CO 2 emission analysis

Similar to the energy consumption analysis, this analysis is also calculated in the unit of kg catch and £ revenue. The following paragraphs describe the calculation method and the result.

The amount of CO2 generated from the fishing operations was estimated using the generic

emission factors published by the Indonesian Oil and Gas Agency (Lemigas, 2014). The emission factor used for the diesel fuel is 74.43 ton CO2/TJ, whilst for the petrol is 72.97

ton CO2/TJ. Using the references listed in Table 5.1 as well as Equation 5.1 and 5.2, the

result of CO2 analysis is presented in Figure 5.5.

CO2 emissions were calculated based on annual fuel consumption, hence, in general the

result shows the same configuration as FUIs. However, since the diesel fuel produce more CO2 than petrol, a slight discrepancy is found in TN and LF vessels, which use

respectively 100% and 30% diesel fuel.

Figure 5.5 CO2 emissions of the studied vessels

5.3.3 Environmental life cycle assessment

Whilst energy consumption and emissions analysis focus on fuel use, LCA considers the energy consumed throughout the lifetime of fishing vessels. This means both direct and indirect energy inputs will be included in the assessment. According to ISO 14040:2006, LCA is conducted in four phases, i.e. goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, impact assessment and result interpretation, as described in the following paragraphs.

5.3.3.1 Goal and scope

In this study, the LCA considers the fishing vessel as a fishing unit consisting of fishing attributes, a collection of inputs and outputs of fishing operations, as mentioned in Section

3.5. Regarding the scope analysis displayed in Figure 5.1, therefore the LCA will assess the environmental impact resulting from the life cycle of each input used within that boundary. Furthermore, in order to provide comprehensive information, both inventory analysis and impact assessment will be presented per vessel unit and per FU.

Figure 5.6 shows the system boundary for the LCA proses, which integrates all fishing inputs listed in Section 3.5. Accordingly, the LCA incorporates multiproduct assessments. One fishing vessel primarily consists of the vessel itself, gear, engine, fuel container, fish container and fishing supplies, each of which has the cycle as seen in Figure 3.6. This means the LCA requires enormous data, and since the data availability is limited various exclusions were applied during the assessment, as listed below.

* Breakdown of fishing inputs can be seen in Table 3.4 (PD vessel), Table 3.5 (TN vessel), Table 3.6 (HL vessel) and Table 3.7 (LF vessel).

Figure 5.6 System boundary of the study

1. Each fishing input is analysed only based on the major components required during each stage. This means the following variables were omitted:

a. Resource and energy associated with transportation due to data limitation and time restriction.

b. Electricity consumption due to data unavailability and insignificant consumption. However, there is an exception for the production and maintenance of the fishing vessel and ice production.

c. The production of solid waste and emissions due to data unavailability. However, an exception is applied for CO2 emissions generated from vessel operation, which

have been calculated in Section 5.3.2

2. Resource and energy required for engine production and end of life stages is omitted for all types of the fishing vessel as no information related to engine production was available. There are references relating to diesel engines published by Reenaas (2005) and Jiang et al. (2014), which are applicable for the case of diesel-powered vessel, however, since each vessel uses a different type of engine, including the engine in only one vessel would lead to a biased comparison. Regarding end of life, used or broken engines are typically sold on the second-hand market, therefore, it can be assumed to be 100% reused. The engine acquisition and its residual value will be calculated in the economic impact assessment.

3. In the case of inadequate and uncertain information, available LCA result published by other researchers were used, such us lamps (Ramroth, 2008), and wood adhesive (Nilsson, 2000).

As with the energy consumption and emission analysis, total catch and revenue data provided in Table 5.3 will be used instead of allocation per fish species. Furthermore, life cycle data for each fishing input was collected by means of interviews with the stakeholders comprising fishers, suppliers and boat builders and where possible, data was also gathered from the product information sheets published by the manufacturers. Regarding end of life treatment, assessments were made based on the way fishers handle the fishing attributes when their lifetime is over. Different treatments are specified depending on the type of product. For example, most of the wood from the vessels will be reused or sold to the second-hand market, whilst most of the nets will be sent to landfill. The proportion for each treatment is estimated based on the fisher’s judgment.

In this study, the LCA was calculated using the IMPACT2002+ method which is run by SimaPro Classroom v8.5.2.0. Data for the background process (the production of generic materials, energy, transport, and waste management) for each component of the product was primarily obtained from Ecoinvent 3 database, with small portions carried out using Industry data 2.0 and European Life Cycle Database (ELCD) databases. In order to ensure an even comparison between the four vessels, the same background process was used across the fishing types. For example, sawn wood in any vessel used the same Ecoinvent 3 database. There are extremely limited processes that are based on Asia explicitly. Therefore, this study used the background processes that are based on the valid average for every country in the world or the rest of the world, which in the Ecoinvent data base it is denoted as GLO and RoW respectively. The justification for this calculation method has been explained in Section 2.6.2.

