increase by about 10
percent due to the renewable fuel’s higher oxygen content. A 22 percent reduction for CO2 over the fuel’s
lifecycle is used, based on results of the West Coast Biodiesel Collaborative experience with ferry transit.
In addition, B100 does not contain any sulfur, aromatic compounds, heavy metals, or crude oil residues.
However, these benefits are outside the scope of this study.

Costs
The price of B100 can fluctuate significantly over time and by region, resulting in significantly variable
costs. While statistics from the United States Department of Energy indicate that the price premium of
biodiesel over diesel has been decreasing in recent years (30), there still remains a significant price
differential between B100 and offroad (NRLM) diesel. As of October 2008, B100 carried a price
premium of approximately $0.84 per gallon. NRLM diesel costs averaged over several ports were about
$3.75 per gallon (31), while B100 costs were about $4.58 per diesel equivalent gallon (32). In this
analysis, the price premium of B100 over NRLM was used to calculate the costs of this strategy.

Cost Effectiveness
The benefits and effectiveness of B100 adoption at the ports of St. Louis and Houston are calculated
assuming 100 percent fleet adoption of the fuel. Biodiesel emission reduction factors are applied to the
total annual emissions at each port individually. This results in an estimated net annual decrease of 121
tons of PM10, 205 tons of CO, and 56,401 tons of CO2 in St. Louis. In Houston, 51 tons of PM10, 241 tons
of CO, and 38,391 tons of CO2 are removed via this strategy. Both ports show a net annual increase of
NOX; thus these results are not presented. Table 2 shows the total emission benefits from converting the
entire tug and tow fleet in each location to B100.
The total cost of this strategy to operators at the ports of St. Louis and Houston are proportional
to total B100 fuel consumption. Fuel consumption is calculated from port inventory data by combining
total port activity (measured in hp-hrs) with EPA fuel-intensity measures of tugboat activity (measured in
gallons consumed per hp-hr) (9). Table 3 shows the resulting cost effectiveness of this strategy for the
ports of St. Louis and Houston, calculated using the annualized cost effectiveness method. For most
pollutants and at each Port, B100 is the most expensive strategy for reducing emissions, with the
exception of CO emissions at the Port of Houston, for which B100 is the most effective strategy at
$51,504 per ton.
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 9

Emission Reduction Strategy 4: Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF)

Emissions from existing engines could be reduced through a variety of in-engine and exhaust aftertreatment
retrofit technologies. Although aftertreatment options may be less appealing industry than other options
due to the associated capital costs, perhaps in addition to efficiency penalties, most technologies have a
history of applications in on- and off-road environments and their performance is well understood.
DPFs are aftertreatment devices intended to remove pollutants from engine exhaust, and can be
retrofitted to existing marine vessels with only minor modifications to the exhaust system. When in use,
the filters capture pollutants from the waste stream and incinerate them using either heat from the engine
or an outside power source. The technology has been evaluated by the ports of Los Angeles (23) and
Boston (33) and found to be effective in reducing emissions. It has also been certified by the California
Air Resources Board and EPA as a verified emissions control device (34). Generally, PM10 reductions of
90 percent or greater are achieved. The devices also require periodic cleaning to remove ash from the
filters as well as a duty cycle that will allow proper regeneration. EPA estimates that DPFs have
reductions of as high as 90 percent for PM10, CO, and HC (34).

Emission Benefits
DPFs are designed primarily to reduce PM10 emissions, and also reduce CO, with typical reductions of
80-90% for the former and 75-85% for the latter. For this strategy, EPA-verified emission reduction
factors of 90% and 79% for PM10 and CO, respectively, are applied to Port of St. Louis and Port of
Houston emission inventories (28). DPFs are not effective in removing NOX from engine exhaust. The
total benefits of DPFs are shown in Table 2.

Costs
While effective at controlling emissions, DPFs are expensive to install and maintain. In addition to the
upfront capital cost, DPFs require annual maintenance and slightly increase total fuel consumption. While
there is currently no information on the costs of operating DPFs in tugboats, Farrell et al. catalog several
pilot projects in harbor ferries, and estimate per-vessel average capital costs of $57,300 and annual
operation costs of $51,700 for DPF devices (35). These values are the best available data for harbor craft
applications. For this strategy, these costs are applied to each port. DPFs are anticipated to have a lifetime
of approximately 10 years; this value was used to determine annualized capital costs.

