Introduction
When looked at from a life cycle perspective, international shipping is an activity that causes enormous damage to the environment. Furthermore, international shipping is widely accepted since it’s the cheapest mode of transport, large manufacturers greatly depend on these shipping lines. Consequently, the wide use of shipping lines globally leads to massive environmental pollution not only during their operation time but also including the times these vessels are being made (Therivel, 2004). During their manufacture, large quantities of raw materials are being extracted from the environment; moreover, the processes involved also pollute the environment (Schryver, 2010).
Guinée, et, al (2002), shipping activities greatly contribute to air pollution due to their high global demands. Nonetheless, it has been reported that most sea lines opt to low quality fuels to make maximum profits, these fuels have high carbon contents that impact negatively upon release to the environment. Studies have it that approximately 70% of the World’s shipping emissions occur within a 400km proximity to human settlement, therefore, it is evident that shipping activities contribute highly to air pollution (In Sarkar, In Datta, In Mukherjee, & In Hannigan, 2016). A more particular case is the case of Mediterranean Sea, research shows that air pollution resulting from shipping activities in the sea contribute to more than 15% Sulphur deposits in Italy, approximately 10% in Cyprus and 56% in Malta (EC-JRC, 2011).
However, oil spillage is another factor that greatly pollutes the environment. Over the years, several oil tankers have capsized into the high seas consequently spilling oil into sea water (Horne, Grant, & Verghese, 2009). The primary objective of this study is to give tangible evidence on how air pollution can be a major threat to both the ecosystem and human health while looking at things from a life cycle point of view (Zbicinski, 2006). Studies have revealed that shipping pollutions is thought to causing approximately 60,000 premature deaths every single year. Shipping pollution significantly contribute to current lifestyle diseases like cancer and respiratory system infections (EC-JRC, 2011).
Literature Review
A life cycle approach is a system that deals with the transition to a modern environmental protection methods. The traditional methods of protecting the environment are seen be contributing minimally towards environmental sustenance. The life cycle approach therefore, strives to revive the dwindling efforts to combat environmental pollution in more effective way (Schryver, 2010). From the provisions of a life cycle approach strategy, the life cycle of a ship does not only include its operation time but also include the time raw materials are extracted to build the ship up to the final disposal of the waste products that originate from either parts or the whole ship.
Several writers have proposed particular ways of dealing with air pollution even though they are quite impractical. Shipping pollution is on the rise and if proper measures are not taken, it will finally get out of hands; the resulting phenomenon will be loss of more lives and increase in human health problems. Besides, certain studies show the consequences that originate from shipping pollution from a life cycle perspective. According to Mahindrakar, et, al (2008), the most conspicuous impacts of air pollution resulting from ships emission are significant damage to human health. These types of damages are denoted by premature deaths; furthermore, the number is continuously rising.
Several writers have struggled to come up with solutions to shipping air pollutions; however, there are several businesses that depend on shipping lines to carry out their trading activities. It’s therefore, necessary to find a sustainable method that would at least reduce environmental consequences of shipping (Canfield, 2005). Pollution resulting from shipping activities is something that is very difficult to control, nonetheless, it pose a very big threat to humanity (Mahindrakar, Das, Asolekar & Kura, 2008). What shipping activities take from the environment is enormous and can hardly be replaced. Building a ship is quite involving, materials used and the processes involved are some of the things that pollution the environment, notwithstanding its operations.
Methodology/ Theoretical Framework
The research design for this study relied on mixed method approach though life cycle assessment (LCA) approach (Creswell, 2013). However, the major guidelines were taken from quantitative research techniques. Several scientific methods relating to quantitative research methods were put into practice to unearth whether it’s true that sea transport leads to environmental pollution. Consequently, data collection models and hypotheses were drawn from various studies to find out the actual truth. However, particular aspects of qualitative research methods were also conjoined, this research applied both quantitative and qualitative techniques; a mixed research.
Studies were conducted on places that were thought to be hard hit by the impacts of environmental pollution. A ship’s lifecycle was divided into three major categories, i.e. shipbuilding, recycling and maintenance, all the three categories were keenly put into review. From the survey, shipbuilding was found to contribute to 40% air pollution, maintenance 35% and recycling 25%. Moreover, questionnaires were given out to individuals occupying these areas, 87% indicated that they were indeed unsatisfied with environmental pollution resulting from shipping activities (Van, 2012).
The bar graph below shows the extent at which a ships life cycle massively contribute to environmental pollution.
Some of the crucial information collected from a ship’s life cycle in relation to air pollution included the environmental release and the types of material used while building the ship. These are some of the core information needed establish the impacts that come as a result of continued use of sea transport.
The research had several limitations as it was entirely dependent on written sources. Some of the information obtained secondary sources also depended on other books to get the information (Mitchell, & Jolley, 2013). Furthermore, there was a very limited information retrieval from the sources that were seen to be of interest to the study. Moreover, errors of commissions and omissions must have also been committed during the research.