The cumulative environmental impact is presented using both midpoint and endpoint results. Whilst the midpoint categories are produced from the characterisation process, the latter is from the damage assessment (see Table 2.2). Regarding the sustainability assessment, the calculation is carried out using the endpoint categories. As those impacts are expressed in different units, the value is converted into ecopoints, using the normalisation and weighting method defined in IMPACT 2002+. Originally ecopoint is denoted as Pt, however due to the small fraction that found, milli-ecopoint is used denoted as mPt.

5.3.3.2 Inventory analysis

Inventory analysis lists the components and quantity required for each fishing input. For example, the production of a wooden boat used in the PD vessel requires 7.5 tons of wood, 33 kg painting material, and 290 kWh of electricity. This section encapsulates the result of the inventory analysis, which is provided in Appendix I, by presenting inventory per fishing vessel, inventory per FU and inventory per life cycle stage.

According to Table 3.4 – 3.7, fishing inputs considered in this study are the vessel, fishing gear, engine, fish container, fuel container, lamps and supplies. In terms of vessel material, PD, TN and LF vessels are wooden boats, whilst the HL vessel is a fibreglass boat. Furthermore, based on its size, the LF vessel is the largest, followed by PD, TN and HL vessels. Both PD and HL vessels are powered by an outboard engine, whilst TN and LF vessels use an inboard engine. A generator is also used in HL and LF vessels to produce electricity during night-time. Regarding the gear, each vessel uses a fishing net,

except the HL vessel which uses hook and line. Furthermore, the LF vessel uses ten sets of fishing gear, whilst in contrast, other vessels only use one or two sets of gear. Both the vessel and the gear are maintained periodically, therefore, materials required for maintenance activities were included in the inventory. Furthermore, oil changing for engine maintenance was also considered, despite the exclusion of engine production and end of life process from the calculation. Different types of container are used to store the catch on board. Both TN and HL vessels use expanded polystyrene (EPS) cool boxes, PD vessel uses plastic drums, whilst the LF vessel uses bamboo baskets. For fuel storage, each vessel uses plastic containers in different sizes and capacities. According to Table 5.3, both PD and LF vessels consume a considerably more fuel than the other vessels. In addition, the PD vessel also carries twice as much ice as the supplies brought by the TN and HL vessels. Meanwhile, ice is not required in the LF vessel.

1. Inventory per vessel

The outputs of the fishing vessel is extremely uncertain, thus, two vessel might have the similar inventory yet significantly different outputs. The inventory information for the whole vessel can subsequently be compared with the inventory per FU. Besides, it will make easier for the readers to follow and refer the calculation for further work. The inventory result is presented in kg, which indicates the mass contribution toward the impact. Furthermore, each input has a different lifetime, for example in PD vessel, the lifetime of the vessel is 20 year, fishing gear is 10 years and the fish container is 5 years. Therefore, the inventory is presented on an annual basis, as illustrated in. Figure 5.8. The figure shows the mass contribution per vessels as accumulated from fishing inputs, which is characterised by different colours. The lesser inputs result in the smaller mass contribution.

In each vessel, the operational supplies are responsible for the most substantial input followed by the vessel itself, except in the case of the LF vessel, where the percentage of fishing vessel contribution is significantly smaller than the gear. The contribution of the engine, fish container, fuel container and lamps are insignificant, as seen in the graph, as none of their colour appear.

Figure 5.8 Result of inventory analysis for LCA per vessel per year (kg)

It is clearly seen that the LF vessel has the greatest input, whilst the HL vessel has the least. Operating the smallest boat made of fibreglass and using lightweight fishing gear has made the HL vessel the lightest fishing unit. The total mass contribution will be calculated per FU next.

2. Inventory per FU

Figure 5.9 shows the inventory result listed in two FUs i.e. per kg catch and per £ revenue. Similar to FUIs analysis, in the PD and LF vessels, the inventory per kg catch is less than the inventory per £ revenue, whilst the TN and HL vessels show the opposite result. Furthermore, the figure reveals that using both FUs, the TN and HL vessels require more inputs than the PD and LF vessels. Therefore, this analysis suggest that in general pelagic fishing operations require less inputs than the demersal fishing operations.

When the fuel is the only considered input, the lowest FUI£ is found in the HL vessel

(Figure 5.3). However, when all supplies are included, the HL vessel ranks in third place after the PD and LF vessels. This is primarily because of the substantial amount of ice brought by the HL vessel. The ratio of ice and catch in HL vessel is roughly 1:1, in the PD vessel is 1:2.5, whilst no ice is required for the LF vessel.

