Good practices for sustainable cruise tourism. Appendix 1, Fiches of good practices in sustainable cruise tourism.
Date: 2023-01-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries
Subjects: case study, ecological tourism, economic consequence, environmental impact, equitable tourism, maritime economy, maritime tourism, regulatory policy, social impact, sustainable development, tourism policy

Good practices for sustainable 
cruise tourism 

Appendix 1: Fiches of Good Practices in Sustainable 
Cruise Tourism 

Deloitte Consulting B.V. and Partners 
Project finalised in December 2022 

Maritime Affairs 
and Fisheries 

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers 
to your questions about the European Union. 

Freephone number (*): 

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) 

The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone 

boxes or hotels may charge you).

LEGAL NOTICE 

This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the 
authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information 
contained therein. 

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2023 

PDF ISBN 978-92-76-61608-5  doi:10.2771/021913  KL-03-22-312-EN-N

© European Union, 2023 

The Commission’s reuse policy is implemented by Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on 
the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39, https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2011/833/oj). Unless otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is authorised under a 
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence 
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed provided appropriate credit 
is given and any changes are indicated

Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 

This study was prepared by Deloitte Consulting B.V and partners under Framework Contract 
EASME/EMFF/2016/029 - Inter-institutional service framework contract for Better Regulation 
related activities - Lot 2: Integrated Maritime Policy 

Table 1 Study Team 

Study team 

Deloitte 

Sander Oudmaijer – 
Director Strategy 
E-mail: soudmaijer@deloitte.nl
Gurvinder Arora –
Manager
E-mail: gurvarora@deloitte.nl
Yi Gong –
Consultant
E-mail: ygong@deloitte.nl
Tom Roestenberg –
Consultant
E-mail: troestenberg@deloitte.nl
Thomas van de Wijdeven –
Consultant
E-mail:
tvandewijdeven@deloitte.nl 

Ramboll Management 
Consulting 

Global Sustainable 
Tourism Council 

Aurelie Louguet – 
Senior Researcher 
E-mail: aelt@ramboll.com
Karun Gelibolyan
Researcher
E-mail: kgeli@ramboll.com
Simon Kennedy
Researcher
E-mail:
simon.kennedy@ramboll.co.uk 

Dr Ioannis Pappas 
Senior destination 
expert 
E-mail:
ioannis@gstcouncil.org 
Bermello Ajamil & 
Partners 
Luis de Carvalho 
Cruise industry expert 
E-mail:
LdeCarvalho@bermelloajamil.c
om 

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 
Directorate A - Maritime Affairs and Blue Economy 
Unit A2 – Blue Economy Sectors, Aquaculture and Maritime Spatial Planning 

Contact: Heino Nau 

E-mail: MARE-A2@ec.europa.eu

European Commission 
B-1049 Brussels

 Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 

 2 

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Good practices for sustainable 
cruise tourism 

Appendix 1: Fiches of Good Practices in Sustainable 
Cruise Tourism 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers  
to your questions about the European Union. 

Freephone number (*): 

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 

(*) 

The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone 

boxes or hotels may charge you). 

LEGAL NOTICE 

This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the 
authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the 
information contained therein. 

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2022 

© European Union, 2022 

The Commission’s reuse policy is implemented by Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 
12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39, https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2011/833/oj). Unless otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is authorised 
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence 
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed provided appropriate 
credit is given and any changes are indicated 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 
Abbreviation  Full name 
AB 
AE 
AFID 
AWTS 
BC 
BWTS 
BWMC 
CAGR 
Capex 
CO 
CO2 

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Auxiliary Boiler 
Auxiliary Engine 
Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive 
Advanced Wastewater Treatment System 
Black Carbon 
Bilge Water Treatment System 
Ballast Water Management Convention 
Compound Annual Growth Rate 
Capital expenditure 
Carbon monoxide 
Carbon Dioxide 
The number of CO2 emissions with the same global warming 
potential as another greenhouse gas 
Cruise Line International Association 
Clean Shipping Index 
Corporate Social Responsibility 
Data Collection System 
Destination Management and Marketing Organisation 
Destination Management Organisation 
European Alternative Fuels Observatory 
Emission Control Area 
European Destination of Excellence 
Energy Efficiency Design Index 
Exhaust Gas Cleaning System 
European Green Deal 
Eco-Management and Audit Scheme 
European Maritime Safety Agency 
European Maritime Transport Environmental Reports 
Environment Protection Agency 
Environmental Port Index 
Environmental Ship Index 
European Sea Ports Organisation 
European Tourism Association 
Emissions Trading System 
Greenhouse Gas 
Global Reporting Initiative 
Global Sustainable Tourism Council 
GSTC Destination Criteria 
Gigatonnes 
Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission 
Heavy Fuel Oil 
Heating, Ventilation and Cooling 
Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil 

CO2e 

CLIA 
CSI 
CSR 
DCS 
DMMO 
DMO 
EAFO 
ECA 
EDEN 
EEDI 
EGCS 
EGD 
EMAS 
EMSA 
EMTER 
EPA 
EPI 
ESI 
ESPO 
ETOA 
ETS 
GHG 
GRI 
GSTC 
GSTC-D 
GT 
HELCOM 
HFO 
HVAC 
HVO 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Abbreviation  Full name 
IAS 
ICCT 
IFRC 
ILO 
IMO 
ISHY 
ISO 
KPI 
LED 
LNG 
LS MGO 
MARPOL 
ME 
MED 
MGO 
MLC 
MRV 
MS 
Mtoe 
NOx 
O3 
Opex 
OPS 