References
Ariwa, E. (2014). Green technology applications for enterprise and academic innovation.
Bolster, W. J. (2012). The mortal sea: Fishing the Atlantic in the Age of Sail. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Canfield, D. E. (2005). Aquatic geomicrobiology. Amsterdam [u.a.: Elsevier.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.
De Schryver A. M., (2010). Value Choices in Life Cycle Impact Assessments. PhD –Thesis Radboud University Press, Nijmegen, ISBN: 978-94-91066-02-3
EC-JRC, (2011). Recommendations Based on Existing Environmental Impact Assessment Models and Factors for Life Cycle Assessment in European Context ILCD Handbook. International Reference Life Cycle Data System. European Union EUR24571EN. ISBN978-92-79-17451-3.
Goonetilleke, A., Yigitcanlar, T., Ayoko, G. A., & Egodawatta, P. (2014). Sustainable urban water environment: Climate, pollution and adaptation.
Grob, G. R., Conference Clean Energy 2000. <2000, Genève>., & World Circle of the Consensus. (2002). Blueprint for the clean, sustainable energy age: Protection of health, biosphere & climate by clean energy; conclusions and recommendations from the Milennium Conference; Geneva January 2000. Zürich: Verl. Eco-Performance.
Guinée, J. B., & Lindeijer, E. (2002). Handbook on life cycle assessment: Operational guide to the ISO standards. Dordrecht [u.a.: Kluwer.
Horne, R., Grant, T., & Verghese, K. (2009). Life cycle assessment: Principles, practice, and prospects. Collingwood, Vic: CSIRO Pub.
Huse, I., Aanondsen, S., Ellingsen, H., Engås, A., Furevik, D. M., Graham, N., Isaksen, B., Soldal, A. V. (2003). A desk-study of diverse methods of fishing when onsidered in perspective of responsible fishing, and the effect on the ecosystem caused by fishing activity. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.
In Sarkar, D., In Datta, R., In Mukherjee, A., & In Hannigan, R. (2016). An integrated approach to environmental management.
Kameyama, M, Hiraoka K, Sakurai A, Naruse T, Tauchi H., (2011). Development of LCA
Land, Oregon, USA.
Laurel, B. (2003). Design research: Methods and perspectives. Cambridge, Mass. ; London, England: MIT Press.
Lovelock, J. (2000). Gaia: A new look at life on Earth. Oxford [u.a.: Oxford University Press.
Mahindrakar A. B, S. Das, S. R Asolekar, & B. Kura, (2008). Environmental Issues in the Ship Breaking Industry in India. In: proceedings of A&WMA’s Annual Conference in Port
Mason, P. (2015). Tourism impacts, planning and management.
Mitchell, M. L., & Jolley, J. M. (2013). Research design explained. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Morton, B., University, & International workshop reunion conference. (2003). Perspectives on marine environmental change in Hong Kong and Southern China, 1977 - 2001: Proceedings of an international workshop reunion conference, Hong Kong, 21 - 26 October 2001. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Musin, V. A., & Trunk, A. (2004). International commercial arbitration and international maritime law from a German and Russian perspective =: Internationale Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit und Internationales Seerecht im deutsch-russischen Vergleich. Münster, Westf: LIT.
Nicolopoulou-Stamati, P., Hens, L., & Howard, V. (2005). Environmental health impacts of transport and mobility. Dordrecht: Springer.
Pérez-Arriaga, I. J. (2013). Regulation of the power sector. London: Springer.
Pollution abstracts. (1970). Bethesda, Md., etc: Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, etc..
Reijnders, L., & Huijbregts, M. A. J. (2009). Biofuels for road transport: A seed to wheel perspective. London: Springer.
Remmen, A., Jensen, A. A., Frydendal, J., United Nations Environment Programme., & SETAC (Society). (2007). Life cycle management: A business guide to sustainability. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme.
Richards, D. J. (n.d.). The industrial green game: Implications for environmental design and management. Japan; pp. 159-162
Siemons, R. V. (2002). A development perspective for biomass-fuelled electricity generation technologies: Economic technology assessment in view of sustainability.
Software for Ships and LCI Analysis Based on Actual Shipbuilding and Operation. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on EcoBalance; Tsukuba Publishers,
Therivel, R. (2004). Strategic environmental assessment in action. London: Earthscan
United States. (1994). Transportation statistics annual report. Washington, D.C: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Dept. of Transportation.
Van, A. J. G. (2012). The story of life & the environment: An African perspective. Cape Town: Struik Nature.
Weston, D. P., University of Washington., Washington (State)., & Washington (State). (1986). The environmental effects of floating mariculture in Puget Sound.
Zbicinski, I. (2006). Product design and life cycle assessment. Uppsala: Baltic University Press.