Cost Effectiveness
While DPF technology is expensive, its cost-effectiveness in reducing emissions is competitive with other
strategies. These calculations assume that aftertreatment devices are fitted to all vessels in the tug fleets of
St. Louis and Houston. Since the costs of this strategy involve both up-front and ongoing costs, an
annualized cost value was calculated using the annualized cost effectiveness method. Table 3 shows the
resulting cost-effectiveness values. No values are presented for CO2 or NOX, as the strategy is ineffective
against these pollutants
The cost-effectiveness of DPFs is mixed in comparison to other strategies. In St. Louis, is strategy
is more cost-effective than B100. In Houston, however, DPFs are much more expensive than alternative
fuels in reducing emissions. This discrepancy is due to differences in fleet composition between St. Louis
and Houston; DPFs are more effective on the larger, older tugs in St. Louis than on the smaller, newer
tugs in Houston. Table 3 shows the resulting cost effectiveness values for each pollutant from this
strategy.
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 10

Emission Reduction Strategy 5: Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)

SCRs are aftertreatment devices specifically targeting NOX emissions, chemically reducing the pollutant
from engine exhaust into harmless gaseous nitrogen and water. Because SCRs rely on injection of a
reagent to the exhaust stream, additional tanks are often required to house the urea or ammonia (36).
SCRs are ineffective against PM10 and CO emissions.
SCR technologies have been deployed on vessels at the Port of Boston using a urea/ammonia
base, with NOX reductions as high as 95 percent observed. A study of SCR demonstrations in England
reported NOX of up to 90 percent (37). SCR has also been employed in the EU’s Cleanest Ship program,
with reductions of NOX as high as 85 percent observed (38). In the U.S., a single SCR unit has been
approved by the ARB (39). This device, manufactured by Extengine, has verified reductions of 80 percent
for NOX.
While some SCR pilot projects install the device in conjunction with other aftertreatment devices,
this strategy analyses the use of SCRs independent of other technologies, as applied to the entire tug and
tow fleets.

Emission Benefits
While the pilot projects above demonstrate NOX reductions as high as 95 percent, this analysis uses a
more conservative value of 80 percent, based on EPA verified reductions (34). No other pollutants are
considered in this analysis. The total emissions benefits of this strategy are presented in Table 2.

Costs
Like DPFs, SCR systems impose both upfront capital costs and ongoing operation and maintenance costs.
Ferrell et al. have estimated SCR systems cost an average of $203,000 per vessel in passenger ferry
demonstrations, much more expensive to install than DPFs (35). O&M costs are also higher, and the units
must be supplied with ammonia or urea reagents. On average, predicted annual O&M costs are about
$57,700 per vessel (35). Since SCRs have not yet been applied to tugboat applications, the generalized
costs established by Ferrell et al. are applied to port inventories in St. Louis and Houston. Urea use per
vessel was estimated as 7.5 percent of the anticipated annual fuel use by each tug fleet with a cost of
aqueous urea of $0.386/gallon (40). SCR units are anticipated to have a lifetime of approximately 15
years; this value was used to determine annualized capital costs.

Cost Effectiveness
Since SCR units can be applied to engines in Tiers 0, 1, and 2, the calculations in this section assume that
SCR aftertreatment devices are fitted to all vessels in the tug fleets of St. Louis and Houston. Cost
effectiveness values were calculated using the annualized cost effectiveness method. The cost
effectiveness of this strategy, as presented in Table 3, demonstrates that SCRs are not the most effective
strategy for reducing NOX at either St. Louis, at $5,009 per ton, or Houston, at $40,633 per ton.
The wide discrepancy between the two ports is explained by the vessel size at each location; SCR
can be a cost-competitive strategy for reducing NOX in large tugboats, but is more expensive than other
options when applied to small tugboats. As such, the strategy is a competitive choice (but not the most
cost-effective choice) at the Port of St. Louis, but less so at the Port of Houston. However, given the high
capital and O&M cost values employed here, these values are likely overestimates. Since the SCR
technology is more effective at higher engine loads, it would be expected to be more cost effective for
line haul and ocean tows that operate with higher load factors.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The following tables present results for each of the five strategies considered here. Table 2 presents
calculated annual region-wide emissions reductions of NOX, CO, PM10, and CO2 for each strategy. Table
3 shows the port-wide cost effectiveness of mitigating each pollutant, for each strategy, in dollars per ton.
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 11

Of the five strategies considered here, SCR showed the greatest overall reductions in NOX, DPFs
showed the greatest overall PM10 reductions, and CO reductions were comparable with DPFs and B100.
VSR showed the greatest CO2 reductions.

