IN DEGREE PROJECT ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT,SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS

, STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2019

Life Cycle Assessment of a Road Ferry

ANNA RINGSTRÖM

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYSCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

1

Life Cycle Assessment of a Road Ferry Livscykelanalys av en Vägfärja Keywords: Life Cycle Assessment, Swedish Transport Administration, STA Road Ferries, Road Ferry, Trafikverket, Färjerederiet Degree project course: Strategies for sustainable development, Second Cycle AL250X, 30 credits Author: Anna Ringström Supervisor: Carolina Liljenström Examiner: Anna Björklund Department of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering School of Architecture and the Built Environment KTH Royal Institute of Technology

2

Abstract On a national level, the Swedish Transport Administration (STA) constitute the responsible authority for national long-term infrastructure planning in Sweden and therefore has an important role for limit the environmental load from domestic transport. STA Road Ferries is responsible actor within STA, for national infrastructure planning connected to public marine transport and has formulated the goal of net zero GHG emissions by year 2045 for the ferry fleet. Today, yearly operation causes around 38,400 tons CO2-equivalents. Emissions from construction, maintenance and deconstruction of road ferries are yet unknown. In order to reach climate neutrality, identification of emissions from a life cycle perspective is needed. This study analyses environmental performance of a standard road ferry from an LCA perspective to be used as a baseline in future work towards climate neutrality. The LCA was conducted in SimaPro 8.4.0 and evaluated thorough EPD (2013) methodology according to the EN 15804 standardisation. The report gives initial baseline values for the road ferry Neptunus and identifies daily operation as major hotspot in terms of total environmental impact from analysed impact categories, but also construction phase is of importance to consider. The study further concludes that based on long term goal and vision as STA Road Ferries has formulated them to today, a combination of change in construction in terms of material choices and design, together with changed fuel alternative is considered necessary in order to reach Vision 45. Future studies are recommended on this subject to reach the long term goal and vision. For example, studies that complement the developed model with more project specific process data and include more components, and comparative LCA’s between different fuel alternatives. Keywords: Life cycle assessment (LCA), Swedish Transport Administration (STA), STA Road Ferries, road ferry, environmental impact, environmental performance, ferry transport

3

Sammanfattning Trafikverket är den aktör och myndighet som ansvarar för den långsiktiga, nationella infrastrukturplaneringen i Sverige och som därför har en viktig roll i begränsandet av miljöpåverkan från landets transportsektor. Färjerederiet är ansvarig aktör inom Trafikverket för nationell infrastrukturplanering och drift kopplat till den statliga inrikessjöfarten i form av färjedrift. Färjerederiet har idag formulerat det långsiktiga målet att nå nollnetto utsläpp för färjeflottan till år 2045. Idag orsakar färjedriften 38,400 ton CO2 ekvivalenter årligen vilket då enbart är utsläpp kopplat till driften. Emissioner från konstruktion, underhåll och dekonstruktion är dock fortfarande okänt. För att nå total klimatneutralitet behövs således identifiering av emissioner ur ett livscykelperspektiv. Den här studien analyserar miljöprestandan av en standardfärja från Färjerederiets färjeflotta ur ett livscykelperspektiv med syfte att använda detta som utgångsläge i framtida arbete mot klimatneutralitet. Livscykelanalysen genomfördes i SimaPro 8.4.0 och metoden EPD (2013) användes för utvärdering av potentiell miljöbelastning enligt EN 15804 standardiseringen. Resultaten från denna rapport är en utgångspunkt för vidare specialisering, och är baserat på data från vägfärjan Neptunus. Studien identifierade den dagliga driften som en betydande hotspot för den totala miljöpåverkan utifrån de analyserade påverkanskategorierna, men även att konstruktionen är en viktig del av livscykel att ta hänsyn till. Studien visar vidare att ett kombination av en förändrad konstruktion samt val av bränsle är nödvändigt för att nå de långsiktigt uppsatta målen som finns inom Färjerederiet i form av Vision 45. Framtida studier inom detta område är rekommenderat för att nå de långsiktigt uppsatta målen. Till exempel kan vidare studier göras för att komplettera den upprättade modellen med mer projektspecifik processdata och inkludera fler komponenter, samt utföra jämförande livscykelanalyser mellan olika bränslealternativ. Nyckelord: Livscykelanalys (LCA), Trafikverket, Färjerederiet, vägfärja, miljöpåverkan, miljöprestanda, färjetransport

4

Acknowledgments This thesis has been written in collaboration with the Swedish Transport Administration and STA Road Ferries. First, I want to thank everyone involved for having me on the project and for always welcoming me in the different occasions I have got the opportunity to participate in. I have really enjoyed working with this project and hope our paths will cross again in the future. Thank you to Peter Jansson Peterberg, Fredrik Skeppstedt and Fredrik Almlöv at STA Road Ferries for the warm welcome to Vaxholm and for always answering my questions along the road. An especially thanks to Therese Lundblad at the Swedish Transport Administration for being my supervisor at STA and for facilitating this project for me in so many ways during the whole process. Carolina Liljenström, I really appreciate that you were my supervisor at KTH during this project. Your help, guidance and support has been invaluable to me during these months and I do not see how this would have been possible without you. Thank you Ebba for the company and support in the (what it almost felt like) countless number of hours we have spent in the computer rooms at KTH and thank you Agnes, for your tireless support that has given me so many valuable ideas during the process. Lastly, a final thank you to my family for always supporting me in everything I do.

5

Table of Content Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Sammanfattning.......................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................................... 4 List of tables ............................................................................................................................... 8 List of figures ............................................................................................................................. 9

Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................... 10 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 11 2. Aim and Objectives ........................................................................................................... 13 3. Outline of the Thesis ......................................................................................................... 14 4. Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 15

4.1 Research design .............................................................................................................. 15

4.2 Life Cycle Assessment methodology ............................................................................. 15 4.2.1 Methodological uncertainties ................................................................................... 17 4.2.2 Data collection approach .......................................................................................... 18

5. Background ....................................................................................................................... 19 5.1 Swedish transport sector and environmental issues........................................................ 19

5.1.1 Marine transport sector in Sweden and environmental issues ................................. 19 5.2 Transport infrastructure planning in Sweden ................................................................. 20

5.2.1 Klimatkalkyl............................................................................................................. 20 5.2.2 Transport infrastructure planning at STA Road Ferries........................................... 21

5.3 Previous studies within the area ..................................................................................... 22

5.3.1 Previous LCA studies of ferries ............................................................................... 22 5.3.2 Other relevant studies in the area ............................................................................. 23 5.3.3 LCA and complex problems .................................................................................... 25 5.3.4 Study of the environmental management system within STA Road Ferries ........... 25

6. Life Cycle Assessment of a Road Ferry............................................................................ 27

6.1 Goal definition ................................................................................................................ 27 6.2 Scope definition .............................................................................................................. 27

6.2.1 Functional Unit ........................................................................................................ 27 6.2.2 Product definition ..................................................................................................... 27 6.2.3 System boundaries ................................................................................................... 29

6.2.4 Allocation procedures .............................................................................................. 31 6.2.5 General assumptions and limitations ....................................................................... 32 6.2.6 Impact categories and life cycle impact assessment method ................................... 33 6.2.7 Normalisation and weighting ................................................................................... 33

6.3 Life Cycle Inventory Analysis (LCI) .............................................................................. 33

6

6.3.1 Process Flowchart .................................................................................................... 33

6.3.2 Product life cycle description ................................................................................... 35 6.3.3 Assumption of components ...................................................................................... 36

6.4 Life Cycle Impact Assessment ....................................................................................... 45 6.4.1 Results – Total life cycle baseline............................................................................ 45 6.4.2 Results – Construction phase ................................................................................... 46

6.4.3 Results – Maintenance phase ................................................................................... 48 6.4.4 Results – End-of-life phase ...................................................................................... 49

6.5 Sensitivity analysis ......................................................................................................... 50 6.5.1 Sensitivity analysis: Operation hours ....................................................................... 50 6.5.2 Sensitivity analysis: Weight of hull material ........................................................... 51

6.5.3 Sensitivity analysis: Weight propulsion system....................................................... 52 6.5.4 Sensitivity analysis: Paint ........................................................................................ 53 6.5.5 Sensitivity analysis: Insulation................................................................................. 54

6.6 Scenario analysis ............................................................................................................ 56 6.6.1 Scenario: Material change in hull ............................................................................ 56

6.6.2 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biodiesel ...................................................................... 57 6.6.3 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Bioethanol ................................................................... 58 6.6.4 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biomethanol ................................................................ 59 6.6.5 Comparison between analysed fuel alternatives ...................................................... 60

7. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 61

7.1 Uncertainties in the results.............................................................................................. 64 8. Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 65 9. Recommendations and future work ...................................................................................... 66 10. References .......................................................................................................................... 67

10.1 Image references ........................................................................................................... 67 10.2 Software references ...................................................................................................... 67

10.3 Literature references ..................................................................................................... 67 Appendix A. EN 15804: Required modules ............................................................................. 74 Appendix B. EN 15804: Impact Assessment Categories ......................................................... 76 Appendix C. Total surface area steel of vessel ........................................................................ 77 Appendix D. Total surface area aluminium of vessel .............................................................. 78

Appendix E. Compilation input data in SimaPro model .......................................................... 80 Appendix F. Material, production processes and transport for hull ......................................... 82 Appendix G. Material, production processes and transport for paint ...................................... 89 Appendix H. Transport of hull ................................................................................................. 92 Appendix I. Material, production processes and transport for engines .................................... 93

7

Appendix J. Material, production processes and transport for heat pump system ................... 96

Appendix K. Material, production processes and transport for lighting equipment ................ 99 Appendix L. Material, production processes and transport for cables ................................... 101 Appendix M. Material, production processes and transport for batteries .............................. 102 Appendix N. Material, production processes and transport for propulsion system ............... 106 Appendix O. Material, production processes and transports for insulation ........................... 108

Appendix P. Material, production processes and transport for windows ............................... 112 Appendix Q. Transport of constructed ferry to Gullmarsleden.............................................. 113 Appendix R. Ferry operation and maintenance ...................................................................... 114 Appendix S. Transport of ferry to Fridhems shipyard ........................................................... 121 Appendix T. Disassembly of Road Ferry ............................................................................... 122

Appendix U. Disposal scenarios ............................................................................................ 124 Appendix V – Baseline: Resulting absolute values................................................................ 129

1. Baseline - Total life cycle ............................................................................................... 129 2. Baseline – Construction phase ........................................................................................ 130

Appendix W. Sensitivity analysis .......................................................................................... 132

1. Operation hours .............................................................................................................. 132 2. Sensitivity analysis – Weight of hull material ................................................................ 133 3. Sensitivity analysis – Propulsion system ........................................................................ 134 4. Sensitivity analysis – Paint ............................................................................................. 135 5. Sensitivity analysis – Insulation ..................................................................................... 137

Appendix X. Scenario analysis .............................................................................................. 138 1. Scenario: Change of hull material .................................................................................. 138 2. Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biodiesel............................................................................. 139 3. Scenario: Alternative fuel - Ethanol ............................................................................... 140 4. Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biomethanol ....................................................................... 141

8

List of tables Table 1 Required parts to include in the scope. (EN 15804:2012, 2013) ................................ 16 Table 2 CO2 reduction until year 2045 according to the plan set up in Vision 45. (Pöldma, 2018) ......................................................................................................................................... 22 Table 3 Specifications of Neptunus (Trafikverket, 2017a) ..................................................... 28 Table 4 Compilation input data operation and maintenance ................................................... 35 Table 5 Components used for construction of the ferry (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019b) . 36 Table 6 Materials used for operation and maintenance phase (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019b) ....................................................................................................................................... 36 Table 7 Handling of waste in end-of-life phase....................................................................... 37 Table 8 Compilation input data, hull ....................................................................................... 38 Table 9 Results according to included environmental impact categories (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018) .................................................................................................................... 39 Table 10 Compilation input data, paint ................................................................................... 39 Table 11 Compilation input data, engines ............................................................................... 39 Table 12 Compilation input data, heat pump system .............................................................. 40 Table 13 Compilation input data, lighting equipment ............................................................. 41 Table 14 Compilation input data, cables ................................................................................. 41 Table 15 Compilation input data, batteries .............................................................................. 42 Table 16 Compilation input data, propulsion system .............................................................. 43 Table 17 Compilation input data, insulation............................................................................ 43 Table 18 Compilation input data, windows ............................................................................. 44 Table 19 Change in weight propulsion materials .................................................................... 52

9

List of figures Figure 1 Overview of the LCA framework and included phases according to EN 15804 standardisation, (adopted from EN 15804). ............................................................................. 16 Figure 2 Overview of the three consociated areas in order to reach the transport policy objectives Modified from Johansson & Eklöf (2015). ............................................................. 20 Figure 3 Visualisation of calculation in Klimatkalkyl of the climate load based on the resource input data. Modified from (Toller, 2018). ................................................................................ 21 Figure 4 Flowchart over the activities from STA Road Ferries from where the environmental aspects has been identified. Modified from Broberg & Nilsson (2012). ................................. 26 Figure 5 Picture over Neptunus. (Photo by: Kasper Dudzik) .................................................. 28 Figure 6 Map over route in Gullmarsleden. (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019a) ................... 29 Figure 7 Initial flowchart of system to give an indication of processes included. .................. 30 Figure 8 Process flowchart over the life cycle of the road ferry Neptunus. ............................ 34 Figure 9 Environmental impacts total life cycle, characterization results............................... 45 Figure 10 CED total life cycle, characterization results .......................................................... 46 Figure 11 Environmental impacts construction phase, characterization results...................... 47 Figure 12 CED construction phase, characterization results ................................................... 48 Figure 13 Environmental impacts maintenance, characterization results ............................... 49 Figure 14 Environmental impacts end-of-life, characterization results .................................. 50 Figure 15 Scenario: Operation hours. Resulting life cycle compared to baseline,.................. 51 Figure 16 Sensitivity analysis: Material in hull construction. Resulting life cycle compared to baseline ..................................................................................................................................... 52 Figure 17 Sensitivity analysis: Weight propulsion system. Resulting life cycle compared to baseline ..................................................................................................................................... 53 Figure 18 Sensitivity analysis: Paint. Resulting life cycle compared to baseline ................... 53 Figure 19 Sensitivity analysis: Paint. Results maintenance phase compared to baseline ....... 54 Figure 20 Sensitivity analysis: Insulation. Results total life cycle compared to baseline ....... 55 Figure 21 Sensitivity analysis: Insulation. Results construction phase compared to baseline 55 Figure 22 Baseline. Results hull production, characterisation results ..................................... 56 Figure 23 Scenario: Material change in hull. Results hull production, Characterisation results .................................................................................................................................................. 57 Figure 24 Scenario: Material change in hull. Resulting graph hull production, compared to baseline ..................................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 25 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biodiesel. Results total life cycle compared to baseline .................................................................................................................................................. 58 Figure 26 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Ethanol. Results total life cycle compared to baseline59 Figure 27 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biomethanol. Results total life cycle compared to baseline ..................................................................................................................................... 60 Figure 28 Compiled comparison for analysed fuel alternatives including baseline ................ 60

10

Abbreviations CED – Cumulative Energy Demand EN – European Standards EPD – Environmental Product Declaration GHG – Greenhouse gases LCA – Life Cycle Assessment LCI – Life Cycle Inventory LCIA – Life Cycle Impact Assessment ISO – International Standardisation Organisation PCR – Product Category Rules STA – Swedish Transport Administration VRLA - Valve Regulated Lead Acid

11

1. Introduction Since year 2005, the nine warmest years ever recorded on Earth have occurred where five of these have taken place after year 2010. Statistics show that the global mean temperature between years 2013-2017 increased by 0.4 ℃ above average temperatures compared to temperature levels measured between years 1981-2010. In total, a temperature rise around 1.0 ℃ above pre-industrial level is therefore now a fact. (WMO, 2018). The evidences for human influence on the climate system with climate change as a consequence are stronger than ever, and linked to the anthropogenic released greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (IPCC, 2015). In order to strengthen the global response to the threat of currently occurring global climate change, actions on different levels have been adopted. This can for example be seen globally through the by UN established sustainable development goals (UN, 2019a) or through the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement is a global convention adopted in year 2015 in order to limit global climate change and therefore limit a temperature rise to a level lower than 2 ℃ level compared to pre-industrial levels (UN, 2015). In November 2018, as a consequence of the Paris Agreement, the European Commission presented a strategic long-term vision for a climate-neutral economy within the European Union (EU) by the year 2050, in order to follow the line and reach the goal of keeping global average temperature increase below 2 ℃ (European Commission, 2018). On a national level, Sweden has for example set up a goal to reach zero net GHG emissions by year 2045 and shall therefore lower the national emissions by at least 85 % compared to the levels measured in year 1990. A general framework has been developed to aid the process to achieve the long-term objective of net zero emissions by year 2045. From January 1st, 2018, a new law in relation to the Paris Agreement for climate action also became effective on a national level to further strengthen the work towards becoming climate neutral. (Swedish Government, 2016; Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, 2012). GHG emissions can be divided into direct and indirect emissions with origin in different economic sectors, e.g. the transport sector. In year 2010, the transport sector contributed to approximately 7.0 Gt CO2-eqvivalents of direct carbon dioxide emissions globally which corresponded to around 14 % of the total anthropogenic GHG emissions emitted to the atmosphere that specific year. The anthropogenic GHG emissions from the transport sector is further expected to rise to a level of 12 Gt CO2-equivalents by the year of 2050 if no actions are taken. (IPCC, 2015). Today’s transport system is identified to not only contribute to the anthropogenic global climate change through GHG emissions, but also to have effects in other environmental areas, which are important to take into consideration (Dickinson, 2016). On a national level, the Swedish Transport Administration (STA) constitute the responsible authority for national long-term infrastructure planning in Sweden and therefore has an important role in limiting climate and environmental loads from the transport sector in Sweden. Emissions from infrastructure are identified to occur from all parts of the life cycle i.e. from construction, operation, maintenance and deconstruction. In order to enable consistent

12

measurements of these emissions, STA has developed the tool Klimatkalkyl. Klimatkalkyl is used for calculations of primary energy use and GHG emissions from a life cycle perspective for Swedish transport infrastructure. Klimatkalkyl’s purpose is to ensure that potential emissions from all parts of the life cycle are included in the analysis. The tool has today also been included for a systematic working process towards reaching zero net GHG emissions goal developed within the organisation, and is mainly used in planning and procurement processes for road and railway projects. (Toller, 2018). STA Road Ferries is the responsible actor within STA for the part of Swedish national infrastructure planning connected to the public marine transport. More specific, this implies operation and development of the road ferry fleet in Sweden. (Trafikverket, 2018c). As a consequence of the introduced climate law in Sweden, STA Road Ferries has introduced framework Vision 45 for their organisation in specific. Vision 45 formulates a work plan for STA Road Ferries, in order to reach net zero GHG emissions by year 2045 for the ferry operation. STA Road Ferries today has approximately 70 road ferries in operation which constitutes an important part of the public transport system in Sweden. Operation from these causes GHG emissions of around 38,400 tons CO2-equivalents yearly. (Pöldma, 2018). However, emissions from construction, maintenance and deconstruction of road ferries are yet unknown. In order to reach overall climate neutrality, identification of emissions from a life cycle perspective of a road ferry is needed, and where introduction of Klimatkalkyl provides opportunities to facilitate the working process. (Trafikverket, 2018).

13

2. Aim and Objectives This project intends to act as a starting point for STA Road Ferries in their upcoming work towards reaching their defined goal of becoming climate neutral by year 2045. Main purposes are to:

• Identify the life cycle of a road ferry and its critical phases in relation to the long-term goals and vision defined by STA Road Ferries and visualise potential areas in need of measures.

• Function as a learning process of the usability of life cycle thinking for STA Road Ferries as an actor in order to reach defined long-term goals and vision.

• Provide data from a life cycle perspective for a standard road ferry operated by STA Road Ferries, for implementation in Klimatkalkyl.

The study aims to analyse and provide information of resource use and emissions from a standard road ferry operated by STA from a life cycle perspective and environmental load these correspond to. The study further aims, through a scenario analysis, to analyse how potential changes in the system affects the results compared to the baseline scenario. The results from this study will then, in a second step outside of this project, be translated into default values for a typical road ferry, and furthermore create a baseline in STA’s own LCA1-tool Klimatkalkyl. Based on the aim and purposes, two research questions are addressed:

• RQ1 – What is the environmental performance of a road ferry operated by STA from a life cycle perspective?

• RQ2 – What hotspots can be identified within the studied system’s life cycle? From these research questions, specific objectives are formulated for a more systematic working process. These are in the end be merged together for a complete and comprehensive analysis. The objectives are:

• Identification of resource use from a life cycle perspective of a standard road ferry at STA Road Ferries.

• Identification of emissions from a life cycle perspective of a standard road ferry at STA Road Ferries.

• Assessment of environmental impacts caused by a road ferry at STA Road Ferries overall and in different states of the life cycle

1 LCA = Life Cycle Assessment, see further explanation in section 4.2 Life Cycle Assessment methodology.

14

3. Outline of the Thesis Following chapter presents a short overview of report structure together with a brief description of information included in remaining parts of report. Chapter 4 – Methodology. Aim of chapter 4 is to give a description of used methodology. This chapter gives a background to the LCA framework according to EN 15804 standardisation and vital methodological choices for this LCA are presented. Chapter 5 – Background. A background to the problem and sustainability issues connected to the transport sector is presented first. Further, this chapter gives a description of issues connected to the STA’s responsibility in question and afterwards a brief introduction and analysis to similar studies in the area. The aim of this chapter is to set conducted LCA in a larger context and to identify LCA data. Chapter 6 – Life Cycle Assessment of a Road Ferry. Chapter 6 provides the performed LCA in the study and follows the structure of an LCA according to EN 15804 standardisation. Therefore, chapter 6 starts with an outline of goal and scope, followed by the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) and concludes Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) with interpretation of results. Chapter 6 also provides a sensitivity analysis to assess the reliability of the results and conclusions possible to make from these. Chapter 7 – Discussion. Chapter 7 provides a discussion based on performed LCA study and literature review. This chapter also has a section for discussion of general uncertainties in the report’s results connected to methodological choices and data used in the study. Chapter 8 – Conclusions. Chapter 8 provides conclusions from the study drawn in relation to aim and research questions. Chapter 9 – Recommendations and future work. The final chapter of the report provides recommendations based on the conclusions made from the study and other reflections acknowledged during the process. Ideas for future work to lower environmental impacts within the sector with a specific focus on application of LCA are also presented.

15

4. Methodology Following chapter provides an overall description of adopted method and methodological choices in order to answer defined research questions and reach the purposes and aim of the study. 4.1 Research design The study approaches the defined problems by using the method LCA. This method was considered suitable to use for reaching aim and purpose of the study as resource use and impacts from a life cycle perspective are searched for. Further, the methodology was considered relevant to use as Klimatkalkyl is built upon the LCA methodology, and in order to provide results useful in Klimatkalkyl, the use of LCA in this study was considered to facilitate for future work. In section 4.2 LCA methodology, an overview of the LCA method and its principles according to used standardisation is given. The thesis has further been written in close collaboration with developers of Klimatkalkyl at STA and a group of experts from STA Road Ferries, which implied meetings and additional inputs during the working process. 4.2 Life Cycle Assessment methodology In order to provide results from this study compatible with STA’s LCA-tool Klimatkalkyl, the project follows EN 15804 standardisation which sets the rules for how the LCA has to be conducted (EN 15804:2012, 2013). EN 15804 is a standardisation for construction works compatible with ISO14040, but stricter regarding what stages in the life cycle and which impact categories to include in the assessment. (EN ISO 14040:2006, 2006; EN 15804:2012, 2013). LCA is a tool for assessment and evaluation of resource use and potential environmental impacts of a product throughout its life cycle. A product in an LCA context refers to goods or services and a life cycle normally includes stages involving acquisition of raw material, production steps, use phase and disposal of products. LCA is a methodology which, for example, can be used for quantification of a product’s environmental impacts and resource use during a life cycle. LCA is identified as a suitable tool e.g. for identification of improvement areas in environmental performance for a product, which in turn may comprise an informative basis for strategic decisions and/or for marketing purposes e.g. eco-labelling. The LCA procedure is divided into four iteratively performed phases. (EN 15804:2012, 2013). There are today two different approaches to LCA possible to use; attributional LCA and consequential LCA. The attributional LCA assess potential environmental impacts from input and output flows, typically as an account of a product’s history. A consequential LCA, on the other hand, analyses the system and potential environmental consequences of future possible changes. (Curran, 2015). The outline of the LCA procedure is presented in Figure 1. A thorough description for each step in the framework is given in sections Goal and Scope definition – Life Cycle Interpretation below.

16

Figure 1 Overview of the LCA framework and included phases according to EN 15804 standardisation, (adopted from EN 15804).

