Abstract: Analysing the possible ways to solve the fundamental problem, the author emphasizes the importance of the largest land mass of the globe – Eurasia and transport logistics through it. The study provides an overview of potential CO2 mitigation targets for international railway and maritime transport. The author analyses three possible ways of developing Eurasian transhipment lines in accordance with green standards. The main problems and opportunities of railway roads, Southern warm congested waters are considered. Special attention is paid to the development of Northern waters transhipment lines between the most-producing countries of G-7 and advanced OECD markets.
Today the whole world is aware of the global problem of climate warming. Due to the increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases and harmful emissions into the atmosphere, this problem is getting worse every year. Air pollution occurs due to the development of industry, increased transport, and overall economic growth in countries around the world.
Thinking on the question how we can answer the fundamental challenge of global warming, we should understand that the most inhabitant part of the world and the largest landmass of the Globe is Eurasia. Thus, it is the biggest producer of CO2 and, hence, the most polluted part of the world. Also, important to underline that the biggest countries-producers (China) and countries-consumers (West Europe), producing the biggest economic output, are located on the edge of the Eurasia. These countries, which are states of G-7 (Atlantic states and other European countries) and other advanced OECD economies, drive world’s economies and may play crucial role in improving ecology and environmental standards.
It is equally important to emphasize that the most ambitious logistics and infrastructure project of today – “One Belt – One Road” – runs through the vast expanses of Eurasia. Transportation logistics between Far East and Western Europe is vital for world’s economic development, but today we do not have reliable technologies and transport lines. Due to this it is necessary to think on few aspects, which may determine the development of environmentally friendly economies in future:
– reliable transportation (safe and environmentally friendly) ;
– cheapest modes and transhipment lines;
– fastest modes of transportation
Transportation aspect
The most reliable mode of the transportation is railway. It has certain advantages (compared to air and maritime transport) in the following areas: regularity (rhythmicity), reliability (guaranteed on-schedule delivery and cargo preservation) and the ability to deliver the cargo to any destination.
When comparing cargo transportation from the Far East to West Europe by sea and by rail, the delivery time is often the key argument in favour of the railway. At the same time, the amount of 14 – 15 days is often mentioned. In practice, it takes longer: 35 – 50 days by sea, 28 – 32 days by rail, 6 days by plane and 4 days by roads (See Figure 1). This difference in numbers is caused by the need to form a train, delays at some stations, etc.
Figure 1. Transhipment lines from Far East to Western Europe
Source: IFIMES, 2021
Underlining the reliability of the railway transhipment lines in terms of friendly environmental standards it is assumed that carrying a TEU between the Far East and West Europe using diesel trains would result in emissions of around 0.7 tonnes of greenhouse gas emission. However, the emissions from electric trains could be lower, possibly even falling to zero if they were powered entirely by renewable sources. This suggests that, by using railway mode, the Eurasian transhipment lines are likely to be beneficial to the environment.
While in theory, the implementation of railway electrification and the use of renewable energy sources can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, perhaps even to zero, in practice this process can take decades that our planet is unlikely to have.
This fact makes us think about other possible modes of transportation that are both “convenient” (speed, regularity, and accuracy of delivery), and beneficial to the environment.
The cheapest mode of transportation is by the sea, but it also has some pros and cons. Thus, the warm waters (red) shipping line from Far East to the port of Rotterdam in Netherlands today has great logistics prospects. Currently, 80% of cargo from China to Europe goes through the Atlantic Ocean to the ports of Northern Europe. The warm waters shipping line through the Arabian sea and the Suez Canal to the Balkans reduces the transport time by 7 – 10 days: this is so far the shortest sea route from Far East to Europe (however, to use it to its full capacity, CEE countries need to build the transport infrastructure that the region has a huge need for. This is especially true of the Balkan Peninsula and Ukraine, which are gradually entering a period of stable development after riots and wars that caused serious damage to infrastructure and the economy).