TABLE 2 Annual Emission Reductions from Mitigation Strategies at the Ports of St. Louis and
Houston (short tons per year)
NOX CO PM10 CO2
Strategy
St. Louis Houston St. Louis Houston St. Louis Houston St. Louis Houston
Vessel Repowering 2,177 1,195 n/a n/a 49 21 n/a n/a
Vessel Speed Reduction (VSR) 1,274 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 70,781 n/a
Use of Biodiesel (B100) n/a n/a 205 241 121 51 56,401 38,391
Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) n/a n/a 345 97 230 406 n/a n/a
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 3,661 1,913 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

TABLE 3 Cost Effectiveness of Mitigation Strategies at the Ports of St. Louis and Houston (USD
per short ton)
NOX CO PM10 CO2
Strategy
St. Louis Houston St. Louis Houston St. Louis Houston St. Louis Houston
Vessel Repowering $ 4,792 $ 18,145 n/a n/a $ 214,435 $ 1,009,816 n/a n/a
Vessel Speed Reduction (VSR) $ 12,299 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $ 221 n/a
Use of Biodiesel (B100) n/a n/a $ 90,831 $ 51,504 $ 154,386 $ 243,895 $ 331 $ 324
Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) n/a n/a $ 39,027 $ 760,517 $ 58,443 $ 182,284 n/a n/a
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) $ 5,009 $ 40,633 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Vessel repowering, as envisioned here, showed to be the most cost effective strategy for reducing
NOX, at both ports; DPFs are the most effective PM10 reduction strategy in both areas. Reducing vessel
speeds is the most cost effective way to reduce CO2, followed by B100.
The values estimated here are somewhat higher than other estimates. For example, this analysis
shows SCR to cost $5,009 per ton of NOX in St. Louis and $41,000/ton in Houston. When looking at three
ferries, Farrell et al. found average values of $1,600/ton (35). In addition, this analysis shows the DPF
cost effectiveness at $58,000 and $180,000 per ton of PM10 in St. Louis and Houston, respectively; Farrell
et al. estimate the average cost effectiveness of similar catalyst filters for three ferries at about $41,000
per ton of PM10. This discrepancy is partly due to the larger engines of ferries as compared to tugboats.
Because the engines consume more fuel and produce greater emissions, DPF and SCR reduction
strategies achieve greater benefits for the same fixed upfront costs.
The present analysis found the cost effectiveness of using B100 in tug fleets to be $154,000 per
ton of PM10 in St. Louis and $244,000 per ton in Houston. When investigating goods movement reduction
strategies in Southern California, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) derived
slightly lower cost effectiveness values for harbor craft use of biodiesel of about $115,000 per ton of
PM10 (30). The tendency toward higher values in this study is likely due to the generally conservative cost
approach included.
The wide variation in cost effectiveness of each strategy highlights the importance of choosing
the best strategy to apply to tugboats, both individually and from an industry-wide perspective. If the
costs to the tugboat industry are too great, the burden could impact operators’ ability to compete against
other modes of goods movement. Thus, care must be taken when choosing strategies to reduce emissions.
The most effective approach for a public or private organization to reduce tugboat emissions may be to
adopt a bundle of strategies that impact all pollutants, while balancing capital with operating costs. In
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 12

addition, emissions reductions can be achieved with less economic impact if the costs are shared with
ports or government agencies.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Funding for this project was provided by U.S. EPA, Regions 6 and 7.
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 13