Goal and Scope Definition Goal and scope definition constitutes the first step of an LCA study and provides information regarding the context of the study and why it is carried out. Thus, this part will answer questions such as the purpose and need for assessment and intended application of the study. The goal and scope phase further define relevant details of studied system and therefore functions as a guide for upcoming assessment. This part of the goal and scope phase is considered to be of high importance as it will influences remaining LCA procedure. As the process continues in the other phases of the LCA procedure, revelation of new information necessary to consider in particular the scope definition, may occur. This situation can imply a need for iterative revisions and modifications in the goal and scope. Specific items required in the goal and scope definition are presented in Table 1. (EN 15804:2012, 2013). Table 1 Required parts to include in the scope. (EN 15804:2012, 2013)

Parameters in scope definition Product system of study Functions of the studied system Functional unit System boundaries Allocation procedures Selected impact categories and choice of impact assessment methodology Data need and requirements Assumptions Limitations of the study Initial requirements of data quality Type of critical review for the performed study* Format of the report required for the study*

* Not written in the report, but taken into consideration during work process

17

Life Cycle Inventory Analysis (LCI) Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) is the phase where a compilation of all relevant inputs and outputs from the earlier defined system in relation to the functional unit is made. For each process in the system, input data of raw materials, energy usage, waste from the processes and emissions released to air, water and soil have to be specified for all stages in the life cycle. (EN ISO 14040:2006, 2006; EN 15804:2012, 2013). LCI analysis is also considered as an iterative process. Data collected for the system tend to reveal new requirements for the data collection, change the procedure of data collection and/or change the analysed system. In general, it is though in advance hard to identify the significant materials and system processes when setting initial boundaries in goal and scope phase. In order to achieve transparency in the study, changes made during the process are important to state in the report (EN 15804:2012, 2013). Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) The Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) phase aims to provide key information for upcoming life cycle interpretation phase. To understand the environmental load and potential consequences from the analysed system, a translation is required through the impact assessment phase. More specific, the collected information of inputs and outputs from the LCI phase is converted to a limited number of impact category indicators in order to evaluate the significance of potential environmental impacts. (Golsteijn, 2014). Choice of impact categories for this study is predetermined according to EN 15804 standardisation and magnitude quantification of impact within the impact categories is calculated EPD (2013) impact assessment methodology found in SimaPro 8.4.0. (EN 15804:2012, 2013). Life Cycle Interpretation Life cycle interpretation step is the phase where findings from the LCI and LCIA phases are analysed (Curran, 2015). This part provides conclusions from findings and makes sure that these are transparently presented and consistent in relation to formulated goal and scope. Overall aim with the interpretation phase is to provide reliable, transparent and useful results together with conclusions for the indented audience of the study. The interpretation shall therefore include three important parameters; reached conclusion, discussion of limitations and provided recommendations. (EN 15804:2012, 2013). 4.2.1 Methodological uncertainties Uncertainties in LCA are connected to every stage of the process. In the goal and scope phase, several decisions need to be taken for defining the system and, likewise, assumptions are required for simplification of a complex system. The LCI phase is connected with uncertainties mainly regarding collection of inventory data and data quality connected to its possibility to give a sufficient representation of the reality. (Curran, 2015). In the LCIA phase, several possible sources of uncertainties are identified and needed to be considered during the processes and in the analysis of modelled results. These aspects concern for example, if the quality of data conducted in the LCI and the results from this step are sufficient enough to perform the LCIA and/or if the system boundaries and cut-off have been adequately set or needs to be reviewed during the process. It is also important to consider if the environmental relevance of the LCIA

18

has decreased due to the LCI functional unit calculations, allocation etc. (EN ISO 14040:2006, 2006). In order to deal with the uncertainties from assumptions and approximations made in the different phases, a sensitivity analysis is performed in the study. A sensitivity analysis can be made for indication of what parameters are of greatest importance in the analysis and/or to assess the quality in the used data. This is conducted by systematical changes of one or several input parameters and observation of changes in the impact results. (Curran, 2015). 4.2.2 Data collection approach The study has used both generic and specific data in the assessment. According to EN15804, different modules in the LCA study requires different types of data. For presentation of the different modules, see Appendix A. The module called Product manufacture includes processes that the manufacturer of the product can influence. This module requires manufactures’ average or specific process data while modules regarding production of commodities and raw material, installation processes, use processes and end-of-life processes can use generic data in the assessment. (EN 15804:2012, 2013). Data availability differed considerably between the analysed components included in the assessment. In some cases, different sources provided different numbers for same parameter and where a decision of most probable value, with a given motivation, was used in the assessment. Where no project specific data was found, results from similar LCA studies or other values from the literature were used instead. Scientific literature was found by iterative searches in databases, e.g. Primo and ScienceDirect. Project specific information for analysed ferry was mainly found in published materials and internal documents from STA. Lack of information of e.g. project specific processes made it necessary to include datasets from SimaPro 8.4.0 and the database Ecoinvent v.3.3 (2016) in the study. This implies that in some aspects EN15804 standardisation could be followed correctly while in other aspects, for example in module Product manufacture, EN15804 standard was not possible to follow for the analysed product. Transport distances were primarily calculated by using the web tool Searates (2019). Where this tool in some situations was not possible to use, Google Maps (2019) and a web tool developed by Map Developers (2019) for calculation of distances over a map were used instead to estimate distances for a reasonable route.

19

5. Background The chapter below gives an overview of the transport sector in Sweden and infrastructure planning connected to STA’s responsibility. Chapter 5 ends with an analysis of using LCA in complex problems and finally earlier conducted LCA’s in relation to formulated problem in this study. 5.1 Swedish transport sector and environmental issues Today, Swedish transport system corresponds to around one-third of total territorial GHG emissions and a number of 16,590,000 tons CO2-equvivalents in year 2017 (Naturvårdsverket, 2018a). 90 % of these emissions are direct CO2 emissions from road traffic which in turn is closely connected to the extensive loads of cars and its 98 % dependency of fossil fuels (Trafikverket , 2018b; Olsson, et al., 2015). Current actions within the transport sector includes e.g. energy efficiency measures and a movement to biofuels, but are not enough to counteract the increased traffic load seen today. (Naturvårdsverket, 2018a). Today’s transport system do not only contribute to the anthropogenic global climate change by direct GHG emissions, but also causes other environmental impacts, clearly seen when analysing from a perspective including the national Swedish defined environmental objectives. Sweden has adapted a Generation goal stating: “The overall goal of Swedish environmental policy is to hand over to the next generation a society in which the major environmental problems in Sweden have been solved, without increasing environmental and health problems outside Sweden’s borders.”. This has led to formulation of 16 environmental objectives with appurtenant time frames for more concrete actions. (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, 2012). The transport sector has been identified affecting the environmental objectives Natural acidification only, Clean air, A good built environment, Zero eutrophication and A rich diversity of plant and animal life. Except pressure on the environment caused by the transport system, impacts on public health caused by exposure of high noise levels and to emissions e.g. PM2.5 particles are also of concern. Today, over 2 million people in Sweden are exposed to these kinds of problems and problems estimated to cause 3,500 cases of early deaths in Sweden, with calculated socio-economic costs of 35 billion Swedish kronor yearly. (Dickinson, 2016). 5.1.1 Marine transport sector in Sweden and environmental issues Swedish marine transport sector caused 2 % of total GHG emissions in year 2017, a number of 312,000 tons of CO2-equvivalents. (Naturvårdsverket, 2018). STA Road Ferries causes 38,400 tons CO2-equvivalents from their ferry operation (Pöldma, 2018). Thus, emissions from ferry operation accounts for around 12 % of the emissions connected to Swedish marine transport sector. In 2017, STA Road Ferries operated 70 road ferries in Sweden at 38 different state-owned routes and 3 additional routes (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2018a). 12,940,143 vehicles and 1,427,300 pedestrians were transported, showing the importance of road ferries within the Swedish transport system and its function as an extension of existing road system (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2018b). Future scenarios prospect an annual traffic load increase of 1-2 % on

20

existing ferry lines coming years. The increase is not expected to be equally distributed, where some ferry routes can expect a slightly negative growth while other routes are anticipated to face a more extensive demand increase. Identified problems connected to the increased traffic are not only associated to ferry capacity, but also the infrastructure at port and connecting road network. Plans for new construction of ferries with higher capacity, conversion of existing ferries and deconstruction of ones currently existing with lower capacity are possible to see (Pöldma, 2018). Energy efficiency measures already has been implemented within STA Road Ferries. However, need for further improvements are necessary to reach a climate neutral ferry operation. Especially as the energy efficiency for person transport with a road ferry today is considered low compared to transport with other means of transport. (Johansson & Eklöf, 2015). 5.2 Transport infrastructure planning in Sweden The increased governmental focus in Sweden today on GHG emissions reduction can be visualised by for example the formulated national climate goal, see section 1. Introduction. As a consequence of the national environmental goals, specific transport policy objectives for the transport sector has been established. STA is the responsible authority for the long term national infrastructure planning in Sweden, where actions has to go in line with these transport policy objectives (Swedish Government, 2010). The transport policy objectives include parameters regarding accessibility and a transport sector to be sustainable in terms of human safety, health and the environment. (Trafikverket, 2019). More specific, infrastructure planning shall provide an economic effective and long-term sustainable transport sector in Sweden. From a system perspective, three areas of focus and consociation have by STA been defined to be of importance for reaching a net zero level of GHG emissions from the Swedish transport sector and thus in turn reach the transport policy objectives, see Figure 2 below. (Johansson & Eklöf, 2015).

Figure 2 Overview of the three consociated areas in order to reach the transport policy objectives Modified from Johansson & Eklöf (2015).

5.2.1 Klimatkalkyl In year 2013, the tool Klimatkalkyl was introduced by STA and has since then been used and continuously developed for a more systematic work towards reaching the transport policy

Energy efficieny within the sector

Renewable energy

Infrastructure and transport

planning

21

objectives. Klimatkalkyl is based on LCA methodology and can e.g. be used for calculations of total primary energy use and/or climate load caused by GHG emissions from the Swedish transport system and infrastructure. Applications are e.g. to assess climate load from road or railway by add pre-defined components together as e.g. ‘kilometres of asphalt road’ with ‘kilometres of tunnel’. The input resources are quantified and by the model multiplied by an impact correlation2 for specification of emissions, and consumption of energy per amount of used resources i.e. materials and energy. An illustration of calculation procedure is shown in Figure 3. With Klimatkalkyl, potential emissions are possible to identify and in turn consider already in the planning phase. It also creates prerequisites for set up requirements on e.g. allowed GHG emissions emitted from the project in a life cycle perspective, and thus be a used tool in procurements. Today, energy use and emissions only from infrastructure are included in Klimatkalkyl and emissions from the traffic solely are calculated in other existing models. (Toller, 2018).

Figure 3 Visualisation of calculation in Klimatkalkyl of the climate load based on the resource input data. Modified from (Toller, 2018).

5.2.2 Transport infrastructure planning at STA Road Ferries In order to meet the requirements in demand, i.e. in terms of number of passengers at the routes, STA Road Ferries works according to a five step principle in their planning process. If existing situation not is able to meet the required demand, the system is primary analysed after possibilities to change tours and/or change the frequencies of the tours at the already existing ferry lines. If there are limited possibilities to make an acceptable difference in the system the second step in this five step principle is applied called fleet management. Fleet management implies changes of ferries between the different ferry lines in order to ensure that right ferry is placed at the right place to meet the capacity requirements. Third step in the planning process includes improvement in capacity of already existing ferries, as for example rebuilding of ferries, and the fourth is to buy an already existing ferry. The last step according to the five step principle is construction of a new ferry. (Broberg & Nilsson, 2012). Vision 45 Vision 45 has been developed by STA Road Ferries in order to ensure the demands on existing ferry fleet and in the same time achieve the goals defined in the climate policy framework. The framework provides a rate of CO2 reduction according to the climate neutral goal formulated within STA Road Ferries and compared to the CO2 reduction goals formulated in STA overall,

2 Sv. Emissionsfaktor

Resource use

Impact correlation

Energy use &

Climate load

22

see Table 2. The numbers in the table do only refer to emissions directly connected to operation phase. (Pöldma, 2018). Table 2 CO2 reduction until year 2045 according to the plan set up in Vision 45. (Pöldma, 2018)

Year CO2 reduction in line with the goals set up within STA

Theoretical outcome according to Vision 45

2020 20 % 21.35 % 2025 30 % 44.16 % 2030 40-50 % 60.64 % 2035 60-70 % 67.95 % 2045 90-100 % 100 %

The plan for reduction CO2 in daily operation until year 2045 presumes conversion from currently used fossil fuel to Miljödrift3 for the existing ferries in the fleet. Uncertainties regarding supply and future prices for fuel alternatives creates difficulties to analyse preferable choice in both near future and further ahead. Future uncertainties affects the roadmap and can come to change. Today, discussions mainly assign operation through electricity, bio-methanol, biogas and HVO-operation. (Pöldma, 2018). Requirements of increased capacities, implies development not only in being more efficient of already existing ferries, but also an increase in the ferry fleet regarding number of ferries. Vision 45 includes for example construction of 20 new ferries in order to meet the estimated increase of capacity demands, 18 ferries of the currently existing fleet are planned to be phased out and 44 ferries in operation converted to Miljödrift. (Pöldma, 2018). 5.3 Previous studies within the area Following section presents previous studies conducted within the area of investigation. This section provides a compilation both of information from LCA studies made on ferries and components installed in a ferry. Further, conclusions from a study analysing LCA in relation to complex problems, are given in order to enlighten the complexity of the analysed product. 5.3.1 Previous LCA studies of ferries For the transport system and infrastructure project in general, LCA is today a widely used tool for assessment, including marine transport where several studies have been identified. As global and long-distance shipping though accounts for the major part of the emissions in marine transport, focus often lies here. For road ferries in specific the number of per-reviewed reports have though been limited. Instead, studies on a master thesis level from Norway with similar scope were identified. Thus, the literature study of previous LCA studies in the area gives an indication that the field somewhat lacks examination of current situation. The report A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and All-Electric Car Ferries performs a comparative LCA for two different car ferries operating on the same ferry route. The purpose with the report is to analyse similarities and differences between environmental 3 No suitable translation of the term from Swedish. Refers to the conversion to fuels with limited climate impact.

23

impacts of two ferries with different fuel alternatives, a conventional car ferry driven on marine diesel oil and an electric car ferry using average Norwegian electricity supply mix. Results from the study shows that the analysed electric car ferry outperforms the conventional car ferry in the analysed categories climate change, fossil depletion, marine eutrophication, natural land transformation, ozone depletion, PM formation and photochemical oxidant formation. The major part of the emissions contributing to impact category climate change can be derived to the operation phase and use of fossil fuels. On the other hand, the study also concludes that replacement to batteries instead of conventional fossil fuel ferries, can move the problems from a global level to become a local toxicity issue instead. Impact categories were batteries performed worst in were; freshwater ecotoxicity, human toxicity and metal depletion. (Kullman, 2016). In the report Life Cycle Assessment of a Battery Passenger Ferry, a comparative LCA of four different motors and fuel systems in a ferry was made. The reference scenario was a ‘diesel combustion propulsion system’, a scenario which afterwards was compared with the 3 other scenarios; ‘battery system charged from grid’, ‘battery system charged by photovoltaics and from grid’ and ‘battery system charged from grid but with additional batteries located at each charging station to support the grid during charge’. The results from this study shows that batteries, running on Norwegian electricity mix, have opportunities to reduce global warming potential (GWP) and emissions related to air pollution lowered compared to reference scenario. However, the study further states that the battery alternatives have a larger impact on several depletion and toxicity categories. The study concludes though that compared to the reference scenario, the three comparing alternatives are all overall better as long as the GWP is considered as the most important impact category, as it currently is in transport planning in Norway today. (Nordveit, 2017). In year 2004, MariTerm AB designed a computer based LCA tool called LCA-ships for use in the design phase for a ship. The purpose with LCA-ships is to construct more energy efficient ships from a life cycle perspective. The tool includes all stages in the life cycle i.e. construction, operation, maintenance and scrapping. Construction phase is in the model divided into sub-systems as e.g. production of hull, machinery parts and equipment for crew and passenger. Operation phase includes e.g. emissions from combustion of fuel and maintenance which assumes e.g. minor work on the hull. Scrapping phase assumes transport of the ship to a yard for demolition. To what extent different scenarios of recycling occurs is in turn defined by the user. The development of LCA-ships also resulted in a report with references on included data, in the tool, material flows, assumptions and explanations of how parameters in the model were calculated. (Jivén, et al., 2004).

5.3.2 Other relevant studies in the area

LCA of engines Several LCA studies have been identified, both for new production of engines, for remanufactured engines and for comparison of those in between. (Shi, et al., 2015a; Shi, et al., 2015b; Jiang, et al., 2014). For example, a stand-alone LCA study of a new produced diesel

24

engine from China was identified. The study examines all phases in the life cycle, from natural resource extraction to end-of-life disposal, and analyses climate loading emissions and primary energy demand (PED). Results from the study shows that PED from the use phase accounts for highest proportion of PED from a life cycle perspective and are derived to the use of non-renewable resources of coal, crude oil and natural gas. The study reveals that manufacturing phase is the second most energy demanding phase, due to the complex processes requiring electricity. The PED in manufacturing phase is calculated by division of the engine into seven different components and analyses of each component were in turn made. The study e.g. shows that 2296.21 kWh in total is needed for production of this specific engine. The operation phase of the engine is also identified as the largest contributor to GWP, and accounts for 97.65 % of total GWP from a life cycle perspective. The high percentage can be derived to the process of diesel fuel production and the burning of diesel fuel for energy. (Li, et al., 2013). Another example of a comparative LCA study can be seen through the study of a remanufactured diesel engine respectively a remanufactured liquefied natural gas (LNG) engine. The study consider six different environmental impact categories; global warming potential (GWP), Acidification potential (AP), Eutrophication potential (EP), Photochemical ozone creation potential (POEP), ozone depletion potential (ODP) and primary energy demand (PED). Results from the LCA shows that a remanufactured engine to a LNG engine reduced PED during operation phase with almost 42 % compared to the diesel engine. Highest decrease was though possible to see for the impact categories EP and AP with around 74 % and 71 % respectively. It has already in earlier studies been concluded that remanufacturing of diesel engines has been recognized to be preferable both regarding environmental performance but also as it is calculated to have a greater economic benefit per unit than a newly produced diesel engine. Based on this information, the study identifies opportunities for remanufacturing of diesel engines to LNG engines. The study also though identifies the remanufacturing process as the most energy and material demanding from a life cycle perspective, also in relation to a reconstructed diesel engine. (Shi, et al., 2015a).

LCA of hull material In year 2016, Gilbert et al, (2016) published a report regarding the role of material efficiency in the ship hull through a comparative LCA. The study analyse energy use and CO2-emissions from a container vessel constituting 75-85 % of steel. The study focuses on emissions connected to the steel in the ship hull and compare the magnitudes of CO2-emissions for different scenarios with inclusion of recycled steel. The approach thus implies that two life cycles are studied in each scenario. Results from the study shows that a 100 % recycling of the steel in the hull will give a 29 % reduction of CO2-emissions compared to the use of virgin materials. In the study, a case using 50 % reused steel material instead demonstrated a 10 % reduction of CO2-emissions. The study further identifies problems related to socio-economic issues with a change in the system towards use of recycled material in a higher extent and e.g. consequences of changes in the currently existing industry. Other issues with recycling of the steel concerns the quality of the steel and difficulties to ensure that the quality is retained over the whole life cycle. The study concludes that these are areas in need of further research. (Gilbert, et al., 2016).

25

5.3.3 LCA and complex problems LCA is considered to be a valuable tool for describing complex and multidimensional problems and potential impacts from these. Tchertchian et al., (2012) reviewed three different approaches to use LCA for complex products. The analyses were applied for a passenger road ferry for identification of differences and difficulties between the different analysed approaches. The report enlighten several difficult problems to consider already in the design phase of the product that will affect the outcome. For example, sub-systems in a complex product are interdependent, but also possible to see as stand-alone systems. This implies that these components by themselves can be analysed from an LCA perspective independently and potentially give alternative solutions. The article states that the more independently sub-systems the product consists of, the more complex becomes the system to analyse and thus to design. Regarding the road ferry analysed in this study it is e.g. possible to see LCA studies for sub-systems alone e.g. steel production processes or a cradle-to-gate investigation of the aluminium production (Maden Olmez, et al., 2016; Hisan Farjana, et al., 2019). Another example on analysis from part of the total system can be seen through a study by Mizanur Rahman et al., (2016) where an LCA assessed only the steel in the ship recycling industry in Bangladesh. These types of studies visualises both level of detail possible to achieve in analyses, the complexity and difficulty to handle this level of detail, but also how it is possible to optimise parts of the system and still make it function in a larger system. Further, a complex system often changes throughout its life cycle, making it hard to make long term forecasts of the life cycle already during the design phase (Tchertchian, et al., 2012). Conclusions from Tchertchian et al., (2012) states that; “Knowledge of each element of a complex system independently does not enable us to predict the behaviour of the system as a whole.”. This kind of knowledge is important to bear in mind if the analysed system has been divided into sub-systems, i.e. due to the complexity of the product to make it manageable. This conclusion further shows the importance and need for a merged analysis of the total climate load from the system as a whole in the final end. 5.3.4 Study of the environmental management system within STA Road Ferries A study with purpose to improve the environmental management system within STA Road Ferries was identified during literature review. In this study, possible environmental aspects in relation to STA’s ferry operation has been investigated and identified. The study identified three different categories of concern, see Figure 4. Within these categories, 28 environmental aspects have been formulated of relevance for STA Road Ferries and are connected their ferry operation. For example emissions, noise pollution and waste were identified environmental aspects of concern. Five of these aspects were considered to be of major environmental concern and suggested to be focus areas in the environmental improvement work. These aspects were fossil fuel for operation, use of chemicals, electricity use for land docking, lack of follow-up after made actions and in procurements of shipyard services. (Broberg & Nilsson, 2012).

26

Figure 4 Flowchart over the activities from STA Road Ferries from where the environmental aspects has been identified. Modified from Broberg & Nilsson (2012).

27

6. Life Cycle Assessment of a Road Ferry Following chapter presents the performed LCA in the study according to the EN 15804 standardisation. 6.1 Goal definition The LCA in this study is conducted as a stand-alone, attributional LCA, implying results from the study showing the current situation and environmental load from STA’s road ferry fleet, which in turn, for example could be possible to use as a supportive decision driver for promoting and working towards a more sustainable road ferry fleet. The study intends to be used internally for lowering the total climate impact and in turn create prerequisites for STA Road Ferries to work towards reaching the goal set up in Vision 45 of becoming climate neutral by year 2045 (Pöldma, 2018). Intended audience for this study is therefore STA overall and STA Road Ferries in specific. However, results from this LCA study can also be used as a communication tool for visualising the current status within the sector and potential improvement work possible to make, and therefore considered to be of value for external audiences as well. 6.2 Scope definition The scope definition includes the critical part of defining the system, including assumptions and limitations of the study, data requirements etc. Following sections presents information required for a sufficient scope definition according to EN 15804 standardisation in context of this project. 6.2.1 Functional Unit The LCA process is structured around a functional unit, which provides a reference as inputs to the system and outputs from the system are related to. In other words, the functional unit defines and provides information of what is being studied. (EN 15804:2012, 2013). The analysed unit for a single, stand-alone system LCA has to be reflected by a precise definition of the product (Curran, 2015). Therefore, following functional unit has been formulated: Functional unit: One standard ferry produced, operated for 30 years and deconstructed by STA Road Ferries. 6.2.2 Product definition In the product definition, two aspects are identified of particular importance to take into consideration for reaching the goal and purpose of the study. First, the defined product shall be representative for a ‘standard’ road ferry operated by STA Road Ferries. It is in the same time also important to define a product that will be able to function as a baseline and starting point for future work towards becoming climate neutral. This means that the ferry analysed in this LCA have to be comparable to a ferry potentially produced today or in the future. The product analysed in this project was therefore chosen to be Neptunus, see Figure 5. Neptunus was constructed in 2017 mainly by Baltic Workboats Ltd., Estonia (Trafikverket, 2017a). The vessel type is a double-ended ferry and has a capacity of 297 passengers respectively 80 passenger

28

cars, which is highest capacity today operating in Sweden (Trafikverket, 2017b; Trafikverket, 2017a). Specifications of Neptunus is presented in Table 3.

Figure 5 Picture over Neptunus. (Photo by: Kasper Dudzik)

Table 3 Specifications of Neptunus (Trafikverket, 2017a)

Dimension Quantity and unit Length overall 99.7 meters Length of hull 85.0 meters Breadth over all 18.2 meters Breadth moulded 18.0 meters Depth moulded 2.2 meters Scantling draught 2.08 meters Displacement light ship 1020 tons Gross Tonnage 977 Max speed 11 knots Capacity 297 passengers

80 passenger cars Maximum deck load 600 tons

Neptunus operates in Gullmarsfjorden, in western part of Sweden between Finnsbo and Skår, together with the road ferry Gullbritt at a route called Gullmarsleden, see ferry route in Figure 6. Gullbritt is today used as the first ferry on the route and has 7,800 operation hours yearly. Neptunus is the second ferry and has currently 5,540 operation hours yearly (Jansson Peterberg, 2019). The route has a length of 1,850 meters and it takes 10 minutes between the two docking locations. (Trafikverket, 2017b). Gullmarsleden is the route in Sweden today contributing to the second largest amount of CO2-emissions during operation phase and 3,264 tons of direct CO2-equivalents were emitted in year 2017 (Pöldma, 2018).

29

Figure 6 Map over route in Gullmarsleden. (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019a)

6.2.3 System boundaries Definition of system boundaries is a critical part of the scoping process. It is of high importance that these are defined appropriately, as the boundaries decides what processes are to be included in the system and therefore included in the impact assessment. EN15804 states that all life cycle stages has to be applied, i.e. a ”cradle-to-grave” approach, meaning that no life cycle stages can be excluded in the assessment. For each stage of the life cycle, specific information module groups exists, providing guideline requirements of what information need to be included in every module (EN 15804:2012, 2013), see Appendix A. These guidelines have been of importance for defining the system, which is presented in sections System process boundaries – Allocation procedures. System process boundaries The system process boundaries provides important information of the processes included in the system (EN 15804:2012, 2013). To give a simplified overview of the analysed system, it has roughly been divided into different material categories, see Figure 7. The study includes all life cycle stages, from material extraction to deconstruction of the ferry and handling of material to ensure availability of the material on the market again.

30

Figure 7 Initial flowchart of system to give an indication of processes included.

Foreground and Background Foreground is defined by the stages and processes in the life cycle as STA Road Ferries have a possibility to control and thus where possible measures potentially will be implemented. In opposite, the background defines the part(s) of the system where the intendent audience have limited possibility to affect the processes. (Curran, 2015). However, in this specific case, a theoretical change for STA Road Ferries to influence more or less all included parts of the defined system to some extent is identified and connected to the ambition within STA Road Ferries to affect the production process. For example, STA Road Ferries could influence through requirements and regulations on e.g. allowed emissions and/or used material, which are defined already in the procurement before production of the road ferry, and therefore identified to be important of where to define the foreground versus background of the project. That said, it is difficult to mark foreground and background in Figure 7, and marking has therefore been excluded in the flowchart.