Another significant reason that slows down the speed of transportation, and thus increases CO2 emissions and reduces the level of „convenience” of warm waters transhipment lines – is the high level of congestion in reservoirs. The low cost and the higher degree of safety compared to transportation by land, has led to an increased number of commercial fleets over the past few decades. Thus, the biggest challenge is the problem of the high level of congestion in warm waters. Currently there are several maritime zones of bottlenecks (see Figure 2):
Figure 2. Main maritime shipping routes
Source: Dept. Of Global Studies and Geography, Hofstra University, 2018
- The Straits of Malacca and Singapore (hereinafter SOMS) is the second most important global chokepoint, with over 16 million barrels per day (120,000 ships passes this route each year). It is a vital strategic region for seaborne trade since it is the shortest route between the Pacific and Indian Oceans. This narrow, 550-mile strait is also a major route for oil transportation, hence creating a danger of potential oil spills or collisions, significantly damaging the biodiversity and the marine environment. Moreover, the SOMS is polluted not only by the oil and ships, but also by enormous noise, influencing the marine bio-life. The transhipment line in addition is not considered as a safe pass, since it is beset with challenges, natural (during frequent squalls from the Indian Ocean, visibility can decrease considerably to make it difficult for mariners to navigate) and man-made (piracy).
- The Phillips Channel in the Singapore Strait is just 2.7km wide making it another maritime zone of bottlenecks and potential oil spills. With so many vessels in the crowded Singapore Strait, there is often an increase of incidents.
- From the Straits of Malacca and Singapore, ships make their way to the South China Sea, another zone of unstable waters in the South – East of the Indian ocean. The South China Sea is a prominent shipping passage with $5.3 trillion (nearly one-third of all global maritime trade) worth of trade cruising through its waters every year. Since this zone has emerged as one of the most dangerous flashpoints in the Indo – Pacific over the last decade, the transhipment here is rather unsafe, not mentioning the ecological disasters which are emerging currently there.
- The Strait of Bab-El-Mandeb, one of the World’s Most Dangerous Straits (situated in the high conflict zone between Yemen and Somalia), is also the shortest trade route between the Mediterranean region, the Indian Ocean, and the rest of East Asia. Oil-rich Arabian Gulf nations rely heavily on it: approximately 57 giant oil vessels from these countries pass through the strait each day, over 21.000 each year. This fact makes the straight not only the zone of interests of main powers (and hence high tension in the region), but a big threat to the environment (oil spills).
- The Strait of Hormuz is a strategically important strait or narrow strip of water that links the Persian Gulf with the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Oman. As one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, is also one of the most essential ones, due to the amount of oil tankers that navigate these waters daily. Around one third of the world’s oil is transported through this strait, making it essential not only for trade, but for the global economy. The same fact is making this route one of the most dangerous to the environment, considering existent oil spills or collisions.
- The Suez Canal (Including Strait of Gubal) provides the shortest route between the Atlantic and Indian oceans (saves 7000 Km of extra travel). The 120-mile pass goes between Israel and Egypt and passes from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea. 100 boats travel the canal daily and 3.9 million oil barrels travelled daily. Thus Around 8% of global sea-borne trade takes place through it. Despite the projects of Canal’s extension, it’ s waters are still congested, making the usage less safe, extending the time, and raising the costs of transhipments.
- Connecting the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea, the Strait of Gibraltar (including 20 nm either side of Europa Point) is one of the most used shipping routes in the world. The strait is only seven nautical miles (13 kilometres) across at its narrowest and 23.7 nautical miles (44 kilometres) at its widest. Approximately 300 ships cross it every day, about one ship every five minutes, which causes a high amplitude internal wave, upwelling of nutrient-rich water and affecting bio-life, not mentioning the noise pollution and heavy maritime traffic.
- The Bosporus and Dardanelles Straits separate the Sea of Marmara from the Aegean and Black Seas. Both straights are on the Europe – Asia boundary and lie within Turkey. The Bosporus is located on the northern edge of the Maramara and southwestern edge of the Black Sea. Turkish Straits provide the only access between the Black Sea and the Aegean Sea. The Dardanelles, on the southern tip of the Marmara and north-eastern coast of the Aegean Sea (which is connected to the Mediterranean) is wider than its northern counterpart. More than 40,000 vessels are passing through these waters per year, transporting almost 650 million tons of cargo. Located in the conflict of the power’s interests, this zone has been always considered vulnerable in terms of safety, not mentioning significant damaging of local maritime bio life.
Thus, it can be traced that the current sea arteries of warm waters are not just seriously congested, but also dangerous not only for the ecology and because of security reasons (robbery, piracy etc), but also for the stable development of trade and economy. The consequences of these dangers may be fatal in few years, unless the measurements of improving the maritime transhipment infrastructure are not taken.