REFERENCES

1 Corbett, J., and A. Robinson. Measurements of NOX Emissions and In-Service Duty Cycle from a
Towboat Operating on the Inland River System. Environ. Sci. Technol, Vol. 35, 2001, pp. 1343-
1349.
2 Corbett, J. and P. Fischbeck. Emissions from Waterborne Commerce Vessels in United States
Continental and Inland Waterways. Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 34, 2000, pp. 3254-3260.
3 Corbett, J, J. Winebrake, E. Green, P. Kasibhatla, V. Eyring, and A. Lauer. Mortality from Ship
Emissions: A Global Assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 41, 2007, pp. 8512–8518.
4 The Blue Skyways Collaborative. What the Blue Skyways Collaborative Offers. Available at
<http://www.blueskyways.org/>. Accessed on November 7, 2009.
5 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Final Regulatory Analysis: Control of
Emissions from Nonroad Diesel Engines. Publication EPA420-R-04-007. May 2004.
6 United States Army Corps of Engineers. Waterborne Transportation Lines of the United States,
Calendar Year – 2007,Volume 3: Vessel Characteristics. Publication 2007 WTLUS – Vol 1.
September 24, 2008.
7 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Commercial Marine Activity for Great Lake and
Inland River Ports in the United States, Final Report. Publication EPA420-R-99-019, September
1999.
8 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Commercial Marine Activity for Deep Sea Ports
in the United States, Final Report. Publication EPA420-R-99-020, September 1999.
9 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of
Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression Ignition Engines
Less than 30 Liters Per Cylinder. Publication EPA420-R-08-001a, May 2008.
10 ICF International. Current Methodologies in Preparing Mobile Source Port-Related Emission
Inventories, Draft Report, March 2009.
11 Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC. Puget Sound Maritime Air Forum Maritime Air Emissions
Inventory. Prepared for the Puget Sound Maritime Air Forum, April 2007.
12 Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC. 2007 Goods Movement Emission Inventory at the Port of
Houston, Final Draft. Prepared for the Port of Houston Authority, January 2009.
13 Corbett, J. and P. Fischbeck. Commercial Marine Emissions and Life-Cycle Analysis of Retrofit
Controls in a Changing Science and Policy Environment. Naval Eng. Journal, Vol 114, No. 1,
2002, pp. 93-106.
14 California Air Resources Board, The Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment
Program Guidelines. Approved Revision 2003, September 30, 2003.
15 Report to Mayor Hahn and Councilwoman Hahn. No Net Increase Task Force, Los Angeles, CA,
June 24, 2005.
16 California Air Resources Board. Cost Analysis for Commercial Harbor Craft, Presented at the
Commercial Harbor Craft Proposed Regulation Workshop, Sacramento, CA, April 24, 2007.
17 MAN Diesel Group. Basic Principles of Ship Propulsion. April 2004.
18 Aichele, R. Attention to the Details Trims Fuel Consumption. Professional Mariner, Issue #114,
Jun/Jul 2008.
19 Floscan Instrument Co Inc. Series 9500/9600 GPS Interface System. Available at
<http://www.floscan.com/html/blue/seriesdetail.php?sid=5&catid=3/>. Accessed on November 7,
2009.
20 FuelTrax. Marine Fuel Management. Available at <http://www.fueltrax.com/>. Accessed on
November 7, 2009.
21 MICAD Marine. MICAD Marine Information Systems. Available at
<http://www.micadmarine.com/>. Accessed November 7, 2009.
Papson, A., Hartley, S., & Browning, L. 14

22 Corbett, J., and A. Robinson, “Measurements of NOx Emissions and In-Service Duty Cycle from
a Towboat Operating on the Inland River System,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 2001, Vol. 35, 1343-
1349.
23 San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan, Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. 2006.
24 Clean Air Fleets. Alternatives to Conventional Number 2 Diesel. Available at
<http://www.cleanairfleets.org/>. Accessed on November 7, 2009.
25 Warnakulasuria, F., and G. King. Emission Reduction of Marine Vessels in the Houston-
Galveston Area Using Bio-Fuel Conversion. Presented to the Texas Joint Center for Air Quality,
December 12, 2005.
26 BioMer. Biodiesel Demonstration and Assessment for Tour Boats in the Old Port of Montreal
and Lachine Canal National Historic Site, Final Report. May 2005.
27 Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC. Puget Sound Maritime Air Forum Maritime Air Emissions
Inventory, April 2007.
28 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Diesel Retrofit Technology Verification.
Available at <http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/verif-list.htm>. Accessed on November 7, 2009.
29 Shore, T. Project Description: Marine Biodiesel Fueling Station. West Coast Diesel Emissions
Reduction Collaborative. December 10, 2004.
30 ICF International. Analysis of Goods Movement Emission Reduction Strategies, Task 1 Final
Report, Prepared for Southern California Association of Governments, January 2008.
31 Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, West Coast and Alaska Marine Fuel Prices 2006-
2008, January 2009.
32 United States Department of Energy. Clean Cities Alternative Fuel Price Report, October 2008.
33 Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM). Scoping Study to Evaluate
the Emissions of Harbor Craft Operating in Boston Harbor and Potential Control Options, Final
Report, April 2006.
34 California Air Resources Board. Retrofit Device Verification Database. Available at
<http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vdb/vdb.php>. Accessed on November 7, 2009.
35 Farrell A., J. Corbett, and J. Winebrake. Controlling Air Pollution from Passenger Ferries: Cost-
Effectiveness of Seven Technological Options. Journal of Air and Waste Management, Vol. 52,
No. 12, 2002, pp. 1399-1410.
36 ICF International. Emission Reduction Incentives for Off-Road Diesel Equipment Used in the
Port and Construction Sectors, Prepared for the United States Environmental Protection Agency,
May 19 2005.
37 ENTEC UK Limited, Ship Emissions: Assignment, Abatement and Market-Based Instruments,
Prepared for European Commission Directorate General Environment, Final Report, August
2005.
38 Schweighofer, J., H. Blaauw. The Cleanest Ship Program, Final Report. February 11, 2009.
39 California Air Resources Board. Currently Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies. Available
at <http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vdb/vdb.php>. Accessed on November 7, 2009.
40 ICF International. Costs of Emission Reduction Technologies for Category 3 Marine Engines,
Final Report, Prepared for the United States Environmental Protection Agency, March 2009.