31

Geographical boundaries The production of the road ferry has been identified to occur in Estonia (Trafikverket, 2017a). The product is after construction transported to Sweden, where the road ferry operates. End-of-life stages are assumed to occur in Sweden. Components used in ferry are identified to be produced in places around Europe. Due to time limitation though, raw material extraction and pre-processing were for included components in study assumed to coincide either with European or global average values. Temporal boundaries According to EN 15804, the quality of used data shall be addressed in the project report (EN 15804:2012, 2013). Age of used data is one aspect to which data quality closely correlates to and important for the reliability analysis of the interpreted results. In general, used data shall be as current as possible. For construction products, additional requirements are applied regarding the time aspect of the data used in the LCA according to EN 15804. No specific data older than 5 years should be used in the assessment and for general data this limit are set to 10 years. (EN 15804:2012, 2013). Time horizon for analysed road ferry in this project is hard to define due to the long and uncertain lifetime of the product. The technical lifespan of a road ferry is though set to 30 years and will be used in this project. The analysed system is not anticipated to be subjected to major changes in the near future and therefore, the results from this LCA are expected to applicable and useful for a couple of years forward. The validity of the model will however depend on whether the system and involved material and processes will be similar in the future. Changes in used material and/or processes are identified to potentially decrease the validity of the model. Cut-off Criteria Due to the complexity of the analysed product, cut-off was considered necessary to limit the scope of the study. The components included in the study are presented in Table 5, section 6.3.2 Assumptions of components. The docking system and infrastructure at port have been excluded from the analysed system. Cut-off has further been made for potential packaging materials used during transport from production location for used components to location of ferry construction. Life cycles for required machines used in production of ferry have been excluded. Transport of process waste to a treatment facility has further been excluded in the assessment for those components where process waste have been identified. 6.2.4 Allocation procedures Where project specific data has been used in the assessment, no allocation procedures have been identified, and thus not needed to take into consideration in the assessment. Processes included in the assessment based on generic data, have been data presented in that manner where potential allocation already has been done. As construction of analysed unit implies an extensive work, absence of allocation procedures was considered reasonable within scope of this study together with how formulation of the analysed system has been made. Furthermore, this study uses the Ecoinvent database with the allocation cut-off system model. Allocation of

32

data is therefore done by economic allocation for all multi-output processes. Using this database further implies a cut-off from the system for the materials that in the waste scenario are sent for recycling. This therefore implies and no positive environmental impacts can be accounted for from the chosen waste treatment alternative in this phase of the life cycle. (Ecoinvent, 2018). 6.2.5 General assumptions and limitations All general assumptions for the analysed system are stated in the section below. General assumptions and limitations involves choices of data and design of analysed system to make the assessment manageable, due to time limitations in relation to the complexity for the analysed product. More detailed description of assumptions connected to each analysed component are made are presented in Appendix F-P. Except for the prerequisites described in section 6.2.2 Product definition, more specific assumptions for the system are presented in the list below:

• A standard ferry at STA Road Ferries follows the exact life cycle as the road ferry Neptunus, produced in year 2017.

• The total system analysed in this study is divided into standalone sub-systems constituting of the components included in the assessment, due to the complex character of the analysed product. The behaviour from the total system as a whole is assumed to be known based on information and results of each component independently.

• Operation phase of Neptunus at Gullmarsleden assumes to last for 30 years. • Neptunus assumes to only consist of components presented in Table 5. • Docking locations and infrastructure at port are assumed to not be a part of the analysed

system. • Waste and garbage generated at the ferry during operation from travellers and workers

at Neptunus are excluded from the analysis. • Distance for transport is calculated from closest loading place found in the searching

tool in Searates (2019) and is for scope of this study considered as an acceptable approximation.

• The deconstruction of the ferry is assumed to completely occur in Sweden after 30 years of operation.

• A general decommissioning plan for a safe waste handling is provided for Neptunus, which suggestions for suitable waste treatments has primaly been used for forming a potential disposal scenario.

• Based on information of suitable waste and material treatments, a potential waste treatment plant was found and an assumption made that all waste goes to this specific Stena recycling treatment plant located in Örebro.

• Potential impacts from transport of process waste to external treatment facilities was assumed negligible according to the scope of this study and therefore excluded in the assessment.

33

6.2.6 Impact categories and life cycle impact assessment method For assessment of potential life cycle impacts from Neptunus, the method EPD (2013) found in SimaPro 8.4.0 was used for calculation of environmental impact contribution. The overall aim with the impact assessment methodology is to convert the collected input and output data of resource use and emissions found in the life cycle inventory (LCI) into a limited number environmental impacts scores (Curran, 2015). This process is in EPD (2013) methodology done through characterisation factors for each substance4 (EN 15804:2012, 2013). By conversion through characterisation factors it is possible to describe the relative severity in each environmental impact category in relation to the impact category parameter. (Huijbregts, et al., 2016; Goedkoop, et al., 2009). The impact assessment methodology EPD (2013) includes 7 different impact categories, according to the EN 15804 standardisation (EN 15804:2012, 2013), and are presented in detail in Appendix B. Also cumulative energy demand (CED) was of interest to analyse and a method with the same name found in SimaPro 8.4.0 was used. 6.2.7 Normalisation and weighting Normalisation in the LCA process puts the generated results into a broader context i.e. refers to a magnitude calculation of the category indicator results in relation to a reference information. Weighting is a step that allows the modeller to weight the importance of different impact categories. (EN ISO 14040:2006, 2006). In EN 15804, normalisation and weighting are steps in the process not allowed and were therefore irrelevant in this study. 6.3 Life Cycle Inventory Analysis (LCI) Following section presents results from the Life Cycle Inventory Analysis (LCI) in the LCA process. An overall description over the products life cycle, general assumptions for the system and included components are provided in this section. A flow chart over final analysed system is first presented in Figure 9, section 6.3.1 Process Flowchart and a final compilation of all relevant data used in modelling per functional unit is provided in Appendix E. All references stated as “Internal documents” refers to paper printed first hand sources in form of sketches and part delivery documents available at STA Road Ferries in Vaxholm. Due to the extensive number of used documents during data compilation and collection these have been categorised together to facilitate for the reader of the report. 6.3.1 Process Flowchart Based on results from LCI phase, a final process flowchart was created over system, see Figure 8. Purpose with the process flowchart is to provide a clear picture over the final analysed system with focus on the actual constructed ferry. As the study approaches the defined problem by involving several components which by themselves constitutes of several materials and production processes, simplification in the figure was considered necessary. Therefore, the final process flowchart still by purpose excludes some details for inputs and outputs for each component in order to make interpretation of the flowchart manageable for the reader.

4 Characterisation factors to be use for the different impact categories are presented in EN15804 standardisation. Example: For methane the characterisation factor 2.5*101 [kg CO2 eq.] shall be used according to the standardisation. (EN 15804:2012, 2013)

34

Figure 8 Process flowchart over the life cycle of the road ferry Neptunus.

35

6.3.2 Product life cycle description Construction of the road ferry was performed in two steps at two different shipyards. The vessel hull was constructed at Riga Shipyard, Latvia, and afterwards trailed by freight to Baltic Workboats Shipyard, Estonia, for further construction to a final product. Transport distance between Riga Shipyard and Baltic Workboats Shipyard was calculated to ~170 km, see Appendix H. At Baltic Workboats Shipyard remaining components in the ferry were installed. An equipment list compiled by Baltic Workboats Shipyard shows 125 different types of installed equipment in the ferry in the second construction (Baltic Workboats Shipyard, 2017). After construction, the final product was transported from Baltic Workboats Shipyard, Estonia, to operation location at Gullmarsleden. The distance is calculated to 1,058 km, see Appendix Q. As mentioned in section 6.2.2 Product description, Neptunus is currently used as the second ferry at the route with 5,540 operation hours yearly. Gullbritt is currently the first ferry at the route with 7,800 operation hours yearly. Plans for near future development for the ferry fleet and this route implies a replacement where Neptunus will become first ferry at the route. The calculations and modelling has therefore been made based on this assumption, i.e. with Neptunus having 7,800 operation hours. Average yearly diesel consumption for Neptunus as second ferry at Gullmarsleden route are calculated to 376,845 litres. From these numbers an average diesel consumption per operation hour has been calculated ( 68 l/operation hour) and multiplied with the new planned operation hours. Over 30 years of operation, diesel consumption is calculated to 15,917,280 litre. Additionally, engine oil is required for a functioning operation and included in the analysis. Amount of engine oil has been calculated for the main engines, axillaries engines and propulsion system to a value of 121,050 litre per functional unit. For compilation of input values, see Table 4, for calculation details, see Appendix R. During operation phase, maintenance of the ferry is also identified to occur. Maintenance are connected to each component and presented in section 6.3.2 Assumption of components. Table 4 Compilation input data operation and maintenance

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Operation Material Diesel 15,917,280 l Internal documents

Engine Oil 121,050 l Internal documents After operation phase, deconstruction of the product is considered. In a decommissioning plan prepared by Baltic Workboats Shipyard, the major and critical materials are considered. This plan is developed in order to ensure an environmental friendly and human safe way of demolition in the disposal phase of a ship or ferry according to IMO resolution A.962(23)5 (International Maritime Organization, 2004). A disassembly process of used product back to assemblies was assumed and from where disposal scenarios in turn were further assumed at Fridhems Shipyard, calculated 4.62 km from Gullmarsleden. For calculation details, see Appendix S. For components constituting of materials with a secondary value, the process

5 The resolution was established in year 2004 by International Maritime Organization and provides guidelines on ship recycling.

36

includes additional required energy for dismantling to same components as included in the construction phase and transport to suitable waste treatment facility. After transport to appropriate treatment facility the component in question is in this study considered to be enough handled for the used material to be available on a market again. Remaining materials, without a direct market value, are handled by a suitable waste treatment scenario before considered available on market again. More specific, all metals in the different components are considered to have a direct secondary value while materials as insulation and cables have to be handled by a suitable treatment before considered to have a secondary market again. For details over division of components based on assumptions made of suitable waste treatment, see Table 7. For calculation details over the disassembly process see Appendix T, for details regarding disposal scenarios see Appendix U. 6.3.3 Assumption of components The high level of complexity regarding components and material used for construction of the road ferry, mainly due to the high number of different components included in the product, made it important to limit the study. Major material flows throughout the life cycle were identified and analysed in the LCA (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019b). The identified materials were divided into the categories; materials used for construction of ferry (Table 5) and material used during operation and maintenance (Table 6). The separation between materials with a secondary market value and materials in need of treatment made the end-of-life scenario is shown in Table 7. Table 5 Components used for construction of the ferry (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019b)

Overview of components – Construction phase Hull material Paint Engines Heating system Lighting equipment Cables Batteries Propulsion system Insulation Windows

Table 6 Materials used for operation and maintenance phase (Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019b)

Overview of materials – Operation phase Fuels Engine oil Hull material Paint Batteries Lighting equipment Engines

37

Table 7 Handling of waste in end-of-life phase Scenario Component Direct secondary market value

Hull material Engines Batteries Heat pump system Propulsion system Insulation

Waste/material treatment needed

Lubricant oils Windows Paint Cables Lighting equipment

Hull The hull in Neptunus consists of high strength steel plates, aluminium plates and copper-coated, unalloyed mild steel wires in the welding consumables. The material is delivered from 15 different suppliers according to internal documents over quality certification provided from each part delivery. Location of suppliers are in these documents stated, but no further information regarding origin of raw material in the metal plates respectively welding consumables are provided. Thus, global average values has been used in the modelling for material production as well as production of plates for respectively material has been included. Cutting, welding and sandblasting are processes identified to be included in the hull construction (Gilbert, et al., 2016). Cutting refers to the process when steel and aluminium plates are cut by laser to right dimensions. According to Gilbert et al., (2016), 10 % of the hull surface area are lost in the cutting process and 8.5 MJ electricity is required per m2 of steel cut. For the bottom parts of the vessel, consisting of steel, the surface area was calculated from an equation provided by Transocean Coatings (2014) to a value of 1692 m2, see Appendix C. Total cutting area was therefore calculated to 169 m2. Construction above bottom parts instead constitutes of aluminium. Due to complexity of shape, no general equation was considered suitable and this surface area was instead calculated by hand from sketches over the ferry. These areas were calculated to a value of approximately ~ 1500 m2, see Appendix D. Thus, 150 m2 of hull material is assumed being lost in the cutting process for aluminium parts. 8.5 MJ electricity is by the author of this study assumed needed per m2 of aluminium cut as well and are based on information regarding energy for steel cut. Total electricity needed for cutting is calculated to 1,438 MJ. Gilbert et al., (2016) further states an electricity requirement of 15.1 MJ per metre welded steel together with the information that 117.2 km for a 1,300 dwt vessel. From this information 25,542 MJ is calculated required for the welding process and assumed to include welding for both steel and aluminium. The third process required part for construction of hull is the sandblasting. This process requires 10 kg sand per square meter of sandblasted steel and 0.023 kg diesel/m2. From this information 31.92 tons sand and 73.37 kg diesel are required for sandblasting process. As for the other processes, sandblasting has been assumed required for

38

both steel and aluminium parts of the ferry hull. For compilation of input values, see Table 8, for more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix F. An additional 10 % of total hull material is reasonable to add during the life time of the ferry as maintenance (Gilbert, et al., 2016). An even distribution between the material fractions was assumed, i.e. 72.6 tons steel, 4.6 tons aluminium and 0.0115 tons welding materials used for maintenance. For details see Appendix R. Table 8 Compilation input data, hull

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Production of hull material

Material

Steel plates 726 ton

Internal documents (Jivén, et al., 2004) (Gilbert, et al., 2016) Aluminium plates 46 ton

Construction of ferry hull

Welding consumables 0.12 ton Internal documents Sand for blasting 32 ton (Jivén, et al., 2004)

Construction processes

Cutting 2,938 MJ (Gilbert, et al., 2016) Sandblasting 73 kg diesel

Welding 25,542 MJ Maintenance of road ferry

Hull material

Additional hull material during operation phase

77 ton (Gilbert, et al., 2016)

Paint Internal documents calculates required amounts and different types of paint needed for a 100 m ferry. In total, 16 different variants of paint are used for colour and protection of the hull vessel. All 16 different types of paint were in this study assumed to have the same characteristics as one of these variants of paint, Intershield 300. (International, 2016). According to International (2015), Intershield 300 has a unit size of the paint can at 17.5 litres with a weight of 23.5 kg. From this information, paint density of ~1.34 kg/l was calculated with the assumption that needed container for storage is not included in this weight. Total amount of paint was compiled from provided internal documents to 18,348 litres and thus a weight of 24,586 kg. JOTUN WaterFine Barrier was used due lack of project specific product and has similar applications as Intershield 300. For JOTUN WaterFine Barrier, an Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) is available providing information over environmental load per kilogram paint for the 7 environmental impact categories included in EN 15804 standardisation. Potential environmental load for used paint during construction phase, are provided in Table 9. Information of production place was available for JOTUN WaterFine Barrier and used as production location in this study. For compilation of input values, see Table 10, for more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix G. According to the technical specifications given for paint, re-painting is suggested for every 36th month (International, 2016). As not all areas are exposed to attrition, re-painting was assumed to not be required for all parts of the ferry. Needed paint for maintenance during a lifetime were calculated to 108,893 l. For calculation details, see Appendix R.

39

Table 9 Results according to included environmental impact categories (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018) Subject of assessment Potential impact of

JOTUN WaterFine Barrier per kg

Unit per kg Total potential impact of JOTUN WaterFine Barrier

Abiotic depletion potential of non-fossil resources Abiotic depletion for fossil resources

5.27E-03 6.66E+01

kg Sb –eqv. MJ

130 1,637,404

Global warming potential (GWP 100 years) Ozone destruction potential (ODP) Acidification potential (AP) Eutrophication potential (EP) Photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP)

6.01E+00 3.80E-08 5.72E-02 1.70E-02 2.84E-03

kg CO2-eqv. kg CFC11-eqv. kg SO2-eqv. kg PO4

3--eqv. kg C2H4-eqv.

147,760 9.3*10-4 1406 418 70

Table 10 Compilation input data, paint

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of remaining part of ferry

Paint

Material 18,348 l (International, 2016) Transport 178,755,292 kgkm (International, 2015)

(International, 2016) (Searates, 2019)

Maintenance of road ferry

Paint Additional paint during operation phase

108,893 l (International, 2016)

Engines The engine model used in Neptunus is Volvo Penta D16-MH produced in Vara, Sweden (Volvo Penta, 2019). The ferry has in total four engines with a weight of 2610 kg per engine (Volvo Penta, 2013). For this project specific model, no information regarding production process has been possible to find. An EPD for a similar marine engine model from Scania, used in other ferries at STA Road Ferries were though available (Scania, 2006). Information from the EPD gives weight shares for the different used material fractions. 97 % of the engine constitutes of cast iron (46 %), steel (40 %), aluminium (8 %), oil and grease (3 %) and remaining material: plastics, rubber, paint, copper, bronze, brass and zinc (in total 3 %), which are materials excluded in this study. For construction of four engines 8.0 m3 water, 102 kg diesel, 7.6 MWh electricity and 3.2 MWh heat are required. For compilation of input values, see Table 11, for more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix I. No information regarding lifespan of used engines were found and a qualified guess of one engine replacement during operation phase of the ferry was made, see Appendix R. Table 11 Compilation input data, engines

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of component installed in ferry

Engines

Material 10,440 kg (Scania, 2006) Transport 44,201,119 kgkm (Volvo Penta, 2019)

(Searates, 2019) Maintenance of road ferry

Additional engines during operation phase

4 units Qualified guess

40

Heat pump system In Neptunus, 11 heat pumps are installed and together with a pipe system assumed composted the heat pump system in the ferry. Installed heat pumps are identified to be produced by Grundfos Lenntech and of type MANGA1 and ALPHA2L. Product descriptions states cast iron as only material in the heat pump component and the study assumes only cast iron in the artefact. The pipes used is in sketches over the heat pump system were specified to be seamless steel pipes. Seamless steel pipes were further identified during compilation of part deliveries. Delivered pipes were calculated to a weight of 15,010 kg. All identified steel in this study assumed to be allocated to the heat pump system in Neptunus as no other information or components has been identified to include this material. Lack of information regarding production process for MANGA1 Or ALPHA2L made it necessary to use generic data for metal working for indication of amplitude of energy requirements and potential environmental load. The heat pumps artefacts are assumed to be produced and delivered from Grundfos Distribution Service B.V., The Netherlands. Delivered steel pipes are from certification documents identified to be produced in Trubnikov, Ukraine and Ostrava, Czech Republic. For compilation of input values, see Table 12, for more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix J. Table 12 Compilation input data, heat pump system

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of component installed in ferry

Heat pump system

Material 15,124 kg (Grundfos Lenntech, 2019) Internal documents

Transport 26,485,548 kgkm (Grundfos Lenntech, 2019) (Searates, 2019)

Lighting equipment Glamox was identified to be the supplier providing lighting equipment installed in Neptunus. From sketches of position markings for the internal lighting system, 200 pieces of lighting armatures of 7 different styles were computed during compilation. Most present light armature model in Neptunus was identified to be Glamox MRS67-1200 LED 5000, and all calculations were made based on information of this model in the assessment. Glamox MRS67-1200 LED 5000 weigh 7.3 kg/unit and consist of aluminium-zinc steel, plastic and light emitting diodes (LED). Material fractions for MRS67-1200 LED 5000 were not possible to identify and AllFive LED from Fagerhults, a similar product available on the market was used instead. AllFive LED is a LED armature consisting of similar material and used in industrial environments. Calculation based on information from these references together with the number of used armatures in Neptunus shows that ~1067 kg steel, ~380 kg polycarbonate and ~15 kg light emitting diodes per functional unit are required materials during construction phase. Lower median lifespan for Glamox á 70,000 hours was used in this study for calculations of needed changes of lighting equipment during maintenance. Thus the lighting armature is assumed to be changed 3 times during operation phase of the road ferry, see Appendix R. Neither Glamox nor Fagerhult provides any information regarding production process or required energy from production and generic production processes were used where provided

41

information above were included. Therefore, average values from Ecoinvent v.3.3 (2016) were used. Glamox is produced in several places around the world, but identified to potentially be produced in Molde, Norway and in this project assumed to be produced there. For compilation of input values, see Table 13, for more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix K. Table 13 Compilation input data, lighting equipment

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of component installed in ferry

Luminaries Material 1,460 kg (Glamox, 2019a) Transport 2,519,157 kgkm (Glamox, 2019a)

(Searates, 2019) Maintenance of road ferry

Additional luminaries during operation phase

600 units (Glamox, 2019a)

Cables 63 different types of cables from TKF are installed in Neptunus, divided between the systems power/lightning, communication, fire detection and the emergency system. According to Müürisepp (2019), electrical engineer at Baltic Workboats AS, a compilation of installed cables on Neptunus was made during construction giving used length per used type of cable. From TKF (2019) densities for different types of cables were found. The total mass for cables was from this information possible to calculate. Project specific information regarding production process for this component was not possible to identify within the time frame for the study and a generic dataset for cable production was used instead been and considered to give an enough indication of the amplitude of potential environmental load. Production was identified to occur in Haaksbergen, the Netherlands. For compilation of input values, see Table 14, for more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix L. Table 14 Compilation input data, cables

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of component installed in ferry

Cables Material 7,082 kg (Müürisepp, 2019) (TKF, 2019)

Transport 14,642,708 kgkm (TKF, 2019) (Searates, 2019)

Batteries In Neptunus, 17 different lead-acid batteries are installed with different battery capacities depending on its purpose. All batteries are assumed to be Valve Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA) batteries from Victron Energy, where weight of each battery is decided by battery capacity. Material composition for VRLA batteries is given in the report Status of life cycle inventories for batteries by Sullivan and Gaines (2012), where lead oxides (35 %), lead (25 %), water (16 %), polypropylene (10 %), sulphuric acid (10 %), glass (2 %) and antimony (1 %) are the included material fractions. The production process for a VRLA battery is given by Spanos et al., (2014), which states that 4.59 MJ/kg electricity is needed per kg produced battery, 0.65 MJ oil/kg battery and 6.31 MJ natural gas/kg battery are required. Transport is calculated from the

42

retailer JG Almere, the Netherlands as no information regarding factory location has been possible to find. Service life of Victron batteries is a function of average temperature and depth of discharge. An average temperature of 20 ℃ gives a service life on 12 years. Based on this information the batteries needs to be changed 2 times á 17 units. For calculations, see Appendix R. For compilation of input values, see Table 15, for more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix M.

Table 15 Compilation input data, batteries Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of component installed in ferry

Batteries

Material 1,081 kg (Victron Energy, 2019) (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Transport 2,361,888 kgkm (Victron Energy, 2019) (Searates, 2019)

Maintenance of road ferry

Additional batteries during operation phase

34 units (Victron Energy, 2019)

Propulsion system Neptunus, has a system with two main propellers at each end of the vessel. Internal documents over the propulsion system identifies Rolls-Royce Azimuth Thruster US 155 P14 FP to be the used propeller type in the propulsion system. Only general information for this propeller type was found from Rolls-Royce (2019), as an average ranging for total thruster weight between 11.5-12.5 tons, where upper limit of 12.5 tons was used. Nickel-aluminium bronze is an alloy today dominating the market, and the material composition of bronze (83 %), aluminium (9 %), nickel (4 %) and iron (4 %) was used in the calculations (Carlton, 2012). The total mass for the propulsion system was assumed to be equal to the total mass of the two main propellers, i.e. 25,000 kg, and from where material fractions were calculated. Lack of information regarding geographical location for production made it necessary to use global values from production of needed materials in the product. According to Carlton (2012) majority of today’s produced propellers are made from casting. It is further stated that different propeller varies considerably in design and therefore also varies in material composition and production processes. As no further project specific information regarding production process has been possible to find, a pre-defined casting process for bronze from Ecoinvent v.3.3 (2016) was used instead, as bronze accounts the major material fraction in the propeller. The propeller artefact, is assembled by Rolls-Royce at their factory in Rauma, Finland, from already produced sub-assemblies. Earlier production steps of these components and location of manufacturing is today not possible to identify (Kokkonen & Karlsson, 2019). Transport is calculated from Rolls-Royce factory in Finland. For compilation of input values, see Table 16, for more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix N.