Thus, the cheapest in the cost, this transhipment line is not beneficial in terms of second criteria – timeframe (See Figure 1).
Another shipping line (cold water – blue line), which arose because of the rapid melting of the Arctic ice cap, opens prospects for the reduction of transport waterways in areas free of ice. Thus, it is another alternative to the main transcontinental routes that pass-through Eurasia, namely land rail (green line), air (white line) and warm southern waters of Eurasia and further to Africa through the Suez Canal (red shipping line). There are basically three possible routes, each of significance:
- the Northwest Passage, connecting the American Continent and Far East Asia;
- the Northern Sea Route, offering a shorter way from Europe to Asia along the Russian Arctic coastline; and
- the Arctic Bridge, connecting Canada and Russia (See Figure 3).
Geographically the position of the North waterways is very beneficial. The Northwest Passage connects the Atlantic and Pacific along the northern coast of North America through the Arctic waters from the Davis straits and Baffin Bay all the way to the Bering Sea shortens the distance between Far East Asia and the American East coast (via Panama) by approximately 7,000 kilometres.
Figure 3. Northern shipping. Major transport routes through the Arctic
Source: Centre Port Canada, 2008.
The Northeast Passage, which connects the Atlantic coast of Western and Northern Europe with the Pacific coast of Northeast Asia via the Russian Arctic coastline, is cutting the distance between the edges of two continents, making it shorter by about 40% in comparison to the traditional, warm seas transport routes via the Suez or Panama Canal.
As it is highlighted in the analysis entitled “IFIMES for the Global Greening Economy (A Brief Impact Study)”, the Arctic Bridge is a seasonal route which shortens the connection between the North American and European continents via the Arctic Ocean. Observation shows that the transhipment route between the North Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean straight over the Central Arctic Ocean (the so-called Arctic Bridge) might be in reach earlier than expected due to climate change. In this case Iceland’s strategic position will change dramatically and could turn the island into an economic hub – a power base for transportation-related services, bringing along a whole new range of economic activities to the Europe.
Thus, in terms of logistics, the cold waters shipping line (blue – Northern sea or Arctic passage) will allow to deliver cargo to Europe by sea faster than the 48 days (that it takes on average) to travel from the Northern ports of the Far East to Rotterdam via the Suez canal, considering that the passage of a cargo ship from Shanghai to Hamburg along the North sea route is 2.8 thousand miles shorter than the route through Suez canal. (i.e., in 2019 the Russian Arctic gas tanker “Christophe de Margerie” reached South Korea from Norway without an icebreaker escort in only 15 days) (See Figure 1).
Another advantage, which play into the hands of the blue transhipment routes is the decrease of using of harmful to the environment material – cement. Building new land infrastructure (especially roads) requires cement, a material that contributes more than 6 per cent of global carbon emissions. Shifting the transportation mode to the sea, therefore, will reduce the amount of roads constructions on the land.
In addition to the time criterion, cold water shipping line is beneficial in terms of capability. It is usually characterized as the shortest sea route between Europe and Asia, the safest (i.e., the problem of Somali pirates) and has no restrictions on the size of the ship, unlike the route through the Suez Canal. Thus, the Arctic route will allow to deliver cargo to Europe faster by sea, reducing the route by 20 – 30%, and hence being more environment friendly (by using less fuel and decreasing CO2 emission) and saving human resources. Nevertheless, the capitalizing on that opportunity requires much work in terms of improved navigation procedure and installation of safety-related infrastructure.
Energy aspect
But the shortening of the transhipment routes and hence slight decreasing of CO2 emissions will not solve the problem completely. The global environmental issue of CO2 consumption should be treated starting from the main root of the problem and in regards with it, Arctic may play the key role.
The projects launched in the Arctic (i.e., project Yamal LNG) meets the goal of reducing the share of coal in total energy consumption in the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters below 58% by the end of 2020, as this project allows to diversify countries’ energy sources, contributing to its withdrawal from coal use. This, in turn, reduces CO2 emissions within the country and may contribute to the implementation of the same scheme in the framework of the building of the transhipment routes.
The goal to reduce a dependence on coal and fossil fuels requires a huge surge in the use of natural gas, and the adoption of renewable energy. Which is resulting in not only infrastructure constrictions, but also the development of the projects connected with energy (See Figure 4). One of the key factors driving the implementation of this projects is that, unlike traditional fossil fuels, renewable energy sources are widely available around the world. Whether it is solar or wind power, tidal energy or hydroelectric plants, most countries have the potential to develop some clean energy.