Invasive Alien Species 
International Council on Clean Transportation 
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies 
International Labour Organisation 
International Maritime Organization 
Implementation of Hybrid Shipping 
International Organization for Standardisation 
Key Performance Indicator 
Light Emitting Diode 
Liquefied Natural Gas 
Low Sulphur MGO (Marine Gas Oil- 
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 
Main Engine 
Mediterranean 
Marine Gas Oil 
Maritime Labour Convention 
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification 
Member State 
Mega tonnes oil equivalent 
Nitrogen oxide 
Ozone 
Operational expenditure 
Onshore Power Supply 
Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the 
North-East Atlantic 
Polychlorinated biphenyls 
Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells 
Port Environmental Review System 
Particulate Matter 
Particulate Matter – Sulphur Dioxide 
Persistent Organic Pollutants 
Port Reception Facilities 
Peer Review Group 
Photovoltaic 
Polyvinyl Chloride 
SOx Emissions Control Area 
Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan 
Safety of Life at Sea 
Sulphur oxide 
Tributyltin 
United Nations World Tourism Organization 
Ultraviolet 
Volatile Organic Compound 
World Travel and Tourism Council 

OSPAR 

PCBs 
PEMFC 
PERS 
PM 
PM-SO2 
POPs 
PRF 
PRG 
PV 
PVC 
SECA 
SEEMP 
SOLAS 
SOx 
TBT 
UNWTO 
UV 
VOS 
WITC 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Abbreviation  Full name 
WTO 
WTS 
WTTC 

World Tourism Organization 
Advanced Wastewater Treatment System 
World Travel and Tourism Council 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................... 5 

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... 8 

TABLE OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................... 10 

TABLE OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ 11 

ONSHORE POWER SUPPLY (OPS) IN CRUISE TERMINAL ALTONA ....................................... 12 

What is OPS? ....................................................................................................... 12 
Overview of the OPS in Cruise Terminal Altona as good practice ................................. 12 
The objective of the OPS located at Cruise Terminal Altona ........................................ 12 
Why is the OPS at Altona a good practice for sustainable cruise tourism? .................... 13 
Impact of the OPS on stakeholders ......................................................................... 15 
Contribution to the EU Green Deal .......................................................................... 17 
Other key considerations for OPS implementation ..................................................... 18 

ESI AT-BERTH MODULE IN VARIOUS PORTS IN THE EU .................................................... 19 

What is the ESI? ................................................................................................... 19 
What are the limitations of the current ESI system for the cruise tourism industry?

 ................................................................................................................. 20 
What is the ESI at-berth module? ........................................................................... 20 
Why is the ESI at berth module a good practice for sustainable cruise tourism? ........... 21 
Impact of the ESI at-berth module on stakeholders .................................................. 22 
Other key considerations to implementing the ESI at-berth module ............................ 26 

SUSTAINABLE CRUISE TERMINAL IN THE PORT OF TALLINN ............................................. 28 

What is the new sustainable cruise terminal in the Port of Tallinn? .............................. 28 
What  are  the  differences  between  the  old  terminal  and  the  newly  constructed 

terminal in the Port of Tallinn? ...................................................................... 30 
The objective of the sustainable cruise terminal in the Port of Tallinn .......................... 30 
Impact of the sustainable cruise terminal on the stakeholders .................................... 31 
Contribution to the EU Green Deal .......................................................................... 34 
Other key considerations to constructing a sustainable cruise terminal ........................ 34 

DUBROVNIK’S COLLABORATION WITH CRUISE TOURISM .................................................. 36 

Why did the collaboration happen? ......................................................................... 36 
Overview of the collaboration ................................................................................. 36 
Why is the collaboration within the city of Dubrovnik a good practice for sustainable 

cruise tourism? ........................................................................................... 38 
Impact of the collaboration on stakeholders ............................................................. 39 
Contribution to the EU Green Deal .......................................................................... 41 
Other key considerations to implementing the collaboration ....................................... 41 

4GOODFOOD: HALVING FOOD WASTE BY 2020 ............................................................... 42 

Why is cruise ship food waste significant? ................................................................ 42 
Overview of the 4GOODFOOD programme ............................................................... 42 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Why  is  the  4GOODFOOD  programme  a  good  practice  for  sustainable  cruise 

tourism? .................................................................................................... 43 
Impact of the 4GOODFOOD programme on stakeholders ........................................... 44 
Contribution to the EU Green Deal .......................................................................... 46 
Other key considerations to implement the 4GOODFOOD programme ......................... 47 

LIQUEFIED  NATURAL  GAS  (LNG)  SHIP-TO-SHIP  BUNKERING  IN  THE  PORT  OF 

BARCELONA ......................................................................................................... 48 

What is ship-to-ship bunkering of LNG? ................................................................... 48 
Overview of LNG bunkering in the Port of Barcelona.................................................. 48 
The objective of the LNG bunkering in the Port of Barcelona ...................................... 49 
Why is LNG bunkering a good practice for sustainable cruise tourism? ........................ 49 
Impact of LNG bunkering on stakeholders................................................................ 51 
Other key considerations to implementing LNG ship-to-ship bunkering as a fuel ........... 55 

WASTE PROCESSING FACILITIES IN THE PORT OF STOCKHOLM ........................................ 56 

What  are  the  international  regulations  regarding  the  disposal  of  waste  in  open 

waters? ...................................................................................................... 56 

Why would cruise ships rather dispose of their wastes in the waters than onshore?

 ................................................................................................................. 57 
Overview of the Waste Processing Facilities in the Port of Stockholm .......................... 57 
Why are the Port of Stockholm’s waste processing facilities efficient? .......................... 58 
The objective of the waste processing facility at the Port of Stockholm ........................ 58 
Why is the waste processing facility a good practice for sustainable cruise tourism?