43

Table 16 Compilation input data, propulsion system Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of component installed in ferry

Propulsion system

Material 25,000 kg (Rolls-Royce, 2019) (Carlton, 2012)

Transport 14,214,250 kgkm (Rolls-Royce, 2019) (Searates, 2019)

Insulation Insulation in the ferry is identified to come from ISOVER. The total amount of insulation material has been estimated based on information from sketches were insulation is placed in the construction together with the made calculations of the total surface area of the vessel, see Appendix C and Appendix D. Two sketches over thermal insulation arrangement shows where insulation is placed in the ferry and general thickness of used insulation for respective place. The thickness of insulation between floor, bulkheads and ceiling in different structures of the ferry are identified to vary in a range between 50-200 mm. Based on analyses of the sketches over most common thickness of insulation is 150 mm, which has been used in the calculations. Total area in vessel with insulation is calculated to 2,440 m2. One of the commonly used insulation types in Neptunus is ISOVER U SeaProtect. This specific insulation has been declared according to ISO14025 standardisation with declaration number EPD-GHI-2008311-D. The declaration provides information regarding used raw material and extraction of these, energy use for production and transport per kilogram produced insulation in a cradle-to-gate perspective. (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008). The results from this EPD were directly used in the assessment. Density for ISOVER U SeaProtect Slab 66, used in Neptunus, is 66 kg/m3 and gives a total weight for used insulation to 24,156 kg. One factory identified to produce ISOVER insulation is located in Lübz, Germany and from where the transport has been calculated. For compilation of input values, see Table 17. For more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix O. Table 17 Compilation input data, insulation

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of component installed in ferry

Insulation Material 24,156 kg (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Transport 42,010,907 kgkm (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008) (Searates, 2019)

Windows Compilation of windows and their dimensions were made from internal sketches, and made it possible to calculate total window area in the ferry. These sketches also provided product specifications e.g. thickness of the glass and supplier of the product to be Bohamet. The sketches showed an average thickness for the windows of 33 mm, which in Bohamet’s product catalogue corresponded to a density of 68 kg/m2 for these types of windows. The total weight for glass were from this information calculated to ~ 2,973 kg. No information regarding production for these specific windows were found and thus an average production procuss for glass were used from Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016). Manufacturing location was identified to be in

44

Białe Błota, Poland, from where transport was calculated. For compilation of input values, see Table 19, For more specific information regarding calculations, see Appendix P. Table 18 Compilation input data, windows

Life cycle stage Component Amount Unit Reference Construction of component installed in ferry

Windows Material 2,973 kg (Bohamet, 2019) Transport 3,473,088 kgkm (Bohamet, 2019)

(Searates, 2019)

45

6.4 Life Cycle Impact Assessment Following section constitutes the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) where results from life cycle modelling in SimaPro 8.4.0 are presented and interpreted. In section 6.4.1 Results – Total life cycle, an overall analysis of potential environmental impact contribution and CED for the whole life cycle is given. Afterwards, an analysis for each phase of the life cycle was made for further identification of hot spots in respectively phase for the studied system’s life cycle, see sections 6.4.2 Results – Construction phase – 6.4.4 Results – End-of-life phase. Relative contribution to environmental impact categories is presented in the figures and some absolute numbers presented in the text. Due to space limitation, not all graphs has been possible to analyse (for example all CED graphs), but instead presented in absolute numbers, see Appendix V. 6.4.1 Results – Total life cycle baseline Results from relative environmental impact contribution in the different investigated impact categories from the life cycle are presented in Figure 9. As the graph with characterisation results shows, daily operation comes out as a predominant environmental impact contribution from in all categories expect for Abiotic depletion, where construction of road ferry instead comprises the relatively largest contribution. That operation is predominant in majority of categories are interpreted to be reasonable due to the long life time of the analysed product and the high yearly fossil fuel consumption in terms of diesel and oil products during operation. From maintenance, the highest relative contribution is found for the impact assessment categories Photochemical oxidation and Abiotic depletion. Disassembly and transport of components to suitable disposal facilities are processes included in the end-of-life phase of the product, and are not major contributors in any of the analysed categories. For interpretation of results of environmental impacts for construction, maintenance and end-of-life; see sections 6.4.2 Results – Construction phase – 6.4.4 Results – End-of-life phase.

Figure 9 Environmental impacts total life cycle, characterization results

46

Resulting CED for total life cycle divided in the different categories according to EN15804 standardisation is visible in Figure 10. For the analysed system, total primary energy used for the whole life cycle has been calculated to 8.3 108 MJ. In the characterisation graph it is possible to identify operation with highest energy demand in the dominating category non-renewable fossil fuel, followed by the construction of ferry, which are results connected to the usage of fossil fuels for operation. Including all analysed phases, it is possible to see that category Non-renewable, fossil accounts for 98.3 % of total CED in the whole life cycle, whereof operation phase accounts for 94.4 % of the energy use within in this category. Interpretation of CED results for construction, maintenance and end-of-life; see sections 6.4.2 Results – Construction phase – 6.4.4 Results – End-of-life phase.

Figure 10 CED total life cycle, characterization results

6.4.2 Results – Construction phase Examination of the construction phase has been made in order to identify and analyse potential hot spots within this phase. Resulting characterisation graphs over environmental impact contribution and CED for the construction phase per component included in the system are shown in Figure 11 respectively Figure 12. Environmental impacts connected to the production of hull accounts for the greatest relative contribution in the categories Global warming, Photochemical oxidation, Ozone layer depletion and Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels. Major contribution in categories Acidification, Eutrophication and Abiotic depletion origins from the propulsion system, which is a notable result as the mass in propulsion system accounts for 3.6 % compared to total hull weight. In the unit process it is possible to identify the use of tin and copper in bronze to be the cause of impact in all these categories. Paint and cables are other components with considerable contribution in relation to mass compared to other material used in the ferry. For cables, Acidification, Eutrophication and

47

Abiotic depletion are categories with where the artefact considerably contributes. In terms of climate impact, and the impact category Global warming, cables are not considered as a hot spot, but from a wider, more extensive environmental perspective cables have relatively large impacts in the analysed impact categories. Transports within the life cycle are have a visible potential impact in the construction phase for all analysed impact categories. Ozone layer depletion, Abiotic depletion fossil fuels and Global warming are the categories where transport is identified to impact most. In this study, a majority of the transported material and products are connected to road transport or transport over sea, which today has a fossil fuel dependence. Thus, it is reasonable that transport contribute within these impact categories. For results in absolute values, see Appendix V.

Figure 11 Environmental impacts construction phase, characterization results

Resulting characterisation graph over CED for production of the ferry is seen in Figure 12. The graph visualises that production of vessel hull requires largest amount of energy in terms of used non-renewable energy sources. These results together with the information that steel and aluminium in the ferry constitutes largest material flows in the product indicates that choice of energy in production of ferry hull is of importance. Transport, paint, insulation and the propulsion system have more or less equal requirements of the non-renewable fossil energy used during construction which together in total accounts for 25 % total use.

In the category Renewable wind, solar, geothermal, paint is the dominating source of contribution. In the used EPD for input data in LCI phase, primary energy was divided in the categories Total use of renewable primary energy resources (TPE) and Total use of non-renewable energy resources (TPRE), where TPE was calculated to 8.03 MJ/ kg produced paint and TPRE was 70.3 MJ/kg produced paint. Per kilogram produced paint, use of renewable energy is considerably lower than used fossil fuels and as paint accounts for largest contribution in this category, it is possible to conclude that the use of renewable energy over the life cycle is not used in any higher extent. It is though important to have in mind that processes are the part of the project that has been most difficult to find project specific data on, and thus the

48

division between renewable and non-renewable energy is united with uncertainties. For results in absolute values, see Appendix V.

Figure 12 CED construction phase, characterization results

6.4.3 Results – Maintenance phase Maintenance is in the project modelled as an additional life cycle to separate contribution from this stage and initial construction in the analysis and still connect to same assemblies as used in construction. Resulting characterisation graph over environmental impact contribution for maintenance phase is possible to see in Figure 13. In the analysis of total life cycle, the maintenance phase contributed most in Photochemical oxidation and Abiotic depletion. In Figure 13, it is possible to identify paint as major contributor in category Photochemical oxidation and batteries and hull as major contributor in category Abiotic depletion. Further results from this study shows that paint has highest contribution in 5 out of the 7 analysed environmental impact categories for maintenance phase and identified as a hotspot from this phase of life cycle. Paint is further the component with largest mass-transport (tnkm) during operation phase and thus the component connected with greatest contribution in transport category as well. An assumption regarding addition of hull material states that 10 % of total used hull weight in construction phase is added during a life time for hull reparation (Gilbert, et al., 2016). This makes hull accounts for major contribution in categories Ozone layer depletion and Abiotic depletion, and the component with second most relative contribution in remaining analysed categories. As shown resulting graph, paint displays no contribution in category Abiotic depletion which is interpreted as an error in the model. This as the model as it is built right now lacks initial data of resource use for paint and modelled only after created emissions from a cradle-to-gate perspective.

49

Figure 13 Environmental impacts maintenance, characterization results

6.4.4 Results – End-of-life phase End-of-life is the last analysed phase in the life cycle. This phase includes transport from Gullmarsleden to Fridhem shipyard for deconstruction of product. Deconstruction of the product more specifically implies a disassembly of the product, transport of assemblies to waste treatment facilities and suitable treatment for each assembly. Resulting environmental impact contribution from this phase is shown in Figure 14. The results shows that hull is the component with highest contribution in all analysed environmental impact categories. As mentioned, the disassembly phase includes transport of the components to a suitable waste treatment facility is included and required processes in order to ensure that the material is available on the market again by recycling or other appropriate approach for handling the waste. For example, steel and aluminium from hull do only include transport to treatment facility while cables comprises an additional necessary treatment to make the materials in the cables available on the market again. For further details, see Appendix U. Notable in the results is that treatment of cables has the second highest relative contribution in the analysed environmental impact categories. This is interpreted to be reasonable as majority of components are assumed recycled and therefore only transport to treatment facility is included. This can be compared with cables which not as easily can be recycled and where pre-defined global dataset for handling of used cables were included in the analysis, a process which contributes to the final environmental impacts. Contribution from end-of-life phase is less then 1 % in all analysed CED categories, where major contribution comes from Non-renewable, nuclear and Renewable biomass with both 0.7 % respectively. Contribution in category Non-renewable, fossil accounts for 0.05 % over the life cycle. According to design of study, end-of-life phase is not considered as a hotspot in the life cycle, but also results connected with uncertainties due to estimations long time in the future. For resulting absolute values, see Appendix V.

50

Figure 14 Environmental impacts end-of-life, characterization results

6.5 Sensitivity analysis In order to handle the complexity in the analysed product, several assumptions were made to estimate characteristics and magnitudes of required materials, processes and transports. These assumptions have all an impact on resulting environmental impact contribution and CED within the life cycle. Thus, a sensitivity analysis was considered necessary in order to analyse the robustness in the results. The sensitivity analysis constitutes of a parameter change from an area that have been interpreted as hotspots in the performed LCA and an analysis of the new results accordingly. 6.5.1 Sensitivity analysis: Operation hours Neptunus is currently used as the second ferry at the route in Gullmarsleden, but planned to replace Gullbritt as the first ferry. Therefore, it is of interest to analyse how a change in operation hours will affect the final environmental impacts in life cycle. A scenario where Neptunus is considered to remain as secondary ferry at Gullmarsleden has thus been calculated for, i.e. a changed functional unit compared to baseline, as number of operation hours is changed from 7,800 operation hours/year to 5,540 operation hours/year. Diesel consumption for a secondary ferry was assumed to have a linear relation to the fuel consumption for a first ferry, therefore the fuel demand in this scenario is the same as the demand calculated for a first ferry i.e. 68.023 l/operation hour. Life time of the road ferry is assumed to remain the same as in the baseline. This assumption is though united with uncertainties and a source of error in the results, as a lower number of operation hours per year in reality also will effect for example lifetime of ferry, which not has been taken into consideration in this sensitivity analysis. For further calculation description, see Appendix R. From a life cycle perspective, a change in operation hours has a positive impact in all analysed categories. By lowering number of operation hours from 7,800 h to 5,540 h, i.e. with 29 %, the potential impact in category Global warming are estimated to decrease with 28.2 % from

51

a total life cycle perspective. Decreased impacts is further clearly visible in categories Acidification ( 28 %), Eutrophication ( 26 %), Photochemical oxidation ( 21 %) and Abiotic depletion fossil fuel ( 27 %). As a linear relationship is assumed between fuel consumption and operation hours, these results are interpreted to show also an almost linear correlation between diesel consumption and environmental load in the analysed categories. The graph shown in Figure 15, visualises the percental change for analysed scenario compared to baseline. Final result in absolute values, see Appendix W.

Figure 15 Scenario: Operation hours. Resulting life cycle compared to baseline,

6.5.2 Sensitivity analysis: Weight of hull material Hull within construction phase has, based on the results from this study, been identified as a hotspot in the life cycle and therefore it is of interest to analyse how sensitive the model is for change in this parameter. Compilation of material used in hull differed between different references and a decision of what value to use was necessary to make. Using material amounts for steel and aluminium compiled from part delivery certification documents is one option. This option was not considered reasonable, but considered to give a ‘high-extreme value’ and create a range where weight of hull is reasonable to vary in between and corresponding environmental impact contribution. A change of material input in line with material stated in certification documents increase steel weight with 30 % (to 936 tons) and aluminium with an increase of approximately 119 % (to 101 tons). The alternative in this sensitivity analysis assumes same output as in the baseline scenario i.e. 700 tons hull, but greater losses in the construction process of the hull compared to baseline, and therefore processes connected to construction assumes to remain the same. From a life cycle perspective the impact category Abiotic depletion increases with 20 % for this scenario, which is highest relative increase. Impact category Global warming increases with 0.54 % for the analysed scenario in a life cycle perspective. Analysing the phase for construction of road ferry only, 30 % more CO2 emissions are released and account highest

52

relative increase between analysed categories. For resulting graph comparing this scenario with the baseline scenario, see Figure 16. Absolute values for all analysed impact categories is possible to see in Appendix W.

Figure 16 Sensitivity analysis: Material in hull construction. Resulting life cycle compared to baseline

6.5.3 Sensitivity analysis: Weight propulsion system Rolls-Royce (2019) provides a range of the propeller weight between 11.5-12.5 tons. In this study, a decision of using upper limit in this range was chosen in the analysis. From components included in construction, the propulsion system accounts for highest relative contribution in impact categories Acidification, Eutrophication and Abiotic depletion. As no more project specific information has been identified during the study regarding actual weight of propellers, it is of interest to analyse how much the total impacts in an LCA perspective changes with a changed propeller weight. Using lower limit value in stated range implies a 8 % change in weight. Same weight share between materials is used, and the new material weights are possible to see in Table 19. Table 19 Change in weight propulsion materials

Material Weight baseline [kg] Weight Sensitivity analysis [kg] Bronze 20,750 19,090 Aluminium 2,250 2,070 Cast iron 1,000 920 Nickel 1,000 920

Resulting graph for the total life cycle compared to baseline is shown in Figure 17. A parameter change for propulsion system weight, changes contribution less then 1 % for all analysed categories, except for impact in category Abiotic depletion which decreases with 4 % from a total life cycle perspective. Analysing construction phase of road ferry, percental change over 1 % is possible to see for impact categories; Acidification ( 3.4 %), Eutrophication ( 3.5 %), Photochemical oxidation ( 2.2 %) and Abiotic depletion ( 4.7 %). This analysis shows that from a life cycle perspective the uncertainties in weight of propulsion system do not have

53

decisive impact on the final results regarding material weight. For calculation details, see Appendix W.

Figure 17 Sensitivity analysis: Weight propulsion system. Resulting life cycle compared to baseline

6.5.4 Sensitivity analysis: Paint In performed study, there are major uncertainties connected to environmental load from the paint used on Neptunus. The uncertainties are related to lack of project specific data for the component. The amount of paint has been decided from internal documents, but it is difficult to ensure that these first estimations are correct as well as if the translation between one paint product to another has been sufficient enough. To analyse how much a change in this parameter affect the final result, a scenario where 10 % more paint in construction and maintenance phase was examined. Results for this scenario shows a relative percental change less than 1 % and analysed parameter is not considered to change final results in model considerably. Resulting environmental impact contribution for the total life cycle from this sensitivity analysis scenario compared to baseline is shown in Figure 18.

Figure 18 Sensitivity analysis: Paint. Resulting life cycle compared to baseline

54

Emissions from a cradle-to-gate perspective are modelled without input material parameters, due to lack of data. When in the next step 10 % more paint is added to the model, Abiotic depletion is one category without any change compared to baseline. As mentioned in section 6.4.3 Results – Maintenance phase this results shows deficiencies in the model and how it is built right now, as more paint in reality will imply more resource use. Analysis of the absolute numbers, see Appendix W, shows no change in this impact category and is a source of error due to the lack of initial data. In maintenance phase, Photochemical oxidation ( 8.2 %), Acidification ( 7.4 %) and Eutrophication ( 7.2 %) accounts for the greatest percental change with an increase of used paint. For further calculation details, see Appendix W.

Figure 19 Sensitivity analysis: Paint. Results maintenance phase compared to baseline

6.5.5 Sensitivity analysis: Insulation Another parameter where estimations has been made is for insulation. This parameter is calculated through information from sketches and thus associated with uncertainties. In baseline model, only thermal insulation has been estimated and fire insulation is currently excluded. For an ‘extreme high limit’-example, a sensitivity analysis where insulation for the whole hull surface area was calculated for. This would imply an insulation over a total area of 3,192 m2 and mass increase of 31 % to an absolute value of 31,600 kg. Resulting environmental impact contribution with changed parameter compared to baseline scenario from a life cycle perspective, is shown in Figure 20. In modelling of insulation, resulting emissions from an EPD has been used instead of input material data as Ecoinvent v.3.3 was lacking the main material phonolite (60-80 % of mass fraction). This further impacts the percental change connected to Abiotic depletion. Used EPD neither includes sulphur dioxide emissions, connected to impact category Acidification. These examples shows sources of error in final results due to the lack of initial data. In the 6 other categories included in the analysis an increase of 31 % insulation increase the final resulting impact the analysed categories with less than 0.05 % from a total life cycle.

55

Figure 20 Sensitivity analysis: Insulation. Results total life cycle compared to baseline

Further analysis comparing only construction phase for this scenario and the baseline scenario is shown in Figure 21. Calculations shows a percental change between 1-2 % for categories Global warming, Ozone layer depletion and Abiotic depletion fossil fuels and less than 1 % for categories Eutrophication and Photochemical oxidation. For calculation details and absolute values, see Appendix W. These results are interpreted to show that insulation not should be considered as a hotspot in this life cycle or in focus to reach the long term vision and goals, as a major change of material use not showed any major changes in the total life cycle.

Figure 21 Sensitivity analysis: Insulation. Results construction phase compared to baseline

56

6.6 Scenario analysis This performed study aims to act as a starting point for upcoming work in order to reach a climate neutral road ferry fleet within STA’s organisation until year 2045. From the results identified in the baseline scenario, hotspots have been identified of main priority. A scenario analysis has therefore further been considered relevant in the study to analyse how changes in parameters directly connected to the identified hotspots have opportunity to impact on the final results. 6.6.1 Scenario: Material change in hull As shown in 6.4 Life Cycle Impact Assessment, hull production has largest environmental contribution in 4 of 7 analysed impact categories and the second largest environmental contribution in remaining 3 analysed categories in the construction phase. Therefore, further analysis of this component is of interest. Analysing the hull component in specific, it is possible to see that steel constitutes the highest impact contribution in all 7 impact categories. Baseline results for contribution from involved parameters in hull production are shown in Figure 22. As steel is the largest material fraction in the assembly and considerably larger than aluminium, which is second largest material fraction, this result is considered reasonable.

Figure 22 Baseline. Results hull production, characterisation results

Using EN 15804 standardisation, avoided burden is only allowed when using recycled material as input. No positive contribution can therefore be accounted for in rest of the life cycle. (EN 15804:2012, 2013). Therefore, an analysis using recycled materials in the ferry has been considered relevant in this study. Steel is identified as a hotspot and therefore the material fraction chosen to be changed in the scenario analysis. Calculations of percental change with recycled steel shows a positive change in all 7 environmental impact categories in a range between 0.8-16 % in the total life cycle in the different environmental impact categories and a range between 16-55 % in the analysed categories for construction phase in specific. For example, category Global warming changed from 2 % in baseline to 1 % in this scenario from

57

a total life cycle perspective, and a number of 54.8 % better environmental performance in category Global warming in the construction phase. Results from analysis of construction phase are shown in Figure 23 and comparing graph between these two scenarios in Figure 24. Calculation details are possible to see in Appendix X.

Figure 23 Scenario: Material change in hull. Results hull production, Characterisation results

Figure 24 Scenario: Material change in hull. Resulting graph hull production, compared to baseline

6.6.2 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biodiesel For diesel as fuel option, daily operation accounts for 97.3 % of the contribution from the total life cycle in the category Global warming. STA Road Ferries, presumes conversion from currently used fossil fuel to a more environmentally friendly fuel alternative (Miljödrift) for already existing ferries. As uncertainties are connected to choice of preferable fuel alternative, it is of interest to analyse the situation from an LCA perspective and analyse how a change will impact in a total life cycle perspective. There are several alternatives for biofuel and biodiesel

58

is one of these. Furthermore, these are several alternatives of biodiesel, where the one option analysed in this project is a vegetable oil methyl ester. This alternative is by the European Union described as biodiesel with ‘diesel quality’ and therefore considered as a reasonable biofuel alternative. Calculations of required amount biodiesel was made by using lower energy content by weight of 37 MJ/kg for biodiesel and 43 MJ/kg for diesel. (European Commission, 2009). With biodiesel as fuel option, daily operation performs better in 4 out of 7 analysed categories. An almost 80 % increased performance in category Global warming is possible to see with biodiesel alternative in daily operation, and instead accounts for 88.3 % of total GWP in the life cycle. Eutrophication, Photochemical oxidation and Abiotic depletion are categories which receive a negative change with this fuel alternative. Analysis of unit process for operation with biodiesel shows that the negative impact in these categories are connected to the process of integrated rape seed production on a global market. With biodiesel as fuel, daily operation still constitute major part of emissions compared to the other analysed phases in the life cycle. Results from this scenario compared to baseline are possible to see in Figure 25. For calculation details, see Appendix X.

Figure 25 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biodiesel. Results total life cycle compared to baseline

6.6.3 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Bioethanol Ethanol is another example of an alternative fuel option. Ethanol produced from biomass has according to European Commission (2009) a lower calorific value at 27 MJ/ kg fuel. With ethanol a 75-90 % better performance in 5 out of 7 impact categories were possible to see for the total life cycle. For calculation details, see Appendix X. In terms of emissions contributing in category Global warming, an increased performance of over 90 % was possible to see with ethanol. Daily operation with ethanol accounts for 75.5 % of global warming potential in the

59

final life cycle. Photochemical oxidation (3.2 %) and Abiotic depletion (67.1 %) were categories having a negative contribution development compared to the baseline. Analysis of unit process shows that use of wood chips in production of ethanol and process waste treatment of gypsum are major sources for the negative impact for category Photochemical oxidation. Production and use of primary zinc in ethanol production explains the negative impacts in category Abiotic depletion. Final results for bioethanol scenario compared to baseline, see Figure 26.

Figure 26 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Ethanol. Results total life cycle compared to baseline

6.6.4 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biomethanol Last analysed scenario for alternative fuel is biomethanol. Energy content by weight for biomethanol is 20 MJ/kg, from where required amounts biomethanol were calculated (European Commission, 2009). With methanol from biomass, daily operation accounts for 70.3 % of global warming in a life cycle perspective. The results in a life cycle perspective for analysed environmental impact categories are visible in Figure 27. Biomethanol performs better from a life cycle perspective in 5 out of 7 analysed categories in a range between 68-90 %. For example, an increased performance of 91 % was possible to see in the impact assessment category Global warming. Photochemical oxidation (63.6 %) and Abiotic depletion (76.0 %) were categories having a negative contribution development compared to baseline. Analysis of the unit process shows that production of synthetic gas from wood used in biomethanol is a major source of the negative impact in impact category Photochemical oxidation. Production of synthetic gas and use of molybdenum and zinc explains negative impacts in category Abiotic depletion. For details in Appendix X.

60

Figure 27 Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biomethanol. Results total life cycle compared to baseline

6.6.5 Comparison between analysed fuel alternatives A final compilation of all the percental changes compared to baseline has been made for the three scenarios presented in section 6.6.2 Scenario: Alternative fuel – Biodiesel – 6.6.4 Scenario: Alternative fuel – Biomethanol. In Figure 28, the percental change from a total life cycle perspective with a changed fuel alternative, for the analysed impact categories is visible in this graph. The comparing graph shows the performance of the alternatives compared to each other. As seen in the table, e.g. a 77-91 % better performance in the impact category Global warming for the analysed alternatives is identified, while for example in the impact categories Photochemical oxidation and Abiotic depletion a negative environmental load compared to baseline is identified for all analysed scenarios.

Figure 28 Compiled comparison for analysed fuel alternatives including baseline

61

7. Discussion This project intends to function as a start for the upcoming work at STA Road Ferries towards become climate neutral by year 2045. The aim was to analyse and provide information of the environmental load of a standard road ferry operated by STA corresponds to from a life cycle perspective. Results from this study shows that the construction and operation phases have considerable contribution in the analysed environmental impact categories. However, the operation phase is identified to overall be the most critical phase based on assessment of analysed environmental impact categories in this study, including for example the contribution in the impact category Global warming. This category further directly connects to Vision 45 defined by STA Road Ferries and should be the phase within the life cycle in need of primary measures for reaching Vision 45. Also Broberg & Nilsson (2012) have earlier identified fossil fuel connected to ferry operation to be of concern for STA Road Ferries. Their study’s aim was to improve the environmental management system within STA Road Ferries and therefore, no quantifications connected to the identified aspects of concern were made. This LCA both confirms the conclusions made by Broberg & Nilsson (2012), of fossil fuel to be of major concern, and that the use of fossil fuels can be a risk for several environmental aspects. Furthermore, in section 5.3 Previous studies within the area, results from LCA studies for road ferries were presented. As mentioned, these studies performs comparative assessments, which in difference to this performed LCA implies a more clear focus on the differences in the results between the analysed systems. However, the earlier performed studies and this performed LCA shows similarities in the results in terms of the decisive impact from the fuel, when using fossil fuel in the system. The scenario analysis shows how a changed fuel alternative has the opportunity to lower the impact in the majority of the analysed impact categories. However, in reality will a fuel change most probably also imply changes in the existing fuel system, and is a parameter which not has been taken into consideration in this study. As shown in section 5.3.3. Other relevant studies in the area and more specific in section LCA of engines the fuel system can either be remanufactured or a new engine system can be manufactured when changing from a diesel engine system to a more environmentally friendly alternative. However, these studies shows that the manufacturing phase, both for remanufacturing and new construction, is identified to be an important and impacting parameter to take into consideration for future changes in the system in order to get correct environmental load from this component in the system. It is no doubt that climate change is of crucial concern and shall be in focus during the continued work in this area at STA Road Ferries. However, this study also shows that other environmental impact categories, e.g. Eutrophication, Photochemical oxidation and Abiotic Depletion, could be conflicting impact categories with potential trade-offs from a broader sustainability perspective. This might not necessarily be directly critical for STA Road Ferries in relation to reach Vision 45. However, Swedish transport policy objectives refers to a broader sustainability perspective than only in terms of climate neutrality. Even though climate neutrality is the focus, the development within the transport system shall also ensure that remaining environmental

62

objectives are achieved. (Swedish Government, 2008). It is therefore important to be aware of the risk of potential trade-offs, when only climate mitigating actions are in focus. Therefore, a broader and comprehensive sustainability perspective is suggested for future analyses when planning for changes in the system, as for example when transfer from today’s fossil fuel to renewable operation. The construction phase accounts for a considerable contribution from a life cycle perspective for analysed impact categories. Results show how the hull material has a noticeable environmental impact during construction and thus comprises a hotspot of concern. However, the study does for example not take quality of steel into consideration in the modelling, which could pose uncertainties in the recommendations on improvements in the construction phase. Quality is identified to be of especial importance in operation at routes where water freezes during the winter season and a parameter putting additional requirements on materials in the ferry hull (Jansson Peterberg, 2019b). Results from this study are considered to give an indication of impact contribution, even though high strength steel used in the ferry not has been accounted for in this assessment due to lack of project specific process data. Emissions in steel production may further be hard to avoid, why this parameter could pose a challenge for STA Road Ferries’ goal of net zero emissions. Changes in material volumes e.g. in the amount hull material, paint, insulation and propulsion, were separately analysed in the different sensitivity analyses. Results from the analyses showed mainly changes in the construction phase for the respective parameters. The study does though not analyse how a changed parameter affects results in another parameter or other stages of the life cycle, or another component in the system. For example, weight of vessels is also closely connected to the energy requirements during operation phase (Jansson Peterberg, 2019b). So even though the amounts of insulation or propulsion weight not showed a considerable difference in the sensitivity analysis in this study, these material volumes will in reality most probably affect energy demand during operation. To lower energy demand during operation, changes in construction in terms of e.g. changed shape and/or used materials to make the final artefact lighter has to be considered. Correctness in estimations of component weights in relation to fuel consumption is an aspect not accounted for in this study as it is not considered crucial in order to set a first baseline but considered necessary before further actions are made in order to reach Vision 45. Changes in shape and/or materials can though be problematic. If major changes are made in the ferry artefact, substantial changes in existing docking locations for ferry routes and other infrastructural changes could be a consequence (Jansson Peterberg, 2019b). Reconstruction and new construction of docking locations are identified to potentially be united with additional intrusion in the environment, high costs and create a time-consuming scenario. Depending on system boundaries (with or without inclusion of surrounding infrastructure), major changes in infrastructure can on one hand imply a chance that goals in terms of meeting increased demand on ferry routes and lower environmental load during the operation phase will be more probably to reach. Though, risks prevail that goals concerning other environmental objectives will be more difficult to achieve in this scenario.