Figure 4. Investments into the Renewable energy projects
Source: Boston University Global Development Policy Centre, 2019.
The region covered by new transhipment routes (esp. South – Eastern Europe, Eurasia and South – Eastern Asia covered by Eurasian transhipment lines) has significant potential to be powered by solar energy. Thus, it is estimated that less than 4 percent of the maximum solar potential of the region could meet the countries’ electricity demand for 2030 which gives the world a possible solution to reduce the countries’ need for fossil fuels as they develop.
Only in Europe, due to the implementation of renewable energy projects (i.e., Francisco Pizarro plant in Spain, Nikopol Solar Power Plant, Ukraine, Cestas Solar Farm in Bordeaux, France etc) the solar capacity increased by 36% to 8 GW in 2018. By 2020, several members stated in the European Union pushed to meet their 2020 renewable energy targets.
Along with solar projects, wind onshore wind farms projects (i.e., southeast region of Ukraine, the Fantanele – Cogealac wind park, Romania etc) are also destined to meet increased national energy needs in the wake of phasing out fossil fuel power plants. Thus, the renewable energy potential and cooperation opportunities is a chance for the countries to leapfrog from their carbon-intensive trajectories to low-carbon futures.
Conclusions
Summing up, for now it can be seen that there are two possibilities for developing transport systems and economies in accordance with green standards:
- Transcontinental railroad system (which requires huge amount of investments);
- Optimization of the cheapest mode of transportation (maritime warm waters transhipment lines) (See Figure 3).
But while thinking on the best ways of the decarbonizing of transport connections between the most-producing countries of G-7 (Atlantic states and other European countries) with other advanced OECD economies, all the existing risks (such as “convenience”, roads “safety” (piracy, oil spills), water congestion levels and maritime traffic) should be considered. As it was mentioned above, warm waters transhipment lines (See Figure 1) currently present certain dangers, being high congested and unsafe (both for trade security and environment), and hence rather vulnerable. Due to this fact, it is crucial to consider other alternatives of connecting the biggest countries-producers (China) and countries-consumers (West Europe).
Statistical data on logistics proves, that the development of the cold waters (i.e., Arctic passage or blue line shipping line) route (See Figure 1) drastically reduce the time and distance between the largest G-7 producers and developed OECD markets. Nevertheless, though there is high potential to slash international shipping distances by opening shorter routes in the north, the high risks on these alternative routes are keeping most traffic running over the classic transport routes like the Suez and Panama Canals.
But when building and improving the continent’s logistics chains, it is also important to consider the standardization aspect along the One Belt One Road initiative.
Today countries of Eurasia, not including China, account for about 18% of global GDP and 26% of global carbon dioxide emissions. Current transhipment lines going through these countries are estimated to increase carbon dioxide emissions by at least 0.3% worldwide – but by 7% or more in some countries as production expands in sectors with higher emissions, unless the measures to decarbonize the initiatives are taking. The window for action is narrow: investment decisions made in the coming few years will determine the carbon intensity of critical infrastructure and major real-estate assets that will operate for decades. Thus, by linking policy, finance, and the international community’s expertise and technological resources, it is possible to lay the groundwork for low-carbon development in the countries’ economies. To ensure that development in the transhipment lines does not undermine the global climate agenda, meaningful steps must be taken to reduce substantially the carbon footprint of new investments in these economies.
Analysing this issue, it is worth mentioning that the carbon dioxide emissions in developed countries have been in decline for over a decade and are at approximately the same level right now they were at 25 years ago, while the developing countries are experiencing an explosion in the growth of carbon dioxide emissions. This is explained by the fact, that developed countries achieved their development on the back of coal, which is now being phased out. On the other hand, developing countries are currently developing by using coal, and that is driving up their carbon emissions. It is also explaining the fact that developing countries are not willing to follow stated “greening” goals, since it will require higher financial costs and longer process of the project’s implementation.
To reach consensus in timing, price, and environmentally friendly standards the growing push to decarbonize economies, implement the green construction methods should be done. Unfortunately, this approach may take decades to be adopted, which our planet may not have. And the understanding of this fact should be the basis for the development of all countries without exception and the logistical development of the initiative “One Belt – One Road” in particular.