 ................................................................................................................. 59 
Impact of the waste processing facilities on stakeholders .......................................... 59 
Contribution to the EU Green Deal .......................................................................... 61 
Other key considerations to implementing waste processing facilities .......................... 62 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

TABLE OF FIGURES 

Figure 1: Connection of a cruise ship to OPS at Altona ...................................................... 14 

Figure 2 A view of the cruise terminal of the Port of Tallinn ............................................... 29 

Figure 3 The Port of Tallinn plans to develop sustainably ................................................... 33 

Figure 4 A cruise ship sailing past Dubrovnik ................................................................... 37 

Figure 5 Costa Crociere’s food waste reduction programme ............................................... 42 

Figure 6 The Haugesund Knutsen LNG bunker vessel ........................................................ 48 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

TABLE OF TABLES 

Table 1 Study Team ...................................................................................................... 2 

Table 2 CO2 emissions reduction from connecting cruise ships to OPS ................................. 13 

Table 3 CO2 emissions decline significantly when AIDAsol connects to OPS .......................... 14 

Table 4 Impact on stakeholders ..................................................................................... 15 

Table 5 Impact on stakeholders ..................................................................................... 23 

Table 6 Impacts by stakeholder group ............................................................................ 31 

Table 7 Impacts by stakeholder group ............................................................................ 39 

Table 8 Impact on stakeholder groups ............................................................................ 44 

Table 9 CO2 emissions by diesel-powered and LNG-powered ship, Barcelona, 2021 ............. 50 

Table 10 NOx emissions by diesel-powered and LNG-powered ship, Barcelona, 2021 ............ 50 

Table 11 Impact on stakeholder groups .......................................................................... 51 

Table 12 MARPOL Annex V: simplified overview. .............................................................. 56 

Table 13 Impact on stakeholder groups .......................................................................... 60 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

ONSHORE POWER SUPPLY (OPS) IN CRUISE TERMINAL ALTONA 

This  practice  involves  constructing  an  onshore  power  supply  (OPS)  in  the  port  of 
Hamburg at the Cruise Terminal Altona. OPS provides cruise ships with electricity that 
is produced onshore.  

What is OPS? 

Onshore power supply (OPS), also known as cold ironing, shore-side electricity, or 
shore-side  power,  provides  anchoring  ships  with  electricity  that  is  generated 
onshore.  It  helps  reduce  sounds  and  emissions  from  cruise  ships.  Even  when  the 
energy source is unsustainable, providing onshore electricity is beneficial. The shore-
side  power  supply  replaces  the  internal  power  supply  of  the  ship  while  the  ship  is 
anchoring.  Therefore,  the  auxiliary  motors  onboard  the  cruise  ships  used  for  the 
generation of energy can be (partly) switched off during mooring.  

Cruise ships draw a lot of energy from the grid in relative terms compared to other 
categories  of  ships  (e.g.  tankers,  container  and  reefer  ships,  and  bulk-,  cargo-, 
container- and Ro-Ro ships). A cruise ship requires at least as much energy as 6 000 
households  per  day  12.    In  2030  –  as  part  of  the  Fit-for-55    package  -  ships  will  be 
obliged to connect to the OPS when an OPS installation is present in the port3. 

Overview of the OPS in Cruise Terminal Altona as good practice 

The OPS in the port of Altona was the first OPS for cruise ships constructed in 
Europe. It is connected to the main grid4. The installation provides a total maximum 
capacity  of  12 MVA  and  two  ships  –  AIDAsol  (AIDA  cruises)  and  Europa  2  (Hapag-
Lloyd)  -  use  it  at  the  moment  of  writing.5  The  construction  of  the  OPS  in  Cruise 
Terminal  Altona  started  in  June  20146  and  the  installation  started  working 
commercially  in  June  2016.7  8  The  terminal  is  provided  with  energy  solely  from 
sustainable sources.9  

The objective of the OPS located at Cruise Terminal Altona 

The  OPS  aims  to  reduce  greenhouse  gases,  noise  and  vibrations  from  cruise 
ships. As the internal combustion engine (ICE) of the ship can be shut off, the ships 
emit fewer sounds, vibrations and greenhouse gases into the air.  

1 https://www.ewea.org/wind-energy-basics/faq/ 
2 https://www.onthemosway.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/2-OPS-LNG-.pdf  
3 Fit for 55, Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation 
4 https://safety4sea.com/siemens-develops-european-onshore-power-supply-for-cruise-ships-2/  
5 June 2022 
6 http://www.bpoports.com/OPS_Seminar/Lebmeier.pdf  
7 https://www.monika-griefahn.de/en/2016/07/hamburgs-new-bridge-technology-shore-power-supply-at-

the-cruise-center-altona/  

8 https://www.hafen-hamburg.de/en/press/news/shore-power-station-at-the-cruise-centre-altona-in-full-

operation-for-one-year-ship-calls-soar-35749/?  

9 https://www.hamburg-port-authority.de/en/themenseiten/lng-shoreside-power  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Why is the OPS at Altona a good practice for sustainable cruise tourism? 

As  the  OPS  installation  in  Hamburg  was  the  first  in  Europe,  it  is  considered  a  good 
example for its technical aspects. The selection of OPS for the power supply is based 
on four dimensions: 

•  Cruise-tourism specific: The OPS installation in Altona makes a difference to 

sustainability in a destination clearly related to cruise tourism industry. 

•  An  example  of  collaboration  among  stakeholders:  The  Port  and  cruise 
lines work together in the process to certify ships to connect to the OPS at the 
cruise terminal of Altona. The Port has also worked with regional governmental 
bodies to make a  viable business case  for the OPS installation. Furthermore, 
the Port aligns with the grid owner on the demand and supply of energy.  

•  The example is supported with evidence of sustainability: At least two 
companies use the OPS in Cruise Terminal Altona: AIDAsol (AIDA Cruises) since 
2016 and MS Europa 2 (Hapag-Lloyd Cruises) since 2020. AIDAsol connected 
to the OPS on 13 occasions in 2019. 

The investment costs for the Port of Hamburg are estimated at EUR 10 million. More 
than  a  third  of  these  costs  (EUR  3.55  million)  were  covered  by  the  European 
Commission  via  the  TEN-T  programme.  The  operational  costs  for  the  port  are  EUR 
84,000 per year. Using OPS drastically reduces low-frequency noise. OPS reduces low-
frequency levels in the third-octave spectrum by approximately 20 dB(A) (i.e. 19 dB 
at 16 Hz third octave, 22 dB at 25 Hz third octave, and 19 dB at 40 Hz third octave). 