3. Inventory per life cycle stage

Each fishing input has its own lifetime, hence the inventory includes the production, use, maintenance and end of life stages. Table 5.4 summarises the composition of the inventory result from each fishing input at different stages. Given the operating supplies are the major inputs for the fishing operation, the use stage takes the largest proportion in each vessel. Generally, it is followed by end of life, maintenance and production stages, leaving other stages with minor contribution. This result is in line with the study conducted by Fréon et al. (2014), which focused on the assessment of an anchovies fishing fleet. The study reveals that the largest mass contribution was derived from the use stage (69.50%), followed by end of life (9.60%), maintenance (6.70%) and production (2.90%).

Table 5.4 Result of inventory analysis per life stage (%)

Life stage Fishing attributes PD vessel TN vessel HL vessel LF vessel

Fishing vessel 1.18% 2.19% 0.35% 1.26% Fishing gear 0.05% 0.03% 0.01% 12.03% Fish container 0.02% 0.11% 0.15% 0.54% Fuel container 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.04% Lamps - - 0.00% 0.01% Fuel 50.09% 32.86% 21.72% 46.62% Lubricant 1.99% 0.00% 0.27% 1.41% Ice 41.71% 56.45% 76.10% 0.00% Fishing vessel 1.51% 2.82% 0.35% 1.53% Engine 0.07% 0.24% 0.14% 0.35% Fishing gear 0.30% 0.12% 0.03% 10.39% Fishing vessel 2.69% 5.01% 0.70% 2.79% Fishing gear 0.35% 0.03% 0.01% 22.43% Fish container 0.02% 0.11% 0.15% 0.54% Fuel container 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.04% Lamps - - 0.00% 0.01% 4 ) En d o f li fe 1 ) P r o d u c ti o n 2 ) U se - su p p li e s 3 ) U se - m a in te n a n c e

The maintenance stage contributes higher inputs than the production stage in the PD and TN vessels, whilst the opposite result are shown in the HL and LF vessels. This is principally because the HL vessel is a fibreglass vessel equipped with hook and line gear which is known for its low maintenance. In addition, boat maintenance in the LF vessel is less frequent than other wooden vessels (3 times/year compared to 4 times/year). At this point, the inventory result is done. Subsequently, it will be used to calculate the environmental impact, which is described in the next section.

5.3.3.3 Impact assessment and result interpretation: midpoint results

The midpoint result is presented in 15 categories with different unit of measurement as seen in Table 5.5. The table compares the result per vessel/year and it can be seen that both PD and LF vessels are responsible for the larger impacts than their counterparts. In contrast, in terms of impact per kg fish, TN and HL vessels contribute more impact than other vessels as seen in Table 5.6. Furthermore, Table 5.7 shows midpoint results in relation to £ revenue which confirm that HL vessel produces the slightly less impact than other vessels.

Regarding the fishing inputs, supplies are the major contributor for environmental impact in all vessels, followed by the fishing vessel itself. Further details of the midpoint result for each vessel is provided in Appendix J, whilst details about the contribution of each fishing input is discussed in the endpoint result, as seen in the next section.

Table 5.5 Impact assessment result in the midpoint categories per vessel per year

No Impact categories Unit PD vessel TN vessel HL vessel LF vessel

1 Carcinogen kg C2H3Cl eq 3,128.21 55.30 333.87 2,601.25 2 Non-carcinogen kg C2H3Cl eq 193.97 46.50 33.16 241.84 3 Respiratory inorganic kg PM2.5 eq 50.07 17.29 14.68 21.40 4 Ionizing radiations Bq C-14 eq 465,449.89 92,499.13 48,516.41 479,953.02

5 Ozone layer depletion kg CFC-11 eq 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01

6 Respiratory organics kg C2H4 eq 23.17 3.53 2.54 23.68 7 Aquatic ecotoxicity kg TEG water 2,676,603.26 573,223.32 316,681.99 2,663,683.65

8 Teresstrial ecotoxicity kg TEG soil 567,100.60 117,891.61 62,189.05 574,181.99

9 Terrestrial acidification/nutrification kg SO2 eq 343.08 71.68 45.71 334.89 10 Land occupation m2org.arable 480.71 239.50 29.00 548.79

11 Aquatic acidification kg SO2 eq 129.43 25.45 16.30 124.84 12 Aquatic eutropication kg PO4 P-lim 6.76 1.62 0.96 6.87 13 Global warming kg CO2 eq 15,614.79 3,072.92 2,227.59 15,270.98 14 Non-renewable energy MJ primary 1,078,184.45 218,714.09 116,796.42 1,132,444.26

Table 5.6 Impact assessment result in the midpoint categories per kg fish

Table 5.7 Impact assessment result in the midpoint categories per £ revenue

5.3.3.4 Impact assessment and result interpretation: endpoint results

The total impact for one vessel is an aggregation of impacts from fishing inputs, each of which consists of three life cycle stages and four endpoint categories, as illustrated in Figure 5.10. Regarding the presentation, the total impact can be depicted either based on the fishing input, life cycle stage or impact categories. Since this study concerns on the contribution of fishing vessel operation toward environmental quality, the total impact will be described based on the impact categories. As with the inventory analysis, the explanation will be divided into 3 parts, i.e. total impact per vessel, per FU and per life cycle stage. It is important to note that the assessment result indicates a drawback to the environment, which means the lower point is the better.