63

Considerable energy efficiency measures have already been implemented within the organisation. However, a great potential, and need for improvements and measures still remains required for STA’s ferry operation to become climate neutral. Higher pressure on already existing system implies need for increases in capacity requirements and necessary development, not only in being more efficient, but also an increase in the ferry fleet regarding number of ferries. It is in Vision 45 possible to see that general plans today implies deconstructions of small ferries, new construction of ferries with higher capacities and remaining ferries to be converted to renewable operation. (Pöldma, 2018). For STA Road Ferries this is considered a challenging situation as larger ferries requires more energy during operation. As the literature study identified a research gap due to lack of previous studies with same scope as this performed study, this study in turn has contributed with relevant information of the environmental load from a life cycle perspective for the analysed impact categories. Furthermore, this is important both for STA Road Ferries in their internal work for reaching the environmental goals defined within the organisation, but could also facilitate for other practitioners conducting LCAs for other ferries in the future. However, it is important to understand that due to complexity of the analysed artefact together with time limitations, a simplified product has been assessed in this LCA with risk of uncertainties in the results. To provide the exact environmental load from the real system is time consuming and complex. Especially if the analysis should take into consideration how each component included in the system interrelates and impacts the behaviour of the final system, which according to Tchertchian et al., (2012) could have an impact on the final results. Results from this study are though considered possible to use as a start for development of a baseline in Klimatkalkyl to use in upcoming work towards becoming climate neutral by year 2045.

64

7.1 Uncertainties in the results Several uncertainties are connected to results and an aspect important to have in mind when evaluating validity in the results. In this section, major uncertainties in the study are stated. These have also been identified as crucial uncertainties to take into consideration for future development of results.

• Not all used project specific materials and processes are included for the analysed components in the assessment, which implies risks of incomplete results. Exclusion of materials and lack of relevant project specific processes are identified as the greatest risk connected to uncertainties in the result.

• Exclusion of components, especially connected to the more complex components for example electronic devices, are identified to potentially having a significant impact for results in final system.

• The study do not account for quality in used materials, which though is identified to be of high importance for, e.g. steel. This provides uncertainties both in baseline and further in the sensitivity analysis where only a material change was considered without taking quality into consideration.

• The three different scenarios in the scenario analysis regarding alternative fuels assumes that no emissions are released during the actual burning of fuel, and compared to the baseline scenario all emissions from combustion were therefore neglected.

65

8. Conclusions This study assesses the environmental performance of a standard road ferry operated by STA Road Ferries. With an LCA, the study evaluates the environmental load in total and for all included categories included in EPD (2013) as well as the CED from a life cycle perspective. The operation phase of the life cycle was assessed to be the most environmental impact contributing phase with highest contribution in all 7 analysed environmental impact categories expect for category Abiotic depletion, due to the decisive impact of the fuel. In Abiotic depletion, the hull and propulsion system in the construction phase accounted for highest contribution. However, both the construction and operation phases were identified to be of concern in order to reach the long-term vision and goals developed within the organisation. The study further identifies risks when climate mitigation actions are in focus as negative impacts in other environmental categories are identified as possible trade-offs, which is an aspect important to have in mind for future work. However, based on the long-term goal and vision that STA Road Ferries has formulated, a combination of change in construction in terms of material choices and design, together with changed fuel alternative, are considered necessary actions to reach Vision 45.

66

9. Recommendations and future work Recommendations of future work further includes completion of the developed model in this study by inclusion of additional components, materials and project specific processes. Neptunus is constructed of components where an EPD could be developed for each included component. Therefore, it is recommended to try to set pressure on suppliers of these components by for example requirements that used products in future constructed ferries shall have an updated EPD. This then entail opportunities to gain project specific data, results closer to reality and a more accurate baseline to rely on. Division of materials in the different life cycle phases was considered necessary in order to provide results to potentially facilitate future assessments, as the results in turn may be implemented in Klimatkalkyl. Future analyses are recommended to imply comparative life cycle assessments, for example between different alternatives of engines depending on chosen fuel. In this study, a replacement of diesel to a fuel alternative with minimised changes in baseline was made and therefore only implied one changed parameter of concern. Future studies are thus suggested on more comprehensive analyses of different fuel alternatives where changes in for example the whole engine system are required for a more comprehensive and accurate picture of a potential change. One other option of interest to analyse is electric power and batteries. Analyses both in terms of changed environmental impact from the actual artefact, but also how a change of this character will affect the total system as for example the grid are of interest. Changes in this system, especially if implementing electric ferries, has the risk to also have effects outside the analysed system. Based on results from the study, it is identified to also be of interest to expand the system to include docking locations, infrastructure at the port, connecting road network and other relevant infrastructure connected with ferry operation. System expansion is also of interest for other environmental assessment e.g. analysis of the severity of intrusion from infrastructure connected to road ferry operation in the natural environment. As future scenarios are of interest to analyse, consequential LCA analyses which are commonly used when different scenarios of changes in the life cycle are created and the potential effects from these changes are analysed. For example, uncertainties regarding supply and future prices on different fuel alternatives create difficulties to analyse preferable fuel choices for ferry operation in the near as well as in distant future. Future uncertainties concerning for example possible market changes will affect the roadmap of the development of ferries, and the roadmap can come to change. Regarding STA Road Ferries work, an additional or updated version of the five steps principle as currently used for ferry float planning, where a more thorough inclusion of environmental considerations is recommended. This kind of action provides possibilities to permeate the work made within STA Road Ferries to be done in the right direction to become climate neutral and reach Vision 45.

67

10. References 10.1 Image references Dudzik, Kasper (n.d.), Största miljövägfärjan får namnet Tellus. [Photography] Available at: https://www.trafikverket.se/contentassets/2fa06f6fdd684e44ac210b79bd530438/tellus.jpg [Accessed 8 May 2019] 10.2 Software references PRé Sustainability (2016). SimaPro, Release 8 (Eighth edition). Amersfoort: PRé Sustainability. Wernet, G., Bauer, C., Steubing, B., Reinhard, J., Moreno-Ruiz, E., and Weidema, B., 2016. The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, [online] 21(9), pp.1218–1230. Available at: <http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8> [Accessed 01 02 2019]. 10.3 Literature references Baltic Workboats Shipyard, 2017. Equipment List [Internal document]. Nasva, Estonia: Baltic Workboats Shipyard. Bohamet, 2019. Ship windows. Opening and non opening windows and side scuttles, sliding windows, window boxes, accessories. Biale Blota, Poland: Bohamet. Broberg, M. & Nilsson, M., 2012. Miljöutredning, Vaxholm: Trafikverket. Carlton, J., 2012. Chapter 18 - Propeller Materials. In: Marine Propellers and Propulsion (Third Edition). s.l.:Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 385-396. Curran, M. A., 2015. Life Cycle Assessment Student Handbook. 1 ed. New Jersey: Wiley-Scrivener Publishing LLC. Dickinson, J., 2016. Yttrande över Trafikverkets remiss avseende inriktningsunderlag inför transportinfrastrukturplaneringen för perioden 2018-2029 (Trafikverkets diarienummer TRV 2015/42946 Näringsdepartementets diarenummer N2015/4305/TIF)., Stockholm: Naturvårdsverket. Ecoinvent, 2018. Allocation cut-off by classification. [Online] Available at: https://www.ecoinvent.org/database/system-models-in-ecoinvent-3/cut-off-system-model/allocation-cut-off-by-classification.html [Accessed 6 June 2019]. EN 15804:2012, 2013. Svensk Standard SS-EN 15804:2012+A1:2013, Sustainability of construction works - Environmental product declarations - Core rules for the product category of construction products, Stockholm: Swedish Standards Institute (SIS förlag AB).

68

EN ISO 14040:2006, 2006. Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework (SS-EN ISO 14040:2006), Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish Standards Institute (SIS förlag AB). ESAB, 2006. Product Data Sheet. OK Autrod 12.10. [Online] Available at: http://assets.nieuw.lasaulec.nl/product_info_files/A087455.pdf [Accessed 8 April 2019]. European Commission, 2009. Directive. DIRECTIVE 2009/28/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC, : European Union. European Commission, 2018. A Clean Planet for all - A European strategic long-term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive and climate neutral economy, Brussels: European Commission. Fagerhult, 2017. Miljövarudeklaration. [Online] Available at: https://www.fagerhult.com/globalassets/inriverresources/epd/fagerhult_epd_allfiveled.pdf [Accessed 15 April 2019]. FKAB Marine Design, 2016. Trafikverket Färjerederiet - Double-ended road ferry general arrangement. Uddevalla: FKAB Marine Design. German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008. Environmental product declaration Unfaces ULTIMATE boards and felts Saint-Gobain ISOVER G+H AG. Königswinter, Deutschland: DIFBU, Deutsches Institut für Bauen und Umwelt. Gilbert, P., Wilson, P., Walsh, C. & Hodgson, P., 2016. The role of material efficiency to reduce CO2 emissions during shipe manufacture: A life cycle approach. Marine Policy, 75(1), pp. 227-237. Glamox, 2018. History. [Online] Available at: https://glamox.com/corporate/history [Accessed 5 April 2019]. Glamox, 2019a. MIRZ67-1200 LED 5000 HF-E1/S TW PC 840 M20. [Online] Available at: https://glamox.com/se/produkter/nogroup/items/mir078896 [Accessed 17 March 2019]. Glamox, 2019b. Organizational chart. [Online] Available at: https://glamox.com/upload/2019/01/31/organisasjonskart_engelsk_2019.pdf [Accessed 20 May 2019]. Goedkoop, M. et al., 2009. ReCiPe 2008 A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and endpoint level. Report I: Characterisation, Bilthoven, Netherlands: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM).

69

Golsteijn, L., 2014. Characterisation: New Developments for Toxicity. [Online] Available at: https://www.pre-sustainability.com/news/characterisation-new-developments-for-toxicity [Accessed 31 January 2019]. Google Maps, 2019. [Online] Available at: https://www.google.se/maps [Accessed 12 March 2019]. Grundfos Lenntech, 2019. Produktkatalog. [Online] Available at: https://product-selection.grundfos.com/catalogue.html?pumpsystemid=523341228&frequency=50&lang=SVE&productrange=gsv&unitsystem=4&familycode=UPEFAM [Accessed 19 March 2019]. Hisan Farjana, S., Huda, N. & Parvez Mahumd, M., 2019. Impacts of aluminium production: A cradle to gate investigation using life-cycle assessment. Science of The Total Environment, 663(1), pp. 958-970. Huijbregts, M. et al., 2016. ReCiPe 2016 A harmonized life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level Report I: Characterization. RIVM Report 2016-0104, Bilthoven, The Netherlands: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. International Maritime Organization, 2004. Resolution A.962(23) IMO Guidelines on Shiprecycling, s.l.: International Maritime Organization. International, 2015. Intershield 300, Abrasion Resistant Aluminium Pure Epoxy. [Online] Available at: https://marinecoatings.brand.akzonobel.com/m/09fc46f24ef323bb/original/Intershield_300_eng_A4_20151204.pdf [Accessed 26 March 2019]. International, 2016. Commercial Specification Baltic Work Boat. BWB 90153 / 100m Ferry Marine Coatings [Internal document]. Kodatski, Stanislav: AkzoNobel. IPCC, 2015. Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report, Geneva, Switzerland: The International Panel on Climate Change. Jansson Peterberg, P., 2019b. Meeting 20190207 [Interview] (7 February 2019b). Jansson Peterberg, P., 2019. Drifttider Gullmarsleden. Vaxholm: Trafikverket Färjerederiet. Jiang, Q. et al., 2014. Life Cycle Assessment of a Diesel Engine Based on an Integrated Hybrid Inventory Analysis Model. Procedia CIRP, Volume 15, pp. 496-501. Jivén, K. et al., 2004. LCA-ship, Design tool for energy efficient shipes - A Life Cycle Analysis Program for Ships, Final report: 2004-08-27, Göteborg: MariTerm AB.

70

Johansson, H. & Eklöf, H., 2015. Trafikverkets Kunskapsunderlag och Klimatscenario för Energieffektivisering och begränsad klimatpåverkan, Borlänge: Trafikverket. Kirs, K., 2017. Project 90153 Vessel Neptunus Decomissioning plan. Tallin: Baltic Workboats shipyard. Kokkonen, A. & Karlsson, T., 2019. Meeting Rolls-Royce [Interview] (11 March 2019). Kullman, A. B., 2016. A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and All-Electric Car Ferries, Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Marine Technology. Li, T., Liu, Z.-C., Zhang, H.-C. & Jiang, Q.-H., 2013. Environmental emissions and energy consumptions assessment of a diesel engine from the life cycle perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 53, pp. 7-12. Müürisepp, M., 2019. Cables [E-mail conversation]. s.l.:s.n. Maden Olmez, G., Dilek, F. B., Karanfil, T. & Yetis, U., 2016. The environmental impacts of iron and steel industry: a life cycle assessment study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 130(1), pp. 195-201. Map developers, 2019. Distance calculater. [Online] Available at: https://www.mapdevelopers.com/distance_finder.php [Accessed 1 February 2019]. Marin, A.-G., Florea, O. & Petre, I., 2011. Lubricating engine oils for specific marine applications. Kragujevac, Serbia, Serbian Tribology Society, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Kragujevac. Mizanur Rahman, S., Handler, R. M. & Mayer, A. L., 2016. Life cycle assessment of steel in the ship recycling industry in Bangladesh. Journal of Cleaner Production, 135(1), pp. 963-971. Naturvårdsverket, 2018a. Utsläpp av växthusgaser från inrikes transporter. [Online] Available at: http://naturvardsverket.se/Sa-mar-miljon/Statistik-A-O/Vaxthusgaser-utslapp-fran-inrikes-transporter/ [Accessed 6 February 2019]. Naturvårdsverket, 2018. Fördjupad analys av svensk klimatstatistik 2018. Rapport 6848, Bromma: Naturvårdsverket. Nordveit, E., 2017. Life Cycle Assessment of a Battery Passenger Ferry, Grimstad: University of Agder, Department of Engineering and Science.

71

Olsson, L., Hjalmarsson, L., Wikström, M. & Larsson, M., 2015. Bridging the implementation gap: Combining backcasting and policy analysis to study renewable energy in urban road transport. Transport Policy, Volume 37, pp. 72-82. Pöldma, M., 2018. Inriktningsplan för klimatneutral färjedrift 2045, Vaxholm: Trafikverket. Rolls-Royce, 2019. US Type azimuthing thruster. [Online] Available at: https://www.rolls-royce.com/products-and-services/marine/product-finder/propulsors/azimuthing-thrusters/us-type-azimuthing-thruster.aspx#section-key-technical-information [Accessed 25 March 2019]. Scania, 2006. Environmental Product Declaration Form - Diesel Engines for Marine Use. Södertälje: Scania CV AB. Searates, 2019. Find the best Freight Quote - Shipping to and from anywhere. [Online] Available at: https://www.searates.com/ [Accessed 10 April 2019]. Shi, J. et al., 2015a. Life Cycle Environmental Impact Evaluation of Newly Manufactured Diesel Engine and Remanufactured LNG Engine. Procedia CIRP, 29(1), pp. 402-407. Shi, J. et al., 2015b. Comperative Life Cycle Assessment of remanufactured liquified natural gas and diesel engines in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 101(1), pp. 129-136. Spanos, C., Turney, D. E. & Fthenakis, V., 2014. Life-cycle analysis of flow-assisted nickel zinc-, manganese dioxide-, and valve-regulated lead-acid batteries designed for demand-charge reduction. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 28 November, 42(2015), pp. 478-494. Stena Recycling, 2019. Örebro - Returgatan. [Online] Available at: https://www.stenarecycling.se/hitta-till-oss/orebro/orebro---returgatan/ [Accessed 4 April 2019]. Sullivan, J. & Gaines, L., 2012. Status of life cycle inventories for batteries. Energy Conversion and Management, Volume 28, pp. 134-148. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, 2012. Sweden's Environmental Objectives - An Introduction, Stockholm: Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Swedish Government, 2008. Mål för framtidens resor och transporter. Prop. 2008/09:93, Stockholm: Swedish Government. Swedish Government, 2010. Förordning (2010:185) med instruktion för Trafikverket, Stockholm: Swedish Government. Swedish Government, 2016. Regeringens proposition 2016/17:146 - Ett klimatpolitiskt ramverk för Sverige, Stockholm: Swedish Government.

72

Tchertchian, N., Yvars, P.-A. & Millet, D., 2012. Benefits and limits of a Constraint Satisfaction Problem/Life Cycle Assessment approach for the ecodesign of complex systems: a case applied to a hybrid passenger ferry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2013(42), pp. 1-18. The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018. Environmenta Product Declaration. WaterFine Barrier, Jotun U.A.E. Ltd. (L.L.C.), Oslo: The Norwegian EPD Foundation. TKF, 2019. Products MarineLine YZp 0,6/1 kV. [Online] Available at: https://www.tkf.nl/en/catalogue?open=15054|15136|15138 [Accessed 28 March 2019]. Toller, S., 2018. Klimatkalkyl - Beräkning av infrastrukturens klimatpåverkan och energianvändning i ett livscykelperspektiv, modellversion 5.0 och 6.0, Borlänge: Trafikverket Trafikverket , 2018b. Transportsektorns utsläpp. [Online] Available at: https://www.trafikverket.se/for-dig-i-branschen/miljo---for-dig-i-branschen/energi-och-klimat/Transportsektorns-utslapp/ [Accessed 11 February 2019]. Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2018a. Färjerederiet årsrapport 2017, Vaxholm: Trafikverket Färjerederiet. Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2018b. Trafikstatistik om vägfärjor - Trafikstatistik 2017 [Excel-document]. Vaxholm: Trafikverket. Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019a. Trafikinformation Vägfärja. [Online] Available at: https://www.trafikverket.se/trafikinformation/vag/?TrafficType=personalTraffic&map=8%2F297034.88%2F6466338.95%2F&Layers=Ferries%2b [Accessed 29 January 2019]. Trafikverket Färjerederiet, 2019b. Livscykelanalys Vägfärja. Vaxholm: Trafikverket. Trafikverket, 2017a. Neptunus. [Online] Available at: https://www.trafikverket.se/farjerederiet/farjerederiet/vara-farjor/Vara-farjor/neptunus/ [Accessed 18 January 2019]. Trafikverket, 2017b. Neptunus redo för tjänst på Gullmarsleden. [Online] Available at: https://www.trafikverket.se/farjerederiet/farjerederiet/aktuellt-pa-farjerederiet/Nyheter/2017/neptunus-redo-for-tjanst-pa-gullmarsleden/ [Accessed 29 January 2019]. Trafikverket, 2018c. Vår verksamhet. [Online] Available at: https://www.trafikverket.se/om-oss/var-verksamhet/ [Accessed 13 February 2019].

73

Trafikverket, 2018d. Klimatkalkyl - Begränsad version Modellinställningar. [Online] Available at: http://webapp.trafikverket.se/Klimatkalkyl/Modell [Accessed 26 March 2019]. Trafikverket, 2018. Life Cycle Assessment of a Road Ferry [Intern document]. Stockholm: Trafikverket. Trafikverket, 2019. Tillgänglighet i ett hållbart samhälle. [Online] Available at: https://www.trafikverket.se/om-oss/tillgangligt-sverige/tillganglighet-i-ett-hallbart-samhalle/ [Accessed 1 February 2019]. Transocean Coatings, 2014. Calculation of surface areas. [Online] Available at: https://www.transocean-coatings.com/static/downloadcenter/2010/05/Estimation_of_surface_areas.pdf [Accessed 12 March 2019]. UN, 2015. Paris Agreement, Paris, France: United Nation. UN, 2019a. Sustainable Development Goals. [Online] Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs [Accessed 8 February 2019]. Victron Energy, 2019. Gel and AGM Batteries, JG Almere, The Netherlands: Victron Energy B.V.. Vincenzo Rocco, M., 2016. Primary Exergy Cost of Goods and Services: An Input – Output Approach, Milano: Politecnico di Milano, Deparment of Energy. WMO, 2018. WMO Statement on the State of the Global Climate in 2017, Geneva, Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization. Volvo Penta, 2013. Volvo Penta Inboard Diesel D16-MH Technical Data, Göteborg: Volvo Penta. Volvo Penta, 2019. Prodction all around the world. [Online] Available at: https://www.volvopenta.com/brand/en-en/this-is-volvo-penta/about-us/global-presence.html [Accessed 12 March 2019].

74

Appendix A. EN 15804: Required modules All information in this Appendix has been collected from the EN 15804:2012 standardisation document if nothing else has been stated. The environmental information shall be provided and subdivided according to the information module groups presented below: Module A1 – A3 Product stage Table A1. Required environmental information for information modules A1-A3.

Module Details/ Information of: A1 Raw material extraction and processing

Secondary material inputs i.e. recycling processes A2 Transport to manufacturer A3 Manufacturing process

Module A4 – A5 Construction process stage Table A2. Required environmental information for information modules A4-A5.

Module Details/ Information of: A4 Transport to building site A5 Installation into building

Module B1 – B5 Use stage with relation to the building fabric Table A3. Required environmental information for information modules B1-B5.

Module Details / Information of: B1 The use or application of the installed product B2 Maintenance B3 Repair B4 Replacement B5 (Refurbishment)

Module B6 – B7 Use stage related to the operation Table A4. Required environmental information for information modules B6-B7.

Module Details / Information of: B6 The operational energy use B7 The operational water use

Module C1 – C4 End-of-life stage Table A5. Required environmental information for information modules C1-C4.

Module Details / Information of: C1 De-construction

Demolition C2 Transport to waste processing C3 Waste processing for reuse, recovery and/or recycling C4 Disposal

75

Module D Benefits and loads beyond the system boundary Table A6. Required environmental information for information module D.

Module Details / Information of: D Reuse, recovery and/or recycling potentials (expressed as net impacts and benefits)

76

Appendix B. EN 15804: Impact Assessment Categories Table B1. Impact assessment categories to be included in the life cycle impact assessment (EN 15804:2012, 2013)

Impact Category Parameter Unit Depletion of abiotic resources (fossil)

ADP-fossil fuels (for fossil resources) [MJ, net calorific value]

Depletion of abiotic resources (elements)

ADP-elements (for non-fossil resources) [kg Sb equivalents]

Acidification of soil and water AP (Acidification potential of soil and water)

[kg SO2 equivalents]

Ozone depletion ODP (Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer)

[kg CFC 11 equivalents]

Global warming GWP (Global warming potential) [kg CO2 equivalents] Eutrophication EP (Eutrophication potential) [kg PO4 3- equivalents] Photochemical ozone creation POCP (Formation potential of tropospheric

ozone) [kg Ethene equivalents]

According to EN 15804, the resource use in the different stages of the life cycle has to be stated in the LCIA according to the parameters presented in Table B2 (EN 15804:2012, 2013). Table B2. Parameters describing resource use for the life cycle (EN 15804:2012, 2013).

Parameter Unit, expressed per functional unit

Use of renewable primary energy (excluding renewable primary energy resource used as raw material)

MJ, net calorific value

Use of renewable primary energy resource used as raw material MJ, net calorific value Total use of renewable primary energy resources (primary energy and primary energy resources used as raw materials)

MJ, net calorific value

Use of non-renewable primary energy (excluding non-renewable primary energy resources used as raw material)

MJ, net calorific value

Use of non-renewable primary energy resources used as raw material MJ, net calorific value Total use of non-renewable primary energy resources (primary energy and primary energy resources used as raw materials)

MJ, net calorific value

Use of secondary material kg Use of renewable secondary fuels MJ, net calorific value Use of non-renewable secondary fuels MJ, net calorific value Net use of fresh water m3

77

Appendix C. Total surface area steel of vessel Following equations for calculation of a total surface area (TSA) approximation are retrieved from Transocean Coatings (2014).