The  OPS  contribution  to  reducing  emissions  is  shown  in  Table  2.  The  emissions 
reduction  is  largest  when  using  electricity  from  eco-friendly  sources.  However, 
emissions reduce even when electricity is used that is generated by an onshore power 
plant. The calculations in the Table assume a total need for power of 8 145.5 MWh per 
year.  

Table 2 CO2 emissions reduction from connecting cruise ships to OPS 

Altona onshore power supply 

Average  yearly 
CO2 emissions 

(Estimated  need  for  power:  8 145.5 
MWh) 

(t/year) 

Difference 
between 
usage  of  cruise  ship 
engines  and  on-shore 
supply (t/year) 

Emissions  by  cruise  ship  engines 
factor: 
without  OPS 
0.695  kg CO2/kWh) 

(Emission 

5 658 

- 

Emissions when using electricity from 
conventional  onshore  power  plant 
(Emission factor: 0.566 kg CO2/kWh) 

Emissions  when  using  eco-friendly 
electricity (Emission factor: 0.283 kg 
CO2/ kWh) 

4 608 

1 050 

2 304 

3 354 

Source:  Drucksache  20/5316  (2013)  Konzept  zur  alternativen  Energieversorgung  von  Kreuzfahrtschiffen   
im Hamburger Hafen- Haushaltsplan 2013/2014, Einzelplan 7, Mitteilung des Senats an die Bürgerschaft. 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

To accurately represent the result of an OPS, a retrospective view is provided in the 
Table based on the AIDAsol case example. The AIDAsol is a Sphinx class ship that can 
host 2 174 passengers. The savings in CO2 are illustrated in the next table. AIDAsol 
drew 566 MWh of electricity from the OPS in 2019 during 13 berths. The difference in 
emissions between using an OPS on green energy and producing electricity onboard is 
233 tonnes of CO2. 10  

Table 3 CO2 emissions decline significantly when AIDAsol connects to OPS 

AIDAsol power (566 MWh) 

Average yearly 
CO2  emissions 
(t/year) 

Difference between usage 
of cruise ship engines and 
onshore supply (t/year) 

Emissions  by  cruise  ship  engines 
without  OPS 
factor: 
0.695  kg CO2/kWh) 

(Emission 

393 

- 

Emissions when using electricity from 
conventional  onshore  power  plant 
(Emission factor: 0.566 kg CO2/kWh) 

320 

73 

Emissions  when  using  eco-friendly 
electricity  (Emission  factor:  0.283  kg 
CO2/ kWh) 

160 

233 

Source: http://archive.northsearegion.eu/files/repository/20150309115942_TEN-
TaNS_CaseStudy_OnshorePowerSupplyFacilityinHamburg.pdf and 
https://www.cruiseeurope.com/news/news-ce-press-1580819113/ 

Figure 1: Connection of a cruise ship to OPS at Altona 

Source: photo supplied by the Hamburg Port Authority 

10 https://www.cruiseeurope.com/news/news-ce-press-1580819113/ 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Impact of the OPS on stakeholders  

The OPS is a practice with a positive impact on environmental sustainability. However, 
as the installation requires (large) financial commitments, it has an adverse effect on 
the  financials  of  the  stakeholders.  The  effects  for  each  stakeholder  (positive  and 
negative) are discussed in the table below.   

Table 4 Impact on stakeholders 

Stakeholder 
group 

Impacts (positive and negative) 

Cruise Lines  Cruise  ships  emit  fewer  greenhouse  gases,  sounds  and  vibrations. 
However, cruise lines have to: invest in systems that enable them to 
connect to  OPS installations, align the installation onshore with the 
installation  onboard  and  pay  for  the  shoreside-sourced  electricity. 
originating  from  the  shoreside.  These  aspects  have  a  negative 
financial impact on the cruise lines. OPS leads, however, to fewer fuel 
costs, a longer maintenance interval due to fewer  running hours of 
the engines11, and fewer port fees as it is a factor in environmental 
differentiation schemes like the Environmental Ship Index (ESI)12. 

Government  As  the  source  of  funding  is  a  key  requirement  for  the  installation, 
governments could potentially provide support to incentivise the OPS 
financially.  Without  a  direct  channel  of  (financial)  support  from  the 
government,  a  viable  business  case  for  OPS  becomes  ambitious  as 
described below in the economic impacts. 

Port 

The port of Hamburg was the key contributor to the financial aspect 
of the installation. It had to pay for the major part of the investment, 
and  must  maintain  the  OPS  installation.  Additionally,  the  port 
provides discounts on port fees if the ships agree to connect to the 
OPS. The primary source of revenue is through the amount charged 
for the electricity that the ships consume.  

Local 
communities 

Local communities benefit from the  reduction in greenhouse gases, 
sounds and vibrations. A consequence of the implementation of the 
OPS  is  that  fewer  greenhouse  gases  are  emitted  locally,  which 
improves  the  local  air  quality.  Therefore,  there  is  a  positive  impact 
on improving the living conditions in a destination. 

Source: Deloitte/Ramboll analysis 

11 This can be described qualitatively as the actual costs are not shared due to the information being 

competitor sensitive 

12 The Environmental Ship Index (ESI) identifies seagoing ships that perform better in reducing air 

emissions than required by the current emission standards of the International Maritime Organization 
(IMO). Ports use this index to set up incentive schemes for sustainable ships. See: 
https://www.environmentalshipindex.org/  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Hard impacts 

The impacts are evaluated from a sustainability standpoint, which means that the hard 
impacts include economic, environmental, and social impacts. 

Environmental impact 

The cruise ships emit fewer greenhouse gases when connected to the OPS. The impact 
of cruise ships on the environment, therefore, declines. A reduction of 3 354 tones of 
CO2 is achieved in the example port of Hamburg in an ideal scenario where an OPS is 
used to near full capacity. A cruise ship with 2 174 passengers – with 13 berths per 
year - reduces emissions by 233 tonnes of CO2 per year.  