No Impact categories Unit PD vessel TN vessel HL vessel LF vessel

1 Carcinogen kg C2H3Cl eq 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.03 2 Non-carcinogen kg C2H3Cl eq 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 3 Respiratory inorganic kg PM2.5 eq 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 4 Ionizing radiations Bq C-14 eq 8.02 28.96 11.60 5.31

5 Ozone layer depletion kg CFC-11 eq 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6 Respiratory organics kg C2H4 eq 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 Aquatic ecotoxicity kg TEG water 46.10 179.50 75.73 29.45

8 Teresstrial ecotoxicity kg TEG soil 9.77 36.92 14.87 6.35

9 Terrestrial acidification/nutrification kg SO2 eq 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 10 Land occupation m2org.arable 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.01

11 Aquatic acidification kg SO2 eq 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 12 Aquatic eutropication kg PO4 P-lim 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13 Global warming kg CO2 eq 0.27 0.96 0.53 0.17 14 Non-renewable energy MJ primary 18.57 68.49 27.93 12.52

15 Mineral extraction MJ surplus 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01

No Impact categories Unit PD vessel TN vessel HL vessel LF vessel

1 Carcinogen kg C2H3Cl eq 0.10 0.01 0.05 0.07 2 Non-carcinogen kg C2H3Cl eq 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 3 Respiratory inorganic kg PM2.5 eq 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 Ionizing radiations Bq C-14 eq 14.57 14.26 7.75 13.72

5 Ozone layer depletion kg CFC-11 eq 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6 Respiratory organics kg C2H4 eq 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 Aquatic ecotoxicity kg TEG water 83.80 88.35 50.61 76.16

8 Teresstrial ecotoxicity kg TEG soil 17.75 18.17 9.94 16.42

9 Terrestrial acidification/nutrification kg SO2 eq 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 10 Land occupation m2org.arable 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.02

11 Aquatic acidification kg SO2 eq 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 Aquatic eutropication kg PO4 P-lim 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13 Global warming kg CO2 eq 0.49 0.47 0.36 0.44 14 Non-renewable energy MJ primary 33.76 33.71 18.67 32.38

Figure 5.10 Calculation scheme for impact assessment

1. Total impact per vessel

Figure 5.11 illustrates the total impacts of the four studied vessels based on impact categories. It can be seen that most of the impacts are associated with human health and resource use, followed by climate change and ecosystem quality.

Impacts on human health are responsible for the most significant percentage in the TN and HL vessels followed by impact on resource use. Conversely, in the PD and LF vessels, impacts on resource use share the most extensive portion leaving the contribution to human health in the second place. The assessment result shows that ice consumption has a significant impact on human health, which is predominantly derived from electricity consumption during the production stage. Meanwhile, fuel consumption greatly contributes to resources use as the fuel is produced from natural resources. As seen in Table 5.4, the percentage of ice consumption in both TN and HL vessels is larger than the fuel, whilst the opposite result is shown in PD and LF vessels.

The highest impact is derived from the PD vessel, followed by the LF, TN and HL vessels respectively. In fact, examining Figure 5.8, the total fishing inputs accumulated from the PD vessel is slightly lower than the LF vessel. This difference suggests that even though the PD vessel use less fishing inputs than the LF vessel, it produces a higher impact than its counterpart. This is primarily because of the ice use in the PD vessel, which is not applied in the LF vessel.

2. Total impact per FU

Figure 5.12 demonstrates the impact per kg and £ revenue, which is generally in line with the inventory result (Figure 5.9). Firstly, both TN and HL vessel, which operate demersal fishing, produce more impact per kg catch than per £ revenue, whilst the PD and LF vessels, as the representative of pelagic fishing, perform reversely. Secondly, demersal fishing generates higher environmental impacts than pelagic fishing. 3. Total impact per life cycle stage

In terms of the life cycle stage, Table 5.8 summarises the contribution of each fishing input to the environmental impacts. It should be noted that the percentage presented in the table is based on the total impact aggregated of from four impact categories. Detailed results describing the value for each category are provided in Appendix J.

Table 5.8 LCA result per life stage (%)

The table shows that the use stage is generating the most significant impact. In the PD