Figure C1. Sketch over vessel surface (Transocean Coatings, 2014) B = breadth extreme D = depth T = draft Lpp = length between perpendiculars Loa = length over all H = height of topsides (D – T) Total surface area (TSA) = Bottom area + Topside Equation bottom area: Equation topside: Bottom area = ((2 x T) + B x Lbp x P Topside = 2 x H x (Loa + 0.5 x B) Used values: (FKAB Marine Design, 2016) B = 18.2 m T = 3 m Lbp = 85 m P = constant = 0.725 (0.7-0.75 for dry cargo ships) H = 0.92 m Loa = 99.7 m TSA = (((2*3) +18.2)*85*0.725) + (2*0.92*(99.7+0.5*18.2)) = 1692 m2

78

Appendix D. Total surface area aluminium of vessel Following appendix approximates surface area of aluminium parts of vessel. This includes all parts above car deck i.e. fence and railing, apparatus deck, apparatus room, wheelhouse deck and wheelhouse room. Total surface area has been estimated by information given in sketches over the ferry.

Figure D1. Sketch over apparatus room from where approximation of surface area been calculated Port side: (85 1.25) + ((5.775 – 1.25) 4) = (106.25 + 18.1) = 124.35 m2 Ramps (at each end of ferry): (8.75 1.25 2 2) = 43.75 m2 Starboard side: (60 2.4 2) + (13.75 3.375 2) = (288 + 92.8125) = 380.8125 m2 Ceiling starboard side: (60 2.5) = 150 m2 Chimneys: (2.5 5 2) + (2.5 2.5 2) = 62.65 m2 Area wheelhouse and apparatus room, see Figure D1. Total area: (2.3 4.0 2) + (2.3 8.0 2) + (1.25 8.3 2) + (1.25 4.0 2) + (6.0 8.3) = 18.4 + 38.18 + 20.75 + 10 + 49.8 = 137.13 m2

79

Floor wheelhouse: 8.3 4 = 33.2 m2 Deck outside wheelhouse: 9.9 2.5 = 24.75 m2 Apparatus room deck: (15.7 7.5) + (2.5 10) = 142.75 m2 Edges: (10 1.25 2) = 125 m2 Total area calculated from sketch: 1224.3925 m2 1230 m2 As these calculations are united with large uncertainties, and several areas were not possible to estimate from provided sketches, for example fences and stairs, 20 % are added to the calculated value, which by the author of this study has been considered to give an upper value of area for aluminium constructions in ferry. With this argument, an area of 1500 m2 has been used in the calculations.

Figure D2. Sketch with dimensions for apparatus and wheelhouse room

80

Appendix E. Compilation input data in SimaPro model Following appendix provides a final compilation of all relevant data used in modelling per functional unit, see Table E1. The table is structured according to identified life cycle in LCI phase to facilitate for the reader and presents required components in terms of material and process for each life cycle stage per functional unit. For derivation of numbers see chapter 6.3 Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) and Appendix F-P. Table E1. Compilation of input data per functional unit

Life cycle stage

Component Amount Unit Reference

Production of hull material

Material Steel plates 726 ton

Internal documents (Jivén, et al., 2004) (Gilbert, et al., 2016) Aluminium plates 46

Transport hull material

Transport by lorry from hull material suppliers

623935 tnkm

Internal documents (Searates, 2019)

Transport by sea from hull material suppliers 376294 Construction of ferry hull

Material Welding consumables 0.115 ton Internal documents Sand for blasting 16.92 ton (Jivén, et al., 2004)

Construction processes

Cutting 1438 MJ

(Gilbert, et al., 2016) Sandblasting 2198

Welding 25542 Transport constructed hull

Transport from Riga Shipyard to Baltic Boats shipyard

199552

tnkm

(Map developers, 2019)

Construction of remaining part of the ferry

Engines (4 units)

Material 10440 kg (Scania, 2006) Transport 44201119.2 kgkm (Volvo Penta, 2019)

(Searates, 2019) Propulsion system (2 units)

Material 25000 kg (Rolls-Royce, 2019) (Carlton, 2012)

Transport 14214250 kgkm (Rolls-Royce, 2019) (Searates, 2019)

Batteries (17 units)

Material 1081 kg (Victron Energy, 2019) (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Transport 2361887.71 kgkm (Victron Energy, 2019) (Searates, 2019)

Cables Material 7082 kg (Müürisepp, 2019) (TKF, 2019)

Transport 14642707.54 kgkm (TKF, 2019) (Searates, 2019)

Paint

Material 18347.5 l (International, 2016) Transport 178755291.5 kgkm (International, 2015)

(International, 2016) (Searates, 2019)

Insulation Material 24156 kg (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

81

Transport 42010907.4 kgkm (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008) (Searates, 2019)

Windows Material 2973 kg (Bohamet, 2019) Transport 3473088.33 kgkm (Bohamet, 2019)

(Searates, 2019) Heat pump system Material 15123.83 kg (Grundfos Lenntech,

2019) Internal documents

Transport 26485547.81 kgkm (Grundfos Lenntech, 2019) (Searates, 2019)

Luminaries Material 1460 kg (Glamox, 2019a) Transport 2519157 kgkm (Glamox, 2019a)

(Searates, 2019) Transport Transport to Gullmarsleden 975200 tnkm (Map developers,

2019) Operation Material Diesel 15917280 l Internal documents

Engine Oil 121050 l Internal documents Maintenance Material Hull material 77.2115 ton (Gilbert, et al., 2016)

Paint 108,893 l (International, 2016) Luminaries 600 units (Glamox, 2019a) Engine 4 units Qualified guess Battery 34 units (Victron Energy,

2019) Transport Transport form Gullmarsleden to disposal

treatment 4270 tnkm (Map developers,

2019) End-of-life treatment

Disassembly in components and disposal scenarios for each component Disposal material hull

Steel 660 ton (Kirs, 2017) Aluminium 40

Disposal material engine

Steel 4176 kg

(Scania, 2006) Cast Iron 4802 (Scania, 2006) Aluminium 835 (Scania, 2006)

Disposal material battery

Battery component 2162 kg (Spanos, et al., 2014) (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Disposal heat pump system

Heat pump system 15,123.83 kg Qualified guess

Disposal luminaries Luminaries component

7300 kg Qualified guess

Disposal propulsion system

Propulsion system 25,000 kg Qualified guess

Disposal cables Cables component 7082 kg Qualified guess Disposal insulation Mineral wool 24,156 kg Qualified guess Disposal windows Glass 2973 kg Qualified guess

82

Appendix F. Material, production processes and transport for hull Data for material, processes and transport included in the life cycle for the component hull is presented in the tables below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table F1. Table over material used for hull construction per functional unit.

Material Component in SimaPro

Total amount

Unit Reference (Information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Steel Steel, low-alloyed {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

726 tons Internal documents (Jivén, et al., 2004) (Gilbert, et al., 2016)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Characteristics and amount of hull material were identified from certification documents from part deliveries to Riga shipyard, where the hull is constructed. The total amount of material was though identified to be considerably higher than reasonable (26.3 % above the known weight of the ferry hull). It is on the other hand also known that the ferry vessel was constructed into two major hull parts á ~ 300 tons respectively. This due to the information of the capacity for the crane used at Riga Shipyard had a maximal load of 300 tons. These two major parts were welded together and ramps á ~ 30 tons on each side of the ferry were afterwards added. This number agrees also with the amount of steel stated in the decommissioning plan, prepared by the Baltic Workboats Shipyard. This two independent sources together with consultation with experts at STA Road Ferries, made the second alternative more reasonable than compilation of raw material from certification documents and therefore these values were chosen in the modelling. The decommissioning plan also states the amount of aluminium in the ferry – a number of ~ 40 tons, a value also differing compared to the corresponding values from the certification documents of part deliveries. With same reasoning as for steel, the later references of amounts for aluminium has been considered more reliable than from compilation of part deliveries. According to Jivén et al., (2004) and Gilbert et al., (2016) 10 % of the needed hull material can be assumed lost in the cutting process. Total surface area for the vessel surface was calculated to ~ 1692 m2, see Appendix C. With assumption of total area before cutting is 10 % more, calculations gives a value of ~ 1861.2 m2. By calculating

Aluminium Aluminium, cast alloy {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

46 tons Internal documents (Jivén, et al., 2004) (Gilbert, et al., 2016)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

83

relation tons/m2, total weight of steel needed to build the ferry hull is calculated to 726 tons. Due to the higher complexity in construction of the parts above main deck a qualified assumption on 15 % process waste instead for 10 % has been calculated for. Total surface for aluminium construction of vessel is approximated to 1,500 m2, see calculations see Appendix D. With reasoning as above, 46 tons aluminium has been chosen to give corresponding aluminium value as given in the deconstruction plan of the ferry. Based on this argumentation, 726 tons steel and 46 tons aluminium is required to construct the ferry hull with a total weight of 700 tons.

Welding consumables

Steel, unalloyed {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

109.25 kg Internal documents (ESAB, 2006)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Compilation of welding consumables from certification documents of part deliveries provides an amount of used material for welding to 115 kg and is the best information available. Several welding consumables were identified used in the construction process. However, OK Autrod 12.10 from ESAB, were the most commonly used welding consumables and is identified to be a copper-coated unalloyed mild steel wire. No information possible to find regarding amount of copper in the welding wire only that it consists of a thin layer on the outside. Assumptions has therefore been made based on this information that 5 % of total weight consists of copper.

Copper {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

5.75 kg Qualified guess based on information from ESAB (2006)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

84

Table F2. Table with information of chosen processes to create metal plates per functional unit

Process Process in SimaPro

Component(s) in SimaPro Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Production of steel plates

Pre-defined process

Hot rolling, steel {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

726 tons Internal documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Information regarding process for manufacturing of steel plates used in hull production has not been possible to identify. Thus, a dataset from SimaPro 8.4.0 was used instead for represent production of steel plates. The used data set is representative for production within European Union, which is reasonable as all steel plates has with information from certification documents been identified to origin from Europe.

Production of aluminium plates

Pre-defined process

Sheet rolling, aluminium {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

46 tons Internal documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Information regarding process for manufacturing of aluminium plates used in hull production has not been possible to identify. Thus, a dataset from SimaPro 8.4.0 was used instead for represent production of aluminium plates. The used data set is representative for production within European Union, which is reasonable as all aluminium plates has with information from certification documents been identified to origin from Europe.

85

Table F3. Table over hull production processes per functional unit (pre-defined in SimaPro 8.4.0)

Process Process in SimaPro

Component(s) in SimaPro

Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Welding Pre-defined process

Welding, arc, steel {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

59.50 km (Gilbert, et al., 2016)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

According to Gilbert et al. (2016) a 1,300 ton ferry require 117.2 km of welding. Information from where welding for a 700 tons ferry is calculated to 63.11 km of welding. The total amount of required welding has been divided between hull material fractions steel (660 ton) and aluminium (40 ton). As no values for a project specific process was possible to find, a pre-defined process was used. Therefore, 59.50 km welding is needed for steel in ferry and 3.61 km is needed for aluminium parts in ferry.

Welding, arc, aluminium {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

3.61 km (Gilbert, et al., 2016)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Cutting Pre-defined process

Electricity, low voltage {LV}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

2938.2 MJ (Gilbert, et al., 2016)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

No project specific information regarding the cutting process has been found for this study. Information regarding cutting from literature has instead been used in the modelling. According to reference, only electricity is assumed needed for the cutting process. Construction of hull is identified to occur in Latvia, therefore a pre-defined process for electricity mix in Latvia was used. Further, 8.5 MJ electricity is stated to be required per m2 of steel cut according to the same reference. Total surface area of steel construction = 1692 m2, for calculations see Appendix C. Therefore, 169.2 m2 of hull material is being cut (pre-cutting area – final total surface area). From this, 1438.2 MJ electricity is required for cutting steel plates. Total surface area aluminium construction ≈ 1500 m2, for calculations see Appendix D. Also for aluminium, 10 % of material is assumed lost in the cutting process. Therefore, 150 m2 of hull in aluminium is being cut (pre-cutting area – final total surface area). 8.5 MJ electricity is assumed also needed per m2

of aluminium cut and based on information regarding energy for steel cut. From this, 1250 MJ electricity is estimated to be required for cutting of aluminium in the hull construction process. Total electricity need: 1438.2 + 1250 = 2938.2 MJ

86

Table F4. Table over hull production processes per functional unit (created process) Process Process in

SimaPro Component in SimaPro

Component Total Amount

Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Blasting Created Process ‘Sandblasting’

Inputs from nature Sandblasting is a process stated in two different references to be required for hull production. According to these references, 10 kg sand per m2 blasting of steel is required in this process. Based on surface calculations for steel, see Appendix C, 16.92 ton sand is required in the process. Sandblasting is by author of this study assumed to be required also for aluminium construction parts and the process for this material is further assumed to require 10 kg sand per m2 blasting. Based on surface calculations for aluminium, see Appendix D, 15 ton sand is required in the process of sandblasting aluminium.

Sand Sand for blasting hull material

31.92 ton (Gilbert, et al., 2016) (Jivén, et al., 2004)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels According to used references, sandblasting process is stated to require 0.023 kg diesel/m2 of sandblasting. Total area of blast: 1692 + 1500 = 3192 m2 3190 m2, and from where required amount of diesel has been calculated.

Diesel {RER}| market group for | Alloc Rec, S

Diesel for manufacturing

73.37 kg (Gilbert, et al., 2016) (Jivén, et al., 2004)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Emissions to air According to Scania (2006) 2.15 kg CO2 is released per kilogram combusted diesel. 73.37 kg diesel is used for sandblasting and therefore 158 kg CO2 is released from used diesel in sandblasting process.

Carbon Dioxide CO2 emission from combustion of diesel

157.7455 kg (Scania, 2006) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

87

Table F5. Table over transports for hull material per functional unit Transport In SimaPro Transported

weight [tons] Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference Motivation

Transport from NLMK DanSteel A/S

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

194.9701 55.36 10793.54 tkm Internal documents, part deliveries of hull material (Searates, 2019)

Internal certification documents shows location for production of steel and aluminium plates. The total amount of material from these certification documents was considerably higher than reasonable compared to the known displacement lightweight ship of the ferry and not used in the modelling due to allocation problems. A percentage distribution based on the part deliveries from different producers was though calculated from the internal certification documents and considered to give a potential and reasonable scenario of distribution from where the material comes from. From Searates (2019), ways for transport were suggested. Input in SimaPro 8.4.0: Total transport with lorry: 623934.9967 tnkm Total transport over sea: 376293.825 tnkm

Transport, freight, sea, transoceanic ship {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

868.7 169370.526

Transport from SSAB

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

176.3254 83.73 14763.7257 tkm

Transport, freight, sea, transoceanic ship {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

495.51 87370.999

Transport from Alex S.p.a. Aluminium Extrusion

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

4.782566 2808.38 13431.263 tkm

Transport from Alumeco A/S

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

35.17414 1809.38 63643.385 tkm

Transport from Extrusax

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.736832 3491.76 2572.841 tkm

Transport from Alcomet

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

2.839264 2179.41 6187.920 tkm

Transport from Sapa Profiles Kft.

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

2.467201 1499.61 3699.839 tkm

Transport from S.C. Laminorul

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

184.856 1658.61 306604.010 tkm

88

Transport Acciaerie Valbruna

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

7.904443 2007.36 15867.063 tkm

Transport from Aperam Genk

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

18.89991 1868.98 35323.554 tkm

Transport from Losal

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

59.74574 1658.61 99094.882 tkm

Transport from CMC Poland

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

23.49299 932.46 21906.273 tkm

Transport from EAF

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

5.437214 2044.04 11113.883 tkm

Transport from Severstal

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

50.61699 294.69 14916.321 tkm

Transport from ArcelorMittal

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

3.751274 1066 3998.858 tkm

Transport from UAB Serpantinas

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.115 153.38 17.639 tkm Transport of welding products from brand location: Panevezys, Lithuania, From Searates (2019), way of transport was suggested.

89

Appendix G. Material, production processes and transport for paint Data for material, processes and transport included in construction phase of the life cycle for used paint is presented in the tables below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table G1. Paint composition and total mass per functional unit

Material Mass-% interval Used mass-% Total mass Unit Motivation for calculation Pigment

50-75 60.6 14898.9039 kg Internal documents calculates required amounts and different types of paint for a 100 m ferry. Due to complexity, time limitation and difficulties to find data for paint production, all 16 different types of paint were in this study assumed to have the same characteristics as Intershield 300 from where the density was calculated. (International, 2016). Intershield 300 has a unit size at 17.5 litres with a weight of 23.5 kg. From this information, paint density (~1.34 kg/l) was calculated with the assumption that the container for storage and transport is not included in this weight. (International, 2015). Estimations over total amount of used paint in construction phase used in the modelling: 18347.5 litres. With information over paint density, total weight was calculated to 24585.65 kg. Lack of data for used product made it necessary to estimate emissions based on information from another product available on the market. The chosen product was JOTUN WaterFine Barrier and identified to have similar applications as Intershield 300. For the chosen product an EPD has been conducted. (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018). Except from similarities in applications, no further analysis between the different products has been done and therefore results from this component is united with large uncertainties and should only be used for indication of potential magnitude of contribution. The mass percentages used in the calculation were, by the author of this study set to: pigment (60.6 %), binders (17.5 %), water (17.5 %), solvent (4 %), additive (0.2 %) and filler (0.2 %).

Binders

10-25 17.5 4302.48875 kg

Water

10-25 17.5 4302.48875 kg

Solvent

3-5 4 983.426 kg

Additive

0.1-0.3 0.2 49.1713 kg

Filler

0.1-0.3 0.2 49.1713 kg

90

Table G2. Results according to included environmental impact categories (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018) Subject of assessment Potential impact of JOTUN

WaterFine Barrier product per kg Unit per kg Total potential impact of JOTUN

WaterFine Barrier per functional unit Abiotic depletion potential of non fossil resources Abiotic depletion for fossil resources

5.2710-3

6.66101

kg Sb –eqv. MJ

129.5663755 1637404.29

Global warming potential (GWP 100 years) Ozone destruction potential (ODP) Acidification potential (AP) Eutrophication potential (EP) Photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP)

6.01100 3.8010-8 5.7210-2 1.7010-2 2.8410-3

kg CO2-eqv. kg CFC11-eqv. kg SO2-eqv. kg PO4

3--eqv. kg C2H4-eqv.

147759.7565 9.34254710-4 1406.29918 417.95605 69.823246

Table G3. Emissions from a cradle-to-gate perspective for paint per functional unit

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro

Component Total Amount

Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Production paint

Created Process ‘Painting’

Emissions to air The EPD provides emissions according to impact categories included in EN 15804 standardisation per kilograms paint from a cradle-to-gate perspective, see table G2. With used assumptions and calculations shown in table G1 and table G2 following emissions has been modelled in SimaPro 8.4.0.

Carbon dioxide

GWP 100 years

147759.7565 kg CO2-eqv.

(International, 2015) (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Methane, trichlorofluoro-, CFC- 11

ODP 0.9342547 g CFC11-eqv.

(International, 2015) (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Sulfur dioxide

AP 1406.29918 kg SO2-eqv.

(International, 2015) (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Phosphate EP 417.95605 kg PO43--

eqv. (International, 2015) (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Ethene POCP 69.823246 kg C2H4-eqv.

(International, 2015) (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Inputs from nature

91

Energy from oil

Total use of non renewable primary energy resources

1,728,371.195 MJ (International, 2015) (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

No specific information is given in the EPD over what type of non renewable respectively renewable energy resources. Therefore, the components Energy from oil and Energy, solar, converted was assumed reasonable with information of production location, see Table G4. Energy,

solar, converted

Total use of renewable primary energy resources

197,422.7695 MJ (International, 2015) (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Table G4. Table over transports for paint per functional unit

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [kg]

Distance [km]

Result [tnkm]

Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From factory in Al Quoz (Dubai) to Baltic Workboats Shipyard A/S

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

24585.65 7271.53 178,775,291.5 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Production of paint JOTUN is identified to be located in Al Quoz Industrial Area, Dubaim U.A.E. (The Norwegian EPD Foundation, 2018). Way of transport has been suggested from SeaRates (2019).

92

Appendix H. Transport of hull Data and calculations for transport of hull from Riga Shipyard to Baltic Workboats Shipyard is presented below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table H1. Transport from Riga shipyard to Baltic Workboats Shipyard per functional unit

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [ton]

Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From Riga Shipyard (Latvia) to Baltic Workboats Shipyard

Transport, freight, inland waterways, barge {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

700 170.789 119552.3 tnkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

After first construction, the finished vessel hull is transported from Riga Shipyard to Baltic Workboats Shipyard. Potential route has been drawn by the author of this study and distance calculated by Map Developers (2019). See route in, Figure H1.

Figure H1. Transport from Riga shipyard to Baltic Workboats shipyard (Map developers, 2019)

93

Appendix I. Material, production processes and transport for engines Data for material, processes and transport included in the life cycle for the engines is presented in the tables below. All references are stated and a short motivation for the reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table I1. Table over material used for engine construction per functional unit.

Material Component in SimaPro Total amount

Unit Reference (Information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Steel Steel, unalloyed {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

4802.4 kg (Volvo Penta, 2013) (Scania, 2006)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Total mass for the engine = 2610 kg (Volvo Penta, 2013) Numbers of engines in road ferry: 4 pieces The weight shares for the major materials in the engine are: 46 % cast iron (30 % recycled), 40 % steel, 8 % aluminium, 3 % oil and grease (3 % remaining material e.g. plastics, rubber, paint, copper, bronze, brass, zinc) (Scania, 2006). Calculation principle: Total amount per material = total mass engine * numbers of engine * material weight share

Cast iron Cast iron {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

4176 kg (Volvo Penta, 2013) (Scania, 2006)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Aluminium Aluminium, cast alloy {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

835.2 kg (Volvo Penta, 2013) (Scania, 2006)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Oil and grease Lubricating oil {GLO} | production | Alloc Rec, S

313.2 kg (Volvo Penta, 2013) (Scania, 2006)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

94

Table I2. Table over engine production processes per functional unit Process Process in

SimaPro Component in SimaPro Component Total

Amount Unit Reference

(information) Reference (process)

Motivation

Engine Production process

Created Process

Inputs from nature This stage of the process was copied and kept from Ecoinvent process since water is needed in the production process according to reference.

Water, cooling, unspecified natural origin, SE

Water for cooling

8.0 m3 (Scania, 2006) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Engine testing is one part of the phases in engine manufacturing. According to the reference, testing part of the manufacturing process requires 0.4 MWh energy from diesel = 1440 MJ per engine. 45.76 MJ/l gives amount of diesel: 31.47 litres Density: 0.81 kg/l Total diesel amount: 31.47 0.81 4 101.96 kg

Diesel {Europe without Switzerland}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

Diesel for manufacturing

101.96 kg (Scania, 2006) (Trafikverket, 2018d)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Inputs from technosphere: electricity/heat Total electricity demand per engine produced was stated in the used reference. The engine model in the analysed ferry is Volvo Penta D16-MH, produced in Sweden (Volvo Penta, 2019). Thus, electricity mix for Sweden was used in the modelling.

Electricity, low voltage {SE}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

Electricity for manufacturing

7.6 MWh (Scania, 2006) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Heat, for reuse in municipal solid waste incineration only {SE}| treatment of municipal solid waste, incineration | Alloc Rec, S

District heating for engine manufacturing

3.2 MWh (Scania, 2006) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

According to the reference, district heating is one part of the total energy required for the manufacturing process. The engine model in the analysed ferry is Volvo Penta D16-MH, produced in Sweden (Volvo Penta, 2019). Thus, a mix for Swedish district heating was used in the modelling.

Emissions to air The reference used states that 210 kg CO2-emissions from energy is released from the manufacturing process.

Carbon Dioxide CO2 emission from manufacturing

840 kg (Scania, 2006) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Outputs to technosphere: Waste and emissions to treatment

95

Steel and iron (waste treatment) {GLO}| recycling of steel and iron | Alloc Rec, S

Recycling of steel and cast iron process waste

584.8 kg (Scania, 2006) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Total manufacturing process waste per produced engine is stated to 270 kg. Of these, 170 kg of the waste is recycled and 100 kg is treated through external treatment. Based on this information, an assumption that all of the recycled waste is metal fractions. As no further information is stated, an allocation problem occurs which been solved through mass allocation following the weight share of material content. Thus, for steel and iron the total waste has been calculated: (0.46 + 0.4) * 170 = 146.2 kg and for aluminium: 0.08 * 170 = 13.6 kg. As no detailed information of the external treatment for process waste is given, assumption that the rest of the waste is assumed to be treated through municipal solid waste treatment with incineration. A Swedish process was chosen, since the production process is located in Sweden.

Aluminium (waste treatment) {GLO}| recycling of aluminium | Alloc Rec, S

Recycling of process waste of aluminium fraction

54.4 kg (Scania, 2006) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Municipal solid waste (waste treatment) {SE}| treatment of municipal solid waste, incineration | Alloc Rec, S

External treatment of process waste

400 kg (Scania, 2006) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Table I3. Table over transports for engines per functional unit

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [kg]

Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From factory in Vara (Sweden) to port Göteborg

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

10440 94.49 986475.6 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Factory location was identified to Vara, Sweden. SeaRates (2019) suggest transport through lorry and by sea.