Economic impact 

The  practice  influences  the  financials  of  cruisers,  governments  and  ports.  The  total 
investment costs for an OPS in the cruise terminal of Altona were EUR 10 million and 
the operational costs total EUR 84,000 per year. Ports usually have to contribute the 
largest  part  of  the  onshore  investment  and  have  to  maintain  the  installation. 
Additionally,  some  ports  provide  a  discount  to  ships  connecting  to  an  OPS.  Within 
environmental  incentive  schemes  such  as  the  environmental  ship  index  (ESI), 
connecting to an OPS is also an important factor. The government is also involved as, 
without its support and funding, there is no viable business case for an OPS. A tool to 
calculate  the  costs  and  benefits  is  proposed  by  the  World  Ports  Sustainability 
Program.13 Cruise lines  must invest in  systems that enable them to connect to OPS 
installations, must align the installation onshore with the installation onboard and pay 
for the electricity originating from the shoreside. These aspects increase the financial 
obligations  of  the  cruise  lines.  They  lead,  however,  to  fewer  fuel  costs,  a  longer 
maintenance interval due to fewer running hours of the engines, and fewer/lower port 
fees as this is a factor in environmental incentive schemes.14. However, connecting to 
OPS  is  often  more  expensive  for  cruise  lines  than  running  the  internal  combustion 
engines.15 

Social impact 

The local community benefits socially from the OPS. The emissions from cruise ships 
decrease, causing less air pollution which results in a healthier community. The impact 
is greatest when electricity comes from sustainable sources. 

Soft impacts 

Soft  impacts  are  intangible  impacts  and  comprise  the  structure,  implementation 
effectiveness and, monitoring and reporting of the practice. 

13 https://sustainableworldports.org/ops/implementation/ops-calculation-tool/  
14 https://www.cruisegate-hamburg.de/en/latest/news/10-off-for-ships-with-an-esi-index-at-the-port-of-

hamburg-the-most-successful-index-worldwide-for-the-environmental-performanc/  

15 Interview with port and cruise lines representatives 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Practice structure 

For  OPS  implementation  to  be  successful,  the  stakeholders  must  be  aligned  on  the 
distribution of costs and benefits. Cruise lines and ports carry the costs as they have 
to invest in equipment onboard ships and port infrastructure. Cruise lines communicate 
with ports to align on connecting to the OPS.  

Implementation effectiveness 

The  business  case  for  an  OPS  is  made  in  the  case  of  total  energy  consumption  of 
8 145.5 MWh. However, at the time of writing, only two ships were using the OPS after 
six  years.  Assuming  equal  consumption  of  the  two  ships  and  total  consumption  per 
year of 566 MWh,  approximately  17% of the total capacity  is currently  used. 
This is because communication between the port and cruise line is difficult in practice. 
Practicalities  –  such  as  the  required  voltage  and  frequency,  and  the  position  of 
equipment – need to be shared to facilitate successful implementation. Connecting to 
OPS is a threshold as a certification process is needed and it is more costly than using 
the internal combustion engines. Time and money have to be invested to be able to 
connect to an OPS. 

Monitoring and reporting 

The key metric measured for the success of OPS is the data on electricity consumption 
of  the  cruise  ship.  This  is  used  as  a  proxy  to  derive  the  greenhouse  gases  and  the 
information collected by the port is published on the internet for transparency. 

Contribution to the EU Green Deal 

The  practice  contributes  to  three  aspects  of  the  EU  Green  Deal:  supplying  clean, 
affordable and secure energy, a zero-pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment, 
and accelerating the shift to sustainable and smart mobility. 

Supplying clean, affordable and secure energy 

OPS  contributes  to  supplying  clean,  affordable  and  secure  energy  by  delivering 
electricity  produced  onshore  instead  of  electricity  generated  by  the  cruise  ships’ 
auxiliary  motors.  The  electricity  generated  in  Hamburg  originates  from  sustainable 
sources  and  thus  contributes  to  this  EU  Green  Deal  target.  In  other  cases,  the 
electricity  might  (still)  come  from  fossil  fuels.  However,  this  will  evolve  as  the  EU 
progresses  towards  the  EU  Green  Deal  target  states  that  at  least  40%  of  the  total 
energy mix in 2030 should be come from renewable energy sources.  

A zero-pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment 

The majority of cruise ships use fossil fuels, even when anchoring. Greenhouse gases 
are released as a side effect of burning fuel in an internal combustion engine (ICE). 
Reducing  greenhouse  gases  helps  the  move  towards  a  toxic-free  environment.  It 
contributes to the zero-pollution action plan for air pollution. It specifically applies to 
the goal of “improving air quality to reduce the number of premature deaths caused 
by air pollution by 55%”.16  

16 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Accelerating the shift to sustainable and smart mobility 

The  EU  Green  Deal  includes  the  target  of  reducing  reduce  transport-related 
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 90% by 2050. One of the objectives is to make 
sustainable  alternative  solutions  available  to  the  public  and  businesses.  The  OPS  in 
Hamburg supports this  objective by  offering a  sustainable alternative in the form  of 
green energy, instead of the need to burn fossil fuel.  

Other key considerations for OPS implementation 

Apart from clear communication between stakeholders and the financial viability of the 
OPS installation, there are other considerations for successful implementation. 

Standardisation of technical requirements  

Besides  improving  communication,  the  installations  could  be  standardised  to  solve 
impracticalities  between  the  electricity  connection  onboard  and  onshore.  There  is 
currently no common standard for OPS installations. It would be helpful if there were 
standards  –  both  for  ships  and  ports  -  to  provide  transparency  to  ports  and  cruise 
ships. As a first step, EMSA is currently a drafting guidelines for OPS. 

Energy security  

Cruise ships require large amounts of power which has to be produced onshore17. A 
destination must be able to fulfil this requirement. When implementing an OPS, the 
energy security of a destination should be investigated.  

Energy sustainability 

When cruise ships are provided with electricity produced from fossil sources instead of 
producing  electricity  onboard,  there  is  still  a  positive  effect  on  the  environment. 
However,  when  energy  is  obtained  from  green  sources,  the  effect  is  significantly 
greater. 

Applicable ships 

Ships  that  frequently  call  at  the  same  ports  and  remain  at  berth  for  longer  are 
potentially  the  best  applications  for  shore  power  because  the  ships  and  OPS 
installations have to calibrate to be used. 

Port size 

As an OPS installation is large, small ports might be unable to house OPS installations. 
This has the effect of limiting the construction of an OPS installation to bigger ports. 

17 https://www.onthemosway.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/2-OPS-LNG-.pdf  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

ESI AT-BERTH MODULE IN VARIOUS PORTS IN THE EU 

This practice involves creating a system that calculates emissions of cruise ships when 
at berth, the so-called ESI at-berth module which is currently in development and will 
be piloted in 2022. This system will be implemented as a module in the Environmental 
Shipping Index (ESI), probably from 2023 onwards. 

We  first  describe  the  current  ESI  module  and  then  the  cruise-specific  ‘ESI  at-berth’ 
module.  As  this  is  still  in  development,  some  of  the  potential  results  of  the  ESI  at-
berth module come from the Environmental Port Index (EPI)  – a similar initiative to 
the ESI at berth module, which is currently operational in several ports in Norway. EPI 
results are included in  Box 1 to illustrate where the ESI at-berth module could lead 
based on the EPI example. The EPI is a for-profit company and is used purely to predict 
potential results of the ESI at-berth module. 

What is the ESI? 

At the time of writing,18 various ports have implemented the ESI programme. ESI is 
an  international  voluntary  incentive  programme  that  focuses  on  vessels  going 
above  and  beyond  International  Maritime  Organization  (IMO)  regulations.  The 
programme  is  run  by  an  NGO  –  the  International  Association  of  Ports  and  Harbors 
(IAPH). The scheme is widely used: 6 908 ships and 57 ports were participating in the 
programme as of June 2022. Approximately 1% of the total are cruise ships. 

Ship operators earn financial or operational bonuses – such as a reduction in 
port  fees  or  berthing  at  a  preferred  quay  -  by  having  a  higher  ESI  score.  A 
higher  ESI  score  is  obtained  by  using  cleaner  technology  and  fuel  that  reduces 
emissions.  The  ESI  assigns  clean  ship  ratings  to  vessels  to  enable  ports  to  provide 
incentives  to  reward  top-performing  ships.  Every  participating  ship  receives  an  ESI 
score. ESI scores range from 0 (ship complies with regulations) to 100 (ship exhausts 
close  to  zero  emissions).  As  such,  the  ESI  score  is  an  indicator  of  the  exhaust 
emissions’  performance  of  vessels  and  assists  in  identifying  cleaner  ships  that 
proactively  go  beyond  legal  compliance  in  terms  of  sustainability.  The  ESI  score  is 
arrived at from four sub-calculations based on CO2, NOx, and SOx emissions, and the 
fitting  of  equipment  to  connect  to  an  onshore  power  supply  (OPS).  The  formula  to 
calculate the ESI score is: 

𝐸𝑆𝐼 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 = 𝐸𝑆𝐼 𝐶𝑂2 + 𝐸𝑆𝐼 𝑁𝑂𝑥 + 𝐸𝑆𝐼 𝑆𝑂𝑥 + 𝑂𝑃𝑆 (𝑚𝑎𝑥. 100 𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠)  

The individual ESI awarding criteria can be summarised as: 

•  ESI CO2: ships are awarded points if they report their CO2 emissions and/or if 
they  improve  their  energy  efficiency.  The  energy  efficiency  improvement 
calculation is based on the historic performance of the ship itself; the ship is 
not compared with a baseline or other ships. 

•  ESI NOx: the points awarded are based on NOx emissions deducted from the 
rated  power  per  engine  and  the  actual  emissions  per  kWh  depending  on  the 
age  (IMO  tier)  of  the  particular  engines    –  both  the  auxiliary  and  the  main 
engines are included in the calculation. 

18 As of June 2022 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

•  ESI SOx: the fuel bunkered by a ship in the previous six months acts as a proxy 
for the SOx emissions. Based on the sulphur content and mass of the bunkered 
fuel, points are awarded for this category.  

•  OPS: ships earn points when onboard equipment is available to connect to OPS. 

What are the limitations of the current ESI system for the cruise tourism 
industry? 

The current ESI system is based on evaluating emissions over a longer period of time. 
Most cruise ports are interested in the actual emissions of ships during their stay, as 
these ports are often located close to city centres. This means that emissions have an 
immediate effect on the air quality in the city. The ESI system has not been designed 
to provide real-time information about these emissions. 

What is the ESI at-berth module? 

The  ESI  at  berth  module  addresses  the  limitations  for  the  cruise  tourism 
industry of the current ESI described in the previous sub-section. The module aims 
to improve transparency and clarity in the way cruise lines and operators provide ports 
with data on ship emissions at berth.  

The objective of the new module within the ESI system is three-fold: 

• 

• 

• 

it reports the fuel consumption and deducts the emissions of the ship based on 
the fuel type, the volume consumed, and the engines used during berth; 

it creates a data-sharing platform between ports and cruise lines; and 

it  incentivises  cleaner  ships  by  coupling  the  outcomes  of  the  module  to  an 
incentive scheme. 

Participating  cruise  lines  input  the  static  data  of  their  ships  –  such  as  the  engine 
specifications and an overview of the equipment onboard. Static data is recorded once 
when the cruise ship starts participating in the ESI at-berth module. Static data is only 
updated if the specifications of the ship alter.  

As a service to the cruise lines, ports also  input their static data in the ESI at-berth 
module. Poets’ static data include information about port facilities – e.g. the presence 
of an OPS -, local legislation and the port’s incentive schemes for sustainable shipping. 

The ESI at-berth module asks  the cruise ship  engineer to report the  ship’s dynamic 
data to the system. Dynamic data includes the amount of fuel used, the type of fuel 
that is used, and the auxiliary engines that are used during berthing. 

The  dynamic  and  static  data  is  converted  by  the  ESI  at-berth  module  to  useful 
information for both cruise lines and ports.  

The cruise lines can analyse the individual ship performance based on the information 
from the module, and can centrally access the availability of facilities, local regulations 
and the destination’s incentive schemes. 