From port Göteborg to port Tallinn

Transport, freight, sea, transoceanic ship {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

10440 1192 12444480 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

From port Tallinn to Baltic Workboats Shipyard A/S

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

10440 209.69 2189163.6 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

96

Appendix J. Material, production processes and transport for heat pump system Data for material, processes and transport included in the life cycle for heat pump system is presented in Appendix below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table J1. Specification of heat pumps in ferry Name Type El. power Material Gross Weight [kg] Main heating circ. pump 1 MAGNA1 80-100 F 1x230V/1014W Cast iron 29.4 Main heating circ. pump 2 MAGNA1 80-100 F 1x230V/1014W Cast iron 29.4 Boiler circ. pump MAGNA1 65-80 F 1x230v/476W Cast iron 23.8 ME Aft circ. pump MAGNA1 32-100 180MM 1x230v/175W Cast iron 4.78 ME Fore circ. pump MANGA1 32-120 220MM 1x230v/336W Cast iron 5 Passenger area heating pump ALPHA2L 25-60 180MM 1x230v/45W Cast iron 2.15 Floor heating pump ALPHA2L 25-60 180MM 1x230v/45W Cast iron 2.15 Wheelhouse Heating pump MANGA1 25-100 1x230V/176W Cast iron 5 Outside unit pump MANGA 1 25-80 1x230v/128W Cast iron 5 Outside unit pump MANGA 1 25-80 1x230v/128W Cast iron 5 Wheelhouse floor Heating pump ALPHA2L 25-60 180MM 1x230v/45W Cast iron 2.15

97

Table J2. Table over material used for heat pump construction per functional unit. Material Component in

SimaPro Total amount

Unit Reference (Information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Cast iron Cast iron {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

113.83 kg (Grundfos Lenntech, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

The heat pump system in Neptunus consists of 11 different heat pumps. see Table J1. Specifications from supplier of heat pump system states cast iron as material for pump housing. No further material is specified in the product specification, thus this study assumes that the pump only consists of cast iron.

Seamless steel pipe

Steel, low-alloyed {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

15,010 kg Internal documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Pipes used for the system is specified as seamless steel pipe in the sketch over the ferry, During compilation of data part deliveries of this material were found and a weight of in total 15,010 kg. As for the hull production, it is not possible to identify exactly if this total quantity from the certification document has been allocated for the specific road ferry. As no information has been found regarding reasonable losses during construction of pipe system, assumption was made that all steel pipes from the certification documents were needed for construction of heat pump system in Neptunus

Table J3. Table over heat pump production processes per functional unit

Process Process in SimaPro

Component(s) in SimaPro Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Production of heat pump

Metal working for steel product manufacturing

Metal working, average for steel product manufacturing {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

113.86 kg (Grundfos Lenntech, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Lack of information regarding production process and location of production made it necessary to use an already existing data set with global values. Thus, the result is united with uncertainties but considered to give an indication of potential impact contribution from the heat pump production process and therefore still adds a relevant information in the assessment. Information of location for production of steel pipes were found and therefore a process suitable for production in Europe were possible to use.

Production of seamless steel pipes

Hot rolling steel Drawing of pipe, steel {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

15,010 kg Internal documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

98

Table J4. Table over transports for heat pumps per functional unit Transport In SimaPro Transported

weight [kg] Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From factory in Grundfos to Baltic Workboat Shipyard by lorry

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

113.83 2184.91 248708.3053 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Assumption of transport from Grundfos distribution service to Baltic Workboat Shipyard by lorry. Distance calculated through SeaRates (2019)

Transport from Ukraine, Nikopol 56, Trubnikov to Baltic Workboat Shipyard

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

9970 1923.35 19175799.5 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Compilation of part deliveries from internal documents over seamless steel pipes showed location of factory. Distance and mean of transport from Ukraine is suggested by SeaRates (2019) Transport from Ostrava in Czech Republic has been calculated from Google Maps (2019) as this place of load not were available in the SeaRate tool.

Transport from Vratimovská 689, 707 02 Ostrava. Rizeni Jokosti. Czech Republic to Baltic Workboat Shipyard

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

5040 1401 7061040 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

99

Appendix K. Material, production processes and transport for lighting equipment Data for material, processes and transport included in the life cycle for lighting equipment is presented in Appendix below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table K1. Table over material used for luminaries’ armature per functional unit.

Product Material Component in SimaPro Total amount

Unit Reference (Information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Luminaries with LED lighting

Aluminium-zinc coated steel

Steel, low-alloyed {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

1065.8 kg (Glamox, 2019a) (Fagerhult, 2017)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Lighting armatures from Glamox were identified from internal sketches over lighting arrangement in ferry. Several different types of armatures were identified used in the ferry. In this study all lighting armatures were assumed to be of model MRS67-1200 LED 5000 HF TW PC 840 B25, as this model is identified most present in Neptunus. Gross weight: 7.3 kg/pcs Number of LED lighting components from compilation on sketches: 200 pcs Gives a total mass: 1460 kg Luminaire material: Aluzinc = aluminium-zinc steel, coat with Al and Zn. Assumes only steel in the modelling. EPD of a luminaire (maximum per material fraction): Aluzinc steel: 73 % Plastic: 26 % LED: 1 % From where amount of material has been calculated.

Polycarbonate Polycarbonate {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

379.6 kg

Light emitting diodes

Light emitting diode {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

14.6 kg

100

Table K2. Table over luminaries’ production processes per functional unit Process Process in

SimaPro Component(s) in SimaPro Amount Unit Reference

(information) Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Luminaire production

Pre-defined production process

Metal working, average for steel product manufacturing {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

1065.8 kg Qualified guess

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

No information regarding production process was possible to find neither for Glamox or Fagerhult. Thus, chosen production processes in this study are only based on qualified guesses. The result from this part is therefore assumed to be united with uncertainties, but considered to give an indication of potential impact contribution from the heat pump production process and therefore still adds a relevant information in the assessment.

Pre-defined production process Plastic parts plates

Extrusion, plastic pipes {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

379.6 kg Qualified guess

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Table K3. Transport for luminaire armatures per functional unit

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [kg]

Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From Glamox factory, Molde to Kapellskär by lorry

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

1460 933.34 1695483.4 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Several Glamox factories located in Norway, Sweden, Estonia, Germany, Canada and China (Glamox, 2018). No information possible to find regarding from manufacturing location for Neptunus in specific. Information that Norway produces marine lighting equipment made it reasonable to assume production at that location (Glamox, 2019b).

From Kapellskär to Tallinn by freight

Transport, freight, inland waterways, barge {GLO}| Market for | Alloc Rec, S

1460 336.21 490866.6 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

From Tallinn to Baltic Workboats Shipyard by lorry

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

1460 227.95 332807 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

101

Appendix L. Material, production processes and transport for cables Data for material, processes and transport included in the life cycle for the cables is presented in the tables below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table L1. Table over material and processes used for cable construction per functional unit.

Material Component in SimaPro Total amount

Unit Reference (Information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Cables Cable, unspecified {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

7081.88 kg (TKF, 2019) (Müürisepp, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

A compilation of total amount of cables for Neptunus was made during construction and gave approximations for used length per used product. 63 different types of cables are installed divided in between the systems power/lightning, communication, fire detection and emergency system. From TKF (2019) densities [kg/m] for different types of cables were found. The total mass for cables were from this possible to calculate. As the cables in the road ferry not is considered as a major component in the functional unit and information regarding the production process for this component not been possible to identify within the time frame for the study, a pre-defined dataset in SimaPro 8.4.0 for cable production has instead been used and considered to give a good enough indication of the size of potential environmental load.

Table L2. Table over transports for cables per functional unit

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [kg]

Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From factory/distributor in Haaksbergen (the Netherlands) to Baltic Workboat Shipyard by lorry

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

7081.88 2067.63 14642707.54 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Assumption of transport from TKF distribution service located at Haaksbergen, the Netherlands to Baltic Workboat Shipyard by lorry.

102

Appendix M. Material, production processes and transport for batteries Data for material, processes and transport included in the life cycle for used batteries is presented in the tables below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table M1. Compilation of batteries in road ferry

Specification Battery capacity [Ah]

Location Amount [pcs.]

Total mass [kg]

Reference

Consumer battery (2x12V) 220Ah

220 Apparatus room

2 132 Internal documents of the electrical installation i.e. main power diagrams shows the capacity over installed batteries in the ferry. For simplification purposes, this study assumes that all batteries are Valve Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA) batteries produced by Victron Energy. The difference in battery capacity decides the weight of battery. In table M2, battery weight in relation to capacity is stated for used batteries in the ferry and from where total mass for batteries has been calculated. Total weight of batteries used in the assessment: 1081 kg.

IAS/Navigation battery 220 1 66

Emergency Battery 220 1 66 GMDSS Battery 75 1 25 Main engine 1/diesel generator 1

220 Engine Room Fore

1 66

Main engine 2 220 1 66 2x12V 220Ah Battery 220 4 264 Main engine 3/diesel generator 2

220 Engine Room Aft

1 66

Main engine 4 220 1 66 2x12V 220Ah Battery 220 4 264

Table M2. Weight specification for batteries depending on battery capacity (Victron Energy, 2019).

12 Volt Deep Cycle GEL General specification Ah V Weight [kg] Float design life: 12 years

at 20℃.

60 12 20 66 12 24 90 12 26 110 12 33 130 12 38

103

165 12 48 220 12 66 265 12 75

Table M3. Table over material used for lead-acid batteries per functional unit.

Material Component in SimaPro

Total amount

Unit Reference (Information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Lead Lead {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

270.25 kg (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Mass percentage according to reference: Lead 25 % Lead oxides 35 % PP 10 % Sulphuric Acid 10 % Water 16 % Glass 2 % Antimony 1 % Assumes same battery type with different capacities for calculation of total mass per material fraction.

Lead oxide 378.35 kg (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

PP Polypropylene, granulate {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

108.1 kg (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Sulphuric acid

Sulphuric acid {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

108.1 kg (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Water Water, deionised, from tap water, at user {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

172.96 kg (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Glass Glass fibre {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

21.62 kg (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Antimony Antimony {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

10.81 kg (Sullivan & Gaines, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

104

Table M4. Table over lead-acid battery production processes per functional unit Process Process in

SimaPro Component in SimaPro

Component Total Amount

Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Battery Production process

Created Process

Inputs from technosphere: electricity/heat Sum of total electricity demand in manufacturing steps: 4.59 MJ/kg battery. Total electricity demand = 4961.79 MJ

Electricity, medium voltage {NL}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

Primary electricity demand

4961.79 MJ (Spanos, et al., 2014)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Heavy fuel oil {Europe without Switzerland}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

Oil for manufacturing

15.34 kg (Spanos, et al., 2014)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Sum of total oil demand in manufacturing steps: 0.65 MJ/kg battery 0.65 [MJ/kg battery] * 1081 [kg battery] = 702.65 MJ. Crude oil: 45.8 MJ/kg oil from where required amount of oil is calculated. (Vincenzo Rocco, 2016)

Natural gas, high pressure {Europe without Switzerland}| market group for | Alloc Rec, S

Gas for manufacturing

178.1 m3 (Spanos, et al., 2014)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Sum of total gas demand in manufacturing steps: 6.31 MJ/kg battery 6.31 [MJ/kg battery] * 1081 [kg battery] = 6821.11 MJ. Natural gas: 38.3 MJ/m3 natural gas from where required natural gas is calculated. (Vincenzo Rocco, 2016)

Emissions to air The used reference states 0.68 kg CO2-emissions/kg battery produced. Gives a total amount of CO2 emissions from manufacturing to 735.08 kg.

Carbon Dioxide CO2 emissions from manufacturing

735.08 kg (Spanos, et al., 2014)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

105

Table M5. Table over transports for lead-acid batteries per functional unit Transport In SimaPro Transported

weight [kg] Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From retailer JG Almere, the Netherlands to Baltic Workboat Shipyard by lorry

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | Market for | Alloc Rec, S

1081 2184.91 2361887.71 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Assumption of transport from Almere, the Netherlands to Baltic Workboat Shipyard by lorry. Distance and mean of transport from distribution location is suggested by SeaRates (2019).

106

Appendix N. Material, production processes and transport for propulsion system Following appendix presents data for the main propulsion system in Neptunus. The system constitutes of two main propellers, one at each end of the vessel, of type Rolls-Royce Azimuth Thruster US 155 P14 FP. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table N1. Table over material used for main propellers per functional unit.

Material Component in SimaPro

Total amount

Unit Reference (Information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Bronze Bronze {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

20,750 kg (Rolls-Royce, 2019) (Carlton, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Internal documents over the propulsion system only gives information regarding the name of the propeller type in used propulsion system. Further information for this propeller type was found from Rolls-Royce (2019) and gives a general ranging for total thruster weight to 11.5-12.5 tons. An assumption in this study of a total weight was set to 12.5 tons. Carlton (2012) states that nickel-aluminium bronze is the alloy today dominating the market, where a usual material composition from nickel-aluminium bronze alloys are used, as no project specific data for this issue was found: Bronze: 83 % Aluminium: 9 % Nickel: 4 % Iron: 4 % Neptunus, has a system including two main propeller at each end of the vessel. Based on this information, total mass for the propulsion system has been assumed to be equal to the total mass of the two main propellers, i.e. 25,000 kg and from where material fractions were calculated. Lack of information regarding geographical location for production made it necessary to use global values from production of needed materials in the product.

Aluminium Aluminium, cast alloy {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

2,250 kg (Rolls-Royce, 2019) (Carlton, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Cast iron Cast iron {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

1,000 kg (Rolls-Royce, 2019) (Carlton, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Nickel Nickel, 99.5% {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

1,000 kg (Rolls-Royce, 2019) (Carlton, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

107

Table N2. Table over propulsion production processes per functional unit Process Process in

SimaPro Component(s) in SimaPro

Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Casting main propellers

Casting bronze

Casting, bronze {CH} | processing | Alloc Def, S

25,000 kg (Carlton, 2012)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

According to Carlton (2012) the majority of propellers are made from casting, but also that different propeller varies considerably in design and thus material composition and production processes. As no further project specific information regarding production process has been possible to find, a pre-defined casting process for bronze from SimaPro 8.4.0 was used instead. Casting bronze was chosen as it accounts for major material fraction in the propeller. The propeller artefact, is by Rolls-Royce only assembled from already and in other location constructed sub-assemblies. Earlier production steps and location of these is today not possible to identify and thus this a production process united with large uncertainties.

Table N3. Table over transports for propulsion per functional unit

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [kg]

Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From factory in Rauma (Finland) to port Helsinki

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

25,000 256.25 6,406,250 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Transport from manufacturing location in Rauma, Finland to Baltic Workboat Shipyard by lorry. Distance and mean of transport from distribution location is suggested by SeaRates (2019).

From port Helsinki to port at Tallinn

Transport, freight, sea, transoceanic ship {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

25,000 82.33 2,058,250 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

From port Tallinn to Baltic Workboat Shipyard

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

25,000 229.99 5,749,750 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

108

Appendix O. Material, production processes and transports for insulation Data for material, processes and transport included in the life cycle for used insulation is presented in the tables below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. The product ISOVER insulation used in the ferry has been declared according to ISO 14025 with declaration number EPD-GHI-2008311-D. The declaration thus provides information regarding basic material and material extraction, production and processing, the energy use and transport for the cradle-to-gate phase. The results from the EPD were directly used in the LCA calculations in this study. Total amount of insulation material has been estimated based on information from sketches and the calculations made of total surface area, see Appendix C and Appendix D, for the steel respectively aluminium parts of ferry hull. The two sketches over thermal insulation arrangement shows where insulation is used in the ferry and the general thickness of used insulation for respective place. For example differs the thickness of insulation between floor, bulkheads and ceiling in different structures of the ferry in a range between 50-200 mm. Based on analyses of the sketch and need of simplification, the author of this study assumes all the insulation installed in the ferry to be a thickness of 150 mm, as this is the most common used thickness of insulation. Area with insulation: For aluminium: Total area (~1500 m2) – Port side (117.5625 m2) – Ramps (43.75 m2) – Chimneys (62.65 m2) = 1276.0375 m2 ≈ 1280 m2 For steel: Total area (1692 m2) – Ramps ((99.7 – 85) · 18.2 · 2 = 535.08 m2) = 1156.92 m2 ≈ 1160 m2 Total area with insulation: 1280 + 1160 = 2440 m2 Density for ISOVER U SeaProtect Slab 66: 66 kg/m3 Assumed thickness: 0.15 m Total weight used insulation: 2440 m2 · 0.15 m · 66 kg/m3 = 24,156 kg

109

Table O1. Insulation material and total mass per functional unit (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008) Material Material category Range

Mass-% Used Mass-%

Total mass Unit Motivation for calculation

Phonolite Essential material 60-80 72 17392.32 kg Used mass-% was decided by the author of this study and could therefore differ according to reality. Numbers were chosen as far as possible to be in the middle of the mass range, but still add up to 100 %. Remaining information is directly stated from reference.

Bauxite Essential material 5-15 11 2657.16 kg Mineral fillers, lime, potash Other material 5-10* 9.8 2367.288 kg Urea altered phenol-formaldehyde resin Additives >7 6 1449.36 kg Silane Additives 0.1 0.1 24.156 kg Aliphatic mineral oil Additives 1 1 241.56 kg Silicone Additives 0.1 0.1 24.156 kg

* Qualified assumption based on information in EPD, no exact mass fraction stated for this materials (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008). Table O2. Results according to included environmental impact categories per functional unit (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Subject of assessment Potential impact of ISOVER Ultimate product per kg

Unit per kg Total potential impact of ISOVER Ultimate product

Primary energy, non-renewable Primary energy, renewable

57.70 1.70

MJ MJ

1,393,801.2 41,065.2

Global warming potential (GWP 100 years) Ozone destruction potential (ODP) Acidification potential (AP) Eutrophication potential (EP) Photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP)

3.27 0.20*10-6 0.0147 0.0024 0.00060

kg CO2-eqv. kg R11-eqv. kg SO2-eqv. kg phosphate-eqv. kg ethylene-eqv.

78,990.12 0.0048312 355.0932 57.9744 14.4936

110

Table O3. Emissions from a cradle-to-gate perspective for insulation production processes per functional unit Process Process in

SimaPro Component in SimaPro

Component Total Amount

Unit Reference (information) Reference (process)

Motivation

Production insulation

Created Process ‘Insulation’

Materials/Assemblies In order to make the model work in upcoming disposal scenario, some kind of material was needed to be included in the assembly. Therefore, 1 kg recycled material was added to avoid double counting, as recycled material is not being accounted for according to EN 15804.

Polystyrene foam slab {CH} | production, 100% recycled | Alloc Rec, S

Insulation material

1 kg Qualified guess Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Emissions to air Results from calculations made according to the used EPD, see Table O1 was directly used as input in the model as described in this table.

Carbon dioxide GWP 100 years

78,990.12

kg CO2-eqv.

(German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Methane, trichlorofluoro-, CFC- 11

ODP 0.0048312

g CFC11-eqv.

(German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Sulfur dioxide AP 355.0932

kg SO2-eqv.

(German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Phosphate EP 57.9744

kg PO4

3-

-eqv.

(German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Ethene POCP 14.4936 kg C2H4-eqv.

(German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Inputs from nature Energy, from gas, natural

Primary energy non-renewable

1,393,801.2

MJ (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

111

Energy, solar, converted

Primary energy, renewable

41,065.2 MJ (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Table O4. Table over transports for insulation per functional unit Transport In SimaPro Transported

weight [kg] Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Raw materials to factory

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

22416.768

680 15,243,402.24 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Hauling by truck is stated in the EPD. Further, phonolites are stated to origin from: the Eifel, Erzgebirge, Hegau, Kaiserstuhl, Lausitz, Rhön and Spessart. Bauxite are stated to originate from: Austraila, Guinea, Brazil, France, Spain and Greece. From this information, an average distance á 680 km has been stated from the EPD. Raw materials are considered to be Phonolite, Bauxite, mineral fillers, lime and potash, see Table O1.

Binders to factory

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

1739.232

243 422,633.376 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Hauling by truck. No specifications regarding location for binders other than an average á 243 km transport is stated in the EPD, which has been used in the calculations in this study. Binders are assumed to be all additives, see Table O1.

From Lübz, Germany to Baltic Workboats Shipyard

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

24156 1739.15 42010907.4 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Lübz, Germany, was identified to potential location for production of insultation as ISOVER has one of their factories is located there. Transport distance is estimated through SeaRates (2019).

112

Appendix P. Material, production processes and transport for windows Data for material, processes and transport included in the life cycle for windows is presented in the Appendix below. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage Table P1. Table over material used for windows construction per functional unit.

Material Component in SimaPro

Total amount

Unit Reference (Information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Glass Flat glass, uncoated {RER}| production | Alloc Rec, S

2973 kg Internal documents (Bohamet, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Compilation window dimensions from internal sketches made it possible to calculate total mass of glass in the ferry. Average thickness of windows: 33 mm. Weight for glass with average thickness 33 mm: 68 kg/m2

Total area of windows, calculated from sketches: 43.72 m2 Total weight glass: ~ 2973 kg Material around window (sash) was excluded from the analysis.

Table P2. Table over transports for windows per functional unit

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [kg]

Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From factory in Białe Błota to Baltic Workboat Shipyard

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

2973 1168.21 3473088.33 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

SeaRates (2019) suggests following transport from factory located in Białe Błota, Poland to Baltic Workboat Shipyard.

113

Appendix Q. Transport of constructed ferry to Gullmarsleden Following appendix provides information of used data for transport of finalised ferry from place construction to location of operation. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table Q1. Table over transports of constructed ferry to location of operation

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [ton]

Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From Riga Shipyard (Latvia) to Gullmarsleden

Transport, freight, inland waterways, barge {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

922 1057.7 975199.4 tnkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Transport of finalised ferry after construction to location of operation. Estimation of distance was made by Map Developers, see route in Figure Q1.

Figure Q1. Transport from Baltic Workboats shipyard to Gullmarsleden. (Map developers, 2019)

114

Appendix R. Ferry operation and maintenance Following appendix presents data used in assessment for daily operation and maintenance during operation phase. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Daily operation Table R1. Fuel requirements for daily operation per functional unit

Product In SimaPro Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

Diesel MK1

Diesel {Europe without Switzerland}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

13418266.86

kg Internal documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Amount of diesel needed for operation during total operation time was calculated based on fuel consumption statistics from year 2016 and 2018 for Neptunus and statistics from Gullbritt 2017-2018, both operating at Gullmarsleden where Gullbritt currently is the first ferry and Neptunus the second ferry: Neptunus (operation time 5540 h): 2016: 376303 l 2018: 377387 l Gullbritt (operation time 7800 h): 2017: 517855 l 2018: 518779 l The average diesel consumption per operation hour was calculated based on data provided for Neptunus and multiplied with operation time for Gullbritt, as Neptunus most probably will replace Gullbritt as the first ferry at the route. Average amount/operation hour = 68.023 l Average diesel amount per lifetime for Neptunus as: 1st ferry: 15,917,279.78 l Density diesel = 0.843 kg/l (Volvo Penta, 2013) Equation: ((376303 + 377387)/2) * 30/0.843 = 13418266.86 kg

115

Oil products

Lubricating oil {RER}| production| Alloc Rec, S

108945 kg Internal documents (Marin, et al., 2011)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Main engines requires oil exchange every 500th operation hours. Exchange approximately 15 times per year over 30 year á 56 litres. For four main engines per functional unit: 100,800 litres. Auxiliary engines around 300 litres/year: 9,000 litres per functional unit. Propulsion system requires oil exchange after 24,000 hours. With an operation time on 7500 h per year, 9.375 changes á 1,200 litres per functional unit: 11,250 litres. Gives a total amount of oil products: 121,050 litres per functional unit. According to reference, reasonable density = 0.9 kg/l, which has been used for conversion from litres to kg. Cradle to gate, for used data set in SimaPro 8.4.0.

Emission reports for E3-cycle, E2-cycle respectively C1-cycle are conducted for certification purposes for the parent engine. The different tests measures emissions at different power and speed levels for the engine and corresponding emissions. Table R2. Emission report of parent engine (E3-cycle)

Power [%] 100 75 50 25 Speed [%] 100 91 80 63 NOx specific [g/kWh] 5.3 5.4 5.4 7.3 CO specific [g/kWh] 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.9 CO2 specific [g/kWh] 652 635 642 671 HC specific [g/kWh] 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

116

Table R3. Compilation of total emission from fuel burning per functional unit

Power 50 [%] Total emissions per functional unit

Motivation

Speed 80 [%] Unit [g] NOx specific 5.4 [g/kWh] 1092562084 Diesel = 45.76 [MJ/l] (Trafikverket, 2018d)

Energy diesel = 15,917,279.78 [l] * 45.76 [MJ/l] = 728,374,722.7 [MJ] = 202,326,311.9 [kWh] This study assumes 50 % power and 80 % speed for calculation of emissions, see Table R2.

CO specific 0.4 [g/kWh] 80930524.75 CO2 specific 642 [g/kWh] 1.298934922*10^11 HC specific 0.1 [g/kWh] 20232631.19

Table R4. Daily operation per functional unit

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro

Component Total Amount

Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Daily operation

Created Process

Emissions to air According to reasoning above, see Table R1 and Table R2, following data was used as input in SimaPro 8.4.0.

Carbon Dioxide CO2 emissions 129893492200 g Certification documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Nitrogen oxides NOx emissions 1092562084 g Certification documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Carbon monoxide CO emissions 80930524.75 g Certification documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Hydrocarbons, unspecified

HC emissions 20232631.19 g Certification documents

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

117

Maintenance Table R5. Required maintenance during operation per functional unit

Component Amount Unit Reference Motivation Hull material

77.2115 tons (Gilbert, et al., 2016)

According to Gilbert et al., (2016) an assumption of an additional 10 % of total hull material is reasonable to add during the life time of the ferry. As no project specific information regarding this was found during the data inventory phase, this assumption has been applied for the study. Further, an assumption of an evenly distribution between the material fractions was made, i.e. 72.6 tons steel, 4.6 tons aluminium and 0.0115 tons welding materials are used.

Engines 4 pcs. (Volvo Penta, 2013)

Assumption of engine change one time during a life time of a ferry, i.e. engine life time of 15 years.

Paint 108,893 l (International, 2016)

According to the technical specifications given for paint, re-painting is suggested for every 36th month. During a life time this implies: 30 [years] * 12 [months] / 36 [re-paint] = 10 times. As not all areas are exposed to attrition, assumptions were made that repainting is not required for all parts of the ferry. Areas initially painted but considered not in need of repaint were as followed: internal areas in hull other than hull bottom, internal hull bottom, Ballast tank, bilge tank, freshwater tank – ballast water tank, behind insulation, wheelhouse, behind insulation, fuel, lube oil and glycol tanks, waste oil tanks = 7458.2 l Paint needed: 18347.5 [l] – 7458.2 [l] = 10889.3 l Paint for maintenance during a life time: 10889.3 * 10 = 108893 l Re-calculated in kilograms: 145916.62 kg

Lighting 600 pcs. (Glamox, 2019a)

Median lifespan 70,000-90,000 h, use the lower median lifespan: Hours per functional unit = 3036524= 262,800 h 262,800/70,000 3.75 4 i.e. the lights needs to be changed in general 3 times á 200 units are needed for maintenance during a life time.