Ports  can  aggregate  the  emissions  at  port  level,  see  energy  demand  from  specific 
vessels, and use the local emissions of NOx, SOx, particulate matter (PM) and CO2 as 
input for incentive schemes. 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Incentivisation 

A condition imposed by the IAPH for participating in the ESI at-berth module is that 
ports  introduce  incentive  programmes  based  on  the  outcomes  of  the  module.  The 
ports’ incentive scheme can reward two aspects: 

•  Reporting:  irrespective  of  the  performance  of  the  cruise  ship,  reporting 

dynamic and static data during berth is incentivised; 

•  Performance: the more sustainable a ship is during a particular call, the higher 

the incentive that the cruise lines receive. 

The  reporting  incentive  is  self-explanatory:  cruise  lines  receive  an  incentive  when 
reporting the dynamic data during berth.  

However,  many  methods  to  measure  the  performance  of  cruise  ships  might  be 
adopted.  The  two  approaches  to  expressing  a  cruise  ship’s  performance  that  are 
suggested for the ESI at-berth modules are: 

•  Performance indicators ranging from 0-100 – which adopts the same structure 
as  the  ESI  now  –  based  on  three  components:  air  quality,  greenhouse  gas 
emissions, and innovation points (for innovative technologies and/or alternative 
fuels); or 

•  A  performance  indicator  based  on  a  ratio  between  emissions  and  a  –  to  be 
determined – fixed metric. This ratio  could  – for instance  - be the emissions 
per gross ton, the emissions per passenger, or the emissions per hour. 

The form in which ports provide incentives to ships is up to the individual port. Financial 
incentives are commonly applied in the current ESI programme - such as discounts on 
port  fees  for  sustainable  ships.  However,  operational  incentives  could  also  be 
considered - like providing preferred berth places to sustainable cruise ships.  

Timeline 

The ESI at-berth module is still a work in progress. The development of the ESI at-
berth module started in 2022 and is  expected  to be  operational at the beginning of 
2023. In 2023, it is expected that the module will be piloted across several ports. This 
year acts as a transitional year where orts experiment with and build a knowledge base 
on  the  module.  Starting  from  2024,  the  ESI  at-berth  module  should  be  fully 
operational.  

Why is the ESI at berth module a good practice for sustainable cruise 
tourism? 

The  ESI  at-berth  module  is  a  global  project  supported  by  various  EU  ports  that  will 
result  in  the  calculation  of  cruise  ship  emissions  at  berth,  sharing  data  across  and 
among stakeholders and incentivising sustainability measures. The selection of the ESI 
at-berth module as a good practice is based on three dimensions: 

•  Cruise-tourism  specific:  The  ESI  at-berth  module  is  being  developed 
specifically for cruise ships as these berth in densely populated areas. Vessels 
other than cruise ships usually berth at terminals that are more distant from 
inhabited areas. 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

•  Collaboration among stakeholders: The port and cruise lines work together 
in the process to share data. Via the module, ports share information with the 
cruise  lines,  such  as  the  port  facilities,  the  local  regulations  and  incentive 
schemes.  Cruise  lines  share  ship  specifications  with  the  ports,  and  report 
dynamic data – such as fuel consumption.  

•  Evidence of sustainability: The ESI at-berth module connects environmental 
impacts  with  the  economic  impacts  of  the  practice.  Currently,  no  concrete 
results are known or can be shown, as the results of the pilot are not known. 
However, But the results from the EPI programme in Norway can be used as a 
guide (Box 1).  

The example is executed within the European Union (EU): The majority of the 
contributors to the ESI at-berth module are based in the EU. A couple of global ports 
participate such as the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Seattle.  

Box 1 Results from a comparable initiative (EPI in Norway) 

As the ESI at-berth module is still a work in progress, there are not yet any concrete 
results. Results of a comparable initiative in Norway - the Environmental Port Index 
(EPI) –provide insights on what results might be.  

The EPI applies a ‘bonus/malus’ system to the port fee of cruise ships. It incentivises 
environmentally-friendly cruise ships and penalises more polluting cruise ships. The 
EPI assumes an environmental baseline. Comparing the performance of the cruise 
ship with the baseline results in a discount or a penalty on top of the port fee. As a 
result, the port fee is adjusted in the range of 80% to 150%.  

The cost of developing, implementing and administering the ESI at-berth module are 
estimated at EUR 200 000. This amount is financed by three shoreside groups: the 57 
ports that use the current ESI system to incentivise sustainable shipping19, cruise ports 
that are already committed to participating20 and the IAPH, and the increasing number 
of cruise ports that are joining the initiative. The 57 Ports that currently participate in 
the ESI programme contribute EUR 1 000 each – EUR 50 000 to EUR 55 000 in total 
Ports  that  already  committed  to  participating  &  the  IAPH  pay  EUR  150 000  EUR 
altogether, and new cruise ports that join contribute EUR 1 000 each.  

Impact of the ESI at-berth module on stakeholders  

The  ESI  at-berth  module  is  a  practice  with  an  expected  positive  impact  on 
environmental  and  social  sustainability.  However,  as  the  module  requires  financial 
commitments, it has an adverse effect on the financials of the stakeholders involved. 
The effects for each stakeholder  - positive and negative - are discussed in the table 
below.  

19 These Ports might receive other vessels than cruise ships such as cargo vessels 
20 These Ports include the Ports of Aalborg, Amsterdam, Hamburg, HAROPA, Los Angeles, Rotterdam, 
Seattle, and 28 Spanish Ports (PUERTOS DEL ESTADO). One governmental institution – the Nordic 
Council of Ministers – also supports the initiative. 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Table 5 Impact on stakeholders 

Stakeholder 
group 

Impacts (positive and negative) 

Cruise Lines  Cruise lines have to report static and dynamic data as part of the ESI 
at-berth  module.  This  is  an  additional  administrative  task  which  is 
not expected to require much time if the system is well-designed21. 
The process for cruise lines to retrieve local regulations, port facilities 
and  incentive  schemes  is  centralised  and,  therefore,  simplified  for 
cruise  lines.  Moreover,  cruise  ships  could  use  the  ESI  at-berth 
module  to  analyse  their  performance  and  improvement  potential. 
Lastly, the module could impact the port fees of the cruise ships. The 
ESI  at-berth  module  replaces  the  ESI  system  –  shifting  incentives 
awarded based on emissions during one year to emissions exhausted 
during one berth.  