Battery 34 pcs. (Victron Energy, 2019)

Service life of Victron batteries is a function of average temperature and depth of discharge, where a high temperature has a negative effect on the battery life time. An average temperature of 20 ℃ gives a service life on 12 years, which been used in the calculation in this study, see Table L2. Based on this information: 30/12 = 2.5 ≈ 3 times new batteries are needed and new installed during construction, i.e. the batteries needs to be changed 2 times á 17 units is needed during maintenance.

118

Table R6. Transported material to Gullmarsleden Component Transport In SimaPro Transported

weight Unit Distance

[km] Result Unit Reference

(SimaPro) Motivation

Hull See compilation of distances in table R7 Engines From Volvo

Penta (Vara) to Gullmarsleden

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

10440 kg 128.75 1344150 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Transport of material was calculated based on identified required materials for maintenance. Way of transport and distances has been has for all components been calculated by SeaRates (2019) from same location used in construction phase for the different components but to Gullmarsleden, where maintenance of ferry is assumed to occur.

Paint From Dubai to Gullmarsleden

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

145.91662 ton 7129.29 1040281.9 tnkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Lighting From Glamox to Gullmarsleden

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

4380 kg 303.05 1327359 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Transport, freight, inland waterways, barge {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

4380 kg 731.35 3203313 kgkm

Battery From Haaksbergen to Gullmarsleden

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

2162 kg 1091.27 2359325.74 kgkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

119

Table R7. Table with information of transports for hull material during maintenance per functional unit Transport In SimaPro Transported

weight [tons] Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference Motivation

Transport from NLMK DanSteel A/S

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

19.49701 184.9 3604.9971 tkm Internal documents, part deliveries of hull material

Internal certification documents shows location for production of steel and aluminium plates. The total amount of material from these certification documents was considerably higher than reasonable compared to the known displacement lightweight ship of the ferry and not used in the modelling due to allocation problems. A percentage distribution based on the deliveries from the different producers was though calculated from the internal certification documents and considered to give a probable scenario of the distribution from where the material comes from. Suggested ways for transport were found at SeaRate (2019). Total with lorry: 93824.18859 tnkm Total transport over sea: 9370.651725 tnkm

Transport, freight, sea, transoceanic ship {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

257.43 5019.1153

Transport from SSAB

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

17.63254 504.54 8896.3217 tkm

Transport from Alex S.p.a. Aluminium Extrusion

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.4782566 2698.56 1290.6041 tkm

Transport from Alumeco A/S

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

3.517414 597.25 2100.7755 tkm

Transport from Extrusax

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.0736832 1648.07 121.4351 tkm

Transport from Alcomet

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.2839264 2728.24 774.6194 tkm

Transport from Sapa Profiles Kft.

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.2467201 1701.51 419.7967 tkm

Transport from S.C. Laminorul

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

18.4856 2692.31 49768.966 tkm

Transport Acciaerie Valbruna

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.7904443 1895.24 1498.0817 tkm

120

Transport from Aperam Genk

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

1.889991 1258.50 2378.5537 tkm

Transport from Losal

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

5.974574 2692.31 16085.405 tkm

Transport from CMC Poland

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

2.349299 1421.84 3340.3273 tkm

Transport from EAF

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.5437214 1445.74 786.0798 tkm

Transport from Severstal

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

5.061699 437.88 2216.4168 tkm

Transport, freight, sea, transoceanic ship {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

5.061699 857.75 4341.6723 tnkm

Transport from ArcelorMittal

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.3751274 1433 537.5576 tkm

Transport from UAB Serpantinas

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

0.0115 369.66 4.25109 tkm Transport of welding products from brand location: Panevezys, Lithuania. Suggested way of transport was found at SeaRate (2019). Transport, freight, sea, transoceanic

ship {GLO} | market for | Alloc Rec, S 0.0115 857.75 9.864125 tnkm

121

Appendix S. Transport of ferry to Fridhems shipyard Following appendix provides data and calculations for transport of ferry after operation to location of deconstruction. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table S1. Table over transports of ferry after operation to place of deconstruction

Transport In SimaPro Transported weight [ton]

Distance [km]

Result Unit Reference (SimaPro)

Motivation

From Gullmarsleden to Fridhems varv

Transport, freight, inland waterways, barge {RER} | processing | Alloc Rec, S

922 4.62 4268.518 tnkm Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Qualified guess. Fridhems shipyard is one of STA Road Ferries own shipyards, and thus this alternative is considered to be a reasonable assumption for location of deconstruction. Distance was calculated by Map developers (2019), see Figure S1.

Figure S1. Transport from Gullmarsleden to Fridhems shipyard for disposal.

122

Appendix T. Disassembly of Road Ferry Following appendix provides information of disassembly modelling. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table T1. End-of-life scenario referring to assembly “Construction of Road Ferry”

Process Disposal scenarios Sub-assembly Percentage Unit Reference Motivation Separation of sub-assembly

Created scenario ‘Disposal hull’

Hull 100 % Qualified guess

An overall disposal scenario for the ferry seen as one system was made. Waste scenarios were created for each of the analysed sub-systems and the mass percentage of these different components in relation to the total mass of the ferry as a whole was calculated. In the end-of-life scenario the waste from the whole life cycle was included.

Created scenario ‘Disposal engines’

Engines 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal heat pump system’

Heat pump system 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal lighting equipment’

Lighting equipment 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal cables’

Cables 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal battery’

Battery 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal propulsion system’

Propulsion system 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal insulation’

Insulation 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal windows’

Glass 100 % Qualified guess

Treatment of remaining waste

Pre-defined process Municipal solid waste (waste scenario) {SE} | treatment of municipal solid waste, incineration | Alloc Rec, S

100 % Qualified guess

As 100 % of each component in the product is treated in each created scenario no treatment of remaining waste is needed. This parameter is necessary to make the model work properly.

123

Table T2. End-of-life scenario referring to assembly “Maintenance of Road Ferry”

Process Disposal scenario Sub-assembly Percentage Unit Reference Motivation Seperation of sub-assembly

Created scenario ‘Disposal hull’

Hull 100 % Qualified guess

An overall disposal scenario for the ferry seen as one system was made. Waste scenarios were created for each of the analysed sub-systems and the mass percentage of these different components in relation to the total mass of the ferry as a whole was calculated. In the end-of-life scenario the waste from the whole life cycle was included.

Created scenario ‘Disposal engines’

Engines 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal lighting equipment’

Lighting equipment 100 % Qualified guess

Created scenario ‘Disposal battery’

Battery 100 % Qualified guess

Treatment of remaining waste

Pre-defined process Municipal solid waste (waste scenario) {SE} | treatment of municipal solid waste, incineration | Alloc Rec, S

100 % Qualified guess

As 100 % of each component in the product is treated in each created scenario no treatment of remaining waste is needed. This parameter is necessary to make the model work properly.

124

Appendix U. Disposal scenarios Following appendix provides information over each disposal scenario for all included components. All references are stated in the tables and a short motivation and reasoning behind the decisions related to each stage. Table U1. Disposal scenario referring to assembly hull

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro

Component Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Cutting disposal

Created process ‘Cutting disposal’

Inputs from technosphere: electricity/heat In the deconstruction plan for the ferry, needed processes are stated, where cutting is one energy demanding. The cutting process is assumed to demand the same amount of energy as for cutting in the production stage, but modified as the deconstruction is assumed to occur in Sweden and thus Swedish electricity mix is used. Energy need, see Appendix E: 8.5 MJ/m2 Total area of hull: 3192 m2

Electricity, medium voltage {SE} | market for | Alloc Rec, S

Electricity for cutting of hull

27,132 MJ (Kirs, 2017) Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Waste scenario for hull

Pre-defined process

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Due to the long time frame and the fact that Neptunus has long time left in operation phase, disposal scenarios are hard to estimate. For this project, system boundaries are set to where materials are considered to be available again on the market. Therefore, only transport to waste treatment facility is considered in this study as the component is assumed to be 100 % recycled.

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to waste treatment facility

296 kgkm Qualified guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Pre-defined process

Waste streams remaining after separation Empty data set in order to make the model run DummyWasteScenario 100 % Ecoinvent v3.3

(2016)

125

Table U2. Disposal scenario referring to assembly engine

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro Component Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Waste scenarios for engine

Pre-defined process

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Due to the long time frame and the fact that Neptunus has long time left in operation phase, disposal scenarios are hard to estimate. For this project, system boundaries are set to where materials are considered to be available again on the market. Therefore, only transport to waste treatment facility is considered in this study as the component is assumed to be 100 % recycled.

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to waste treatment facility

296 kgkm Qualified guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Pre-defined process

Waste streams remaining after separation Empty data set in order to make the model run DummyWasteScenario 100 % - Ecoinvent

v3.3 (2016)

Table U3. Disposal scenario referring to assembly heat pump system

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro Component Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Waste scenarios for heat pump

Pre-defined process

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Due to the long time frame and the fact that Neptunus has long time left in operation phase, disposal scenarios are hard to estimate. For this project, system boundaries are set to where materials are considered to be available again on the market. Therefore, only transport to waste treatment facility is considered in this study as the component is assumed to be 100 % recycled.

Transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry >32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to waste treatment facility

296 kgkm Qualified guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Pre-defined process

Waste streams remaining after separation Empty data set in order to make the model run DummyWasteScenario 100 % - Ecoinvent

v3.3 (2016)

126

Table U4. Disposal scenario referring to assembly lighting equipment

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro Component Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Waste scenarios for lighting equipment

Pre-defined process

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Due to the long time frame and the fact that Neptunus has long time left in operation phase, disposal scenarios are hard to estimate. For this project, system boundaries are set to where materials are considered to be available again on the market. Therefore, only transport to waste treatment facility is considered in this study as the component is assumed to be 100 % recycled.

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to waste treatment facility

296 kgkm Qualified guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Pre-defined process

Waste streams remaining after separation Empty data set in order to make the model run DummyWasteScenario Recyclable

materials in luminaries

100 % - Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Table U5. Disposal scenario referring to assembly cables

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro Component Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Waste scenarios for cables

Pre-defined process

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Transport to potential waste treatment facility, distance suggested by SeaRates (2019).

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to waste treatment facility

296 kgkm Qualified guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Created process ‘Waste scenario cables’

Waste streams remaining after separation To make the used material available on the market again, an additional waste treatment was considered necessary within the system boundaries of this study

Used cable {GLO}| market for | Alloc Rec, S

Cables 100 % Qualified guess Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

127

Table U6. Battery recycling per kg recycled battery

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro

Component Total Amount

Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Waste scenario for batteries

Created Process ‘Waste scenario battery’

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Due to the long time frame and the fact that Neptunus has long time left in operation phase, disposal scenarios are hard to estimate. For this project, system boundaries are set to where materials are considered to be available again on the market. Therefore, only transport to waste treatment facility is considered in this study as the component is assumed to be 100 % recycled.

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to treatment facility

639,952 kgkm Qualified guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Waste streams remaining after separation Empty data set in order to make the model run DummyWasteScenario

Battery recycling

100 % - Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Table U7. Disposal scenario referring to assembly propulsion system

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro

Component Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Waste scenarios for propulsion system

Pre-defined process

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Due to the long time frame and the fact that Neptunus has long time left in operation phase, disposal scenarios are hard to estimate. For this project, system boundaries are set to where materials are considered to be available again on the market. Therefore, only transport to waste treatment facility is considered in this study as the component is assumed to be 100 % recycled.

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to waste treatment facility

296 kgkm Qualified guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Pre-defined process

Waste streams remaining after separation Empty data set in order to make the model run DummyWasteScenario

Recyclable materials in engine

100 % - Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

128

Table U8. Disposal scenario referring to assembly insulation

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro Component Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Waste scenarios for insulation

Pre-defined process

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Transport to potential waste treatment facility, distance suggested by SeaRates (2019).

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to waste treatment facility

296 kgkm Qualified guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Pre-defined process

Waste streams remaining after separation According to reference, grinded mineral wool is possible to use as an additive for the brick production. Therefore insultation used in construction is considered to have a second value on a market and thus meaningful to recycle.

Waste mineral wool {Europe without Switzerland}| treatment of waste mineral wool, collection for final disposal | Alloc Rec, S

Waste treatment of insulation

100 % Qualified guess (German Institute Construction and Environment (IBU) e.V., 2008)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Table U9. Disposal scenario referring to assembly glass

Process Process in SimaPro

Component in SimaPro Component Amount Unit Reference (information)

Reference (process)

Motivation

Waste scenarios for insulation

Pre-defined process

Inputs from technosphere: materials/fuels Transport to potential waste treatment facility, distance suggested by SeaRates (2019).

Transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 {RER} | transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Alloc Rec, S

Transport to waste treatment facility

296 kgkm Qualfied guess (Stena Recycling, 2019)

Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

Pre-defined process

Waste streams remaining after separation To make the used material available on the market again, an additional waste treatment was considered necessary within the system boundaries of this study.

Waste glass {CH}| market for waste glass | Alloc Rec, S

Waste treatment of windows

100 % Qualified guess Ecoinvent v3.3 (2016)

129

Appendix V – Baseline: Resulting absolute values 1. Baseline - Total life cycle Table V1. Resulting environmental loading per functional unit

Impact category Unit Total

Construction of Road Ferry

Daily operation

Maintenance of Road Ferry

End-of-life Road ferry

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 22227,65104 836424,9696 11255,26146 115,8704859 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 12503,56791 151760,6227 3476,957934 24,60279131 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 2290787,749 137445088,4 1491018,208 30251,34527 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 1569,45864 6852,805112 992,3952066 4,284928247 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional) kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 0,147964339 9,354607195 0,087774244 0,005124818 Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 98,37090086 4,776037624 8,216354732 0,050312566 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 26099685,29 770707335,5 18801640,93 407027,5965 Table V2. CED characterization results, absolute values

Impact category Unit Total

Construction of Road Ferry

Daily operation

Maintenance of Road Ferry

End-of-life Road ferry

Non renewable, fossil MJ 816081484 26117412,3 770752463 18804336,3 407271,725 Non-renewable, nuclear MJ 7169570,77 1807509,56 4942966,33 365559,863 53535,0172 Non-renewable, biomass MJ 6774,79544 2065,59712 4279,6855 413,30229 16,2105262 Renewable, biomass MJ 1531971,99 559172,01 860925,984 100882,007 10991,9908 Renewable, wind, solar, geothe MJ 1861025,8 360349,132 304130,499 1194654,59 1891,58198 Renewable, water MJ 3137954,89 1560723,48 1341205,86 216231,439 19794,1075

130

2. Baseline – Construction phase Table V3. Resulting environmental loading per functional unit

Impact category Unit Total Hull Engines

Heat pump system

Lighting equipment Cables Battery

Propulsion system Insulation Windows

Transport, construction Painting

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 22227,651 8286,94256 104,802739 151,790135 58,4641517 1603,01708 23,3780754 9522,30665 0,00103007 26,7956898 1043,85375 1406,29918

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 12503,5679 4926,30321 36,5741305 97,9370416 26,4282105 1289,57164 14,1569183 5435,87453 57,974675 3,41874251 197,372767 417,95605

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 2290787,75 1668527,69 26094,4904 32009,936 11841,0268 28740,2572 2835,42313 131000,846 79012,9923 3068,06032 159892,914 147764,11 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 1569,45864 850,383895 12,9949833 16,4083678 3,55754217 72,4257114 1,06920775 431,011968 14,493669 0,93695814 28,8507304 137,325607

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 0,14796434 0,09927913 0,00184318 0,00195195 0,00048515 0,00151444 0,00025207 0,00811277 0,00483126 0,0003393 0,02842083 0,00093425

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 98,3709009 29,3645727 0,25654069 0,39975856 0,08303129 8,78186248 1,8095102 57,3869927 4,2351E-07 0,00856125 0,28007052 0 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 26099685,3 17934959,2 253032,223 332108,955 134075,817 424668,971 37542,0316 1365422,2 1393806,62 35868,5265 2459829,53 1728371,2

131

Table V4. CED characterization results, absolute values

Impact category Unit Total Hull Engines

Heat pump system

Lighting equipment Cables Battery

Propulsion system Insulation Windows

Transport, construction Painting

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 26117412,3 17950469,2 253297,77 332263,575 134160,645 424916,34 37550,595 1366498,12 1393806,62 35892,3357 2460185,89 1728371,2

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 1807509,56 1444394,08 49461,086 22019,4907 14925,328 41469,8552 2912,9988 159073,406 2,43760966 2185,32192 71065,5611 0

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 2065,59712 986,657075 10,6564516 469,895702 11,4306596 37,6768875 1,94604012 174,250839 0,00020021 0,95093107 372,132335 0 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 559172,01 400512,625 12046,7349 9278,06984 3630,96672 23177,4837 1421,15039 93083,5976 0,05299063 1010,36167 15010,9673 0

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 360349,132 100309,029 2098,97183 1662,21315 958,744981 2186,29678 377,437035 11004,4552 41065,2267 125,374273 3138,61384 197422,77

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 1560723,48 1257162,1 24388,5591 21549,4249 6475,18585 38027,543 830,879753 189611,288 0,50966871 616,781817 22061,2025 0 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 26117412,3 17950469,2 253297,77 332263,575 134160,645 424916,34 37550,595 1366498,12 1393806,62 35892,3357 2460185,89 1728371,2

132

Appendix W. Sensitivity analysis 1. Operation hours Table W1. Life cycle

Impact category Unit Total, baseline Total, new Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 627674,9794 -27,85542033 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 123794,0837 -26,21015746 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 101433312,4 -28,19243806 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 7433,387533 -21,08045633 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 6,885033127 -28,24705096

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 110,0297795 -1,242062202 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 592708179,3 -27,36559026

Table W2. Daily operation

Impact category Unit Daily operation New, Daily operation Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 836424,9696 594076,1964 -28,97435897 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 151760,6227 107788,9551 -28,97435897 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 137445088,4 97621255,08 -28,97435897 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 6852,805112 4867,248759 -28,97435897 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,354607195 6,644169726 -28,97435897

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 4,776037624 3,392211338 -28,97435897 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 770707335,5 547399825,5 -28,97435897

133

2. Sensitivity analysis – Weight of hull material Table W3. Life cycle

Impact category Unit Total life cycle Total, changed hull material

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 874036,541 0,461227448 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 169686,768 1,145058913 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 142019541,4 0,539721876 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 9767,956047 3,70542775 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 9,637898489 0,442165839

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 133,8782158 20,16325551 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 823927683,1 0,969588443

Table W4. Construction phase

Impact category Unit Construction phase

Construction phase, changed hull material

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 22227,65104 25845,12797 16,27467031

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 12503,56791 14244,162 13,92077922

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 2290787,749 2977127,198 29,96084861 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 1569,45864 1885,644492 20,14617295

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 0,147964339 0,185182642 25,15356277

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 98,37090086 118,7801267 20,74721864 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 26099685,29 33179244,73 27,1250759

134

3. Sensitivity analysis – Propulsion system Table W5. Life cycle

Impact category Unit Total life cycle Total, changed hull material

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 869261,7375 -0,087585556 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 167330,8376 -0,259238658 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 141246614,6 -0,007455244 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 9384,454631 -0,36616903 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 9,594811353 -0,00687036

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 106,822547 -4,120734399 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 815905600,2 -0,013491045

Table W6. Construction phase

Impact category Unit Construction phase

Construction phase, changed hull material

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 22227,65104 21465,8665 -3,427193182

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 12503,56791 12068,698 -3,477966577

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 2290787,749 2280307,68 -0,457487556 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 1569,45864 1534,97768 -2,196997041

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 0,147964339 0,14731532 -0,438632009

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 98,37090086 93,7799414 -4,666989344 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 26099685,29 25990451,5 -0,418525311

135

4. Sensitivity analysis – Paint Table W7. Life cycle

Impact category Unit Total life cycle Total life cycle, 10 % more paint used

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 870999,7243 0,112177585 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 168055,8128 0,17289673 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 141359694 0,072596888 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 9514,247857 1,011832878 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 9,596118969 0,006757071

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 111,4136058 0 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 817215178,9 0,146993449

Table W8. Construction phase

Impact category Unit Construction phase

Construction phase, 10 % more paint used

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 22227,65104 22368,28096 0,632680069

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 12503,56791 12545,36352 0,334269428

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 2290787,749 2305564,16 0,645036233 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 1569,45864 1583,191201 0,874987102

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 0,147964339 0,148057764 0,063140531

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 98,37090086 98,37090086 0 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 26099685,29 26272522,41 0,662219171

136

Table W9. Maintenance phase

Impact category Unit Maintenance phase

Maintenance phase, 10 % more paint used

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 11255,26146 12090,60317 7,421788611

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 3476,957934 3725,223827 7,140319165

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 1491018,208 1578790,09 5,886707548 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 992,3952066 1073,966617 8,219649773

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 0,087774244 0,088329191 0,632243889

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 8,216354732 8,216354732 0 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 18801640,93 19828293,42 5,460440894

137

5. Sensitivity analysis – Insulation Table W10. Life cycle

Impact category Unit Total life cycle Total, changed hull material

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 870023,7526 0 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 167783,6188 0,010650279 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 141281497,1 0,017239082 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 9423,410766 0,047424425 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 9,596959556 0,015517321

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 111,4136058 0 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 816445254,2 0,052641753

Table W11. Construction phase

Impact category Unit Construction phase

Construction phase, changed hull material

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 22227,65104 22227,65104 0

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 12503,56791 12521,43543 0,142899372

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 2290787,749 2315139,183 1,063015749 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 1569,45864 1573,92552 0,284612789

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 0,147964339 0,149453299 1,006296524

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 98,37090086 98,37090086 0 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 26099685,29 26529250,25 1,645862604

138

Appendix X. Scenario analysis 1. Scenario: Change of hull material Table X1. Life cycle

Impact category Unit Total life cycle Total, changed hull material

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 863206,8102 -0,783535213 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 163132,4093 -2,761792559 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 139877579,8 -0,976634412 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 8651,156576 -8,151522292 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 9,517780009 -0,809658961

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 93,85085321 -15,76356177 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 801288580,7 -1,804758013

Table X2. Construction phase

Impact category Unit Construction phase

Construction phase, changed hull material

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 22227,65104 16030,43062 -27,88068074

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 12503,56791 8291,438788 -33,68741749

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 2290787,749 1036636,936 -54,74757815 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 1569,45864 871,4701757 -44,473199

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 0,147964339 0,077336532 -47,73299251

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 98,37090086 82,40476216 -16,23055046 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 26099685,29 12711404,8 -51,29671237

139

2. Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biodiesel Table X3. Total life cycle, biodiesel scenario

Impact category Unit Total life cycle (baseline)

Total life cycle (biodiesel scenario)

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 477096,3668 -45,1628343

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 371884,7531 121,6690535

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 32488600,77 -77,00038422 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 10134,82418 7,600430656

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 3,536084035 -63,14840424

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 237,4362699 113,1124545 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 307292647,8 -62,34231133

Table X4. Daily operation, biodiesel scenario

Impact category Unit Daily operation (baseline)

Daily operation (biodiesel scenario)

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 836424,9696 443497,5839 -46,97700332 Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 151760,6227 355879,6244 134,5006354 Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 137445088,4 28676543,46 -79,13599984 Photochemical oxidation kg C2H4 eq 6852,805112 7568,68541 10,44652937 Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,354607195 3,295220634 -64,77435594

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 4,776037624 130,7987017 2638,64471 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 770707335,5 261984294 -66,00729201

140

3. Scenario: Alternative fuel - Ethanol Table X5. Total life cycle, ethanol scenario

Impact category Unit Total life cycle (baseline)

Total life cycle (ethanol scenario)

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 173140,0474 -80,09938845

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 38984,62118 -76,76246739

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 15570122,36 -88,97746214 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 9720,43718 3,200924623

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 1,849924641 -80,72085551

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 186,2052391 67,12971252 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 198604241,2 -75,66171291

Table X6. Daily operation, ethanol scenario

Impact category Unit Daily operation (baseline)

Daily operation (ethanol scenario)

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 836424,9696 139541,2644 -83,31694181

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 151760,6227 22979,49254 -84,85806652

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 137445088,4 11758065,05 -91,44526356 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 6852,805112 7154,298406 4,399560314

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,354607195 1,609061239 -82,79926451

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 4,776037624 79,5676709 1565,976635 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 770707335,5 153295887,4 -80,10971476

141

4. Scenario: Alternative fuel - Biomethanol Table X7. Total life cycle, methanol scenario

Impact category Unit Total life cycle (baseline)

Total life cycle (biomethanol scenario)

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 870023,7526 92814,12127 å

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 167765,7513 54350,0618 -67,60360123

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 141257145,7 12846454,25 -90,90562521 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 9418,943886 15404,80261 63,5512728

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,595470596 2,549506635 -73,43010319

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 111,4136058 196,0839311 75,99639623 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 816015689,3 188742937,8 -76,87018273

Table X8. Daily operation, biomethanol scenario

Impact category Unit Daily operation (baseline)

Daily operation (biomethanol scenario)

Percental change [%]

Acidification (fate not incl.) kg SO2 eq 836424,9696 59215,33829 -92,92042437

Eutrophication kg PO4--- eq 151760,6227 38344,93316 -74,73327897

Global warming (GWP100a) kg CO2 eq 137445088,4 9034396,947 -93,42690448 Photochemical oxidation

kg C2H4 eq 6852,805112 12838,66384 87,349029

Ozone layer depletion (ODP) (optional)

kg CFC-11 eq 9,354607195 2,308643234 -75,32078914

Abiotic depletion (optional) kg Sb eq 4,776037624 89,44636293 1772,815291 Abiotic depletion, fossil fuels (opt.) MJ 770707335,5 143434584 -81,38922813

TRITA TRITA-ABE-MBT-19525

www.kth.se