Government  The Nordic Council of Ministers supports and contributes financially 

to the ESI at-berth module. 

Ports 

The participating 35 ports carry a total financial cost of EUR 150 000, 
indicating  that  each  port  contributes  on  average  EUR  4 000.  Ports 
must  report  the  local  regulations,  port  facilities  and  incentive 
schemes. This additional administrative task is expected to  require 
little  time.  Additionally  -  as  a  requirement  of  the  module  -  ports 
incentivise sustainable cruise ships. The advantage for ports is that 
they receive insights into the emissions of the cruise ships berthed 
at the port.  

Local 
Communities 

Local  communities  benefit  from  the  locally  improved  air  quality  – 
mainly from the result of the incentive scheme that is part of the ESI 
at-berth  module.  Therefore,  there  is  a  positive  impact  on  living 
conditions at a destination. 

Hard impacts 

The  practices  are  evaluated  from  a  sustainability  standpoint,  which  means  that  the 
hard impacts include economic, environmental, and social impacts. 

Environmental impact 

The cruise ships are incentivised to emit fewer greenhouse gases when at the quay. 
The impact of cruise ships on the environment could, therefore, decline as cruise lines 
want to opt for incentives.  

21 Even Husby – Head of Environment of the Port of Bergen and EPI director  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Economic impact 

The practice influences the financials of cruise lines, governments and ports. The costs 
to  develop,  implement  and  administer  the  ESI  at-berth  module  are  estimated  at 
EUR 200 000. There are no additional costs for  cruise lines. ESI-incentive providers, 
ports and the IAPH finance the module. 

If cruise lines reduce the impact of their ships on the environment, the costs decrease 
for cruise lines as port fees are linked to the emissions of the cruise ships. The costs 
for  cruise  lines  increase  slightly  as  a  consequence  of  the  additional  administrative 
burden (providing static and dynamic data). However, centralised information provided 
by ports reduces the administrative burden as it saves cruise lines having to research 
the most up-to-date situations from fragmented sources. 

Social impact 

The local community benefits socially from the ESI at-berth module. It is expected that 
emissions by cruise ships will decrease in the future as a result of incentives from the 
ESI  at-berth  module,  resulting  in  less  air  pollution  and  therefore  a  healthier 
community.  

Soft impacts 

Soft  impacts  constitute  the  intangible  impacts  and  comprise  the  structure, 
implementation effectiveness and, monitoring and reporting of the practice. 

Practice structure 

The  ESI  at-berth  module  is  part  of  the  ESI  programme.  The  ESI  programme  is  an 
initiative by the IAPH, an NGO representing ports all over the world. Ports and cruise 
lines take part in the ESI at berth module. Cruise lines participate by providing static 
and  dynamic  data  and  ports  contribute  by  providing  facilities,  local  regulations  and 
incentive  schemes.  A  non-profit  and  independent  company  –  the  Green  Award 
Foundation22 – acts as a contact intermediary and helpdesk, validates the emissions 
reported by the cruise lines and provides data reports to the users. 

Cruise  lines  are  incentivised  to  operate  cruise  ships  that  pollute  less  than  legally 
required. For the ESI at-berth module to be successful, as many cruise lines and ports 
as possible have to participate. Ports carry the costs of the module as they pay for the 
development, implementation and administration of the module. 

The objective is for the module to run semi-automatically, i.e. without the help of IAPH 
employees.  The static data of both ports and cruise ships  only need to be manually 
uploaded  to  the  system  once.  The  cruise  ships’  dynamic  data  is  inputted  into  the 
system before and after berthing by a cruise ship employee. 

22 The Green Award Foundation partners with the IAPH regarding the ESI governance. Source: 

https://www.iaphworldports.org/news/iaphnews/8882/ 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Implementation effectiveness 

The ESI at-berth module will be piloted starting from 2023. The module incentivises 
green  improvements  during  the  berthing  of  cruise  ships.  These  improvements  are 
voluntary.  As  reporting  of  emissions  already  results  in  financial  bonuses  for  cruise 
lines, the expectation is that many cruise lines will participate. 

Monitoring and reporting 

As  part  of  the  ESI  at-berth  module,  ship  engineers  report  dynamic  data  of  the  ship 
before and after berthing. Based on these data, and the characteristics of cruise ships, 
such as the engine types, the emissions of a cruise ship can be deduced. Information 
about the emissions can be used by ports to incentivise clean ships and can be used 
by cruise lines to reduce the exhaust gases of their ships. Ports can produce overviews 
of (aggregated) emissions by monitoring the emissions of cruise ships at berth. 

Contribution to the EU Green Deal 

The practice contributes to three aspects of the EU Green Deal. These are supplying 
clean,  affordable  and  secure  energy,  a  zero-pollution  ambition  for  a  toxic-free 
environment, and accelerating the shift to sustainable and smart mobility. 

Supplying clean, affordable and secure energy 

The ESI at berth module contributes to supporting to supply of clean, affordable and 
secure energy by stimulating the reduction in emissions while ships are at the quay. 
The module incentivises – amongst others – energy-efficiency measures, the usage of 
sustainable fuels, and connecting to an onshore power supply (OPS). Energy-efficiency 
measures  result  in  lower  fuel  consumption,  sustainable  fuels  cause  fewer  emissions 
per kilogramme of fuel, and connecting to an onshore power supply prevents emissions 
of cruise ships within the ports. The latter is valid if the electricity generated originates 
from sustainable sources. In other cases, it might be that the electricity provision – 
still - comes from fossil fuels. The EU Green Deal target states that at least 40% of the 
total  energy  mix  in  2030  should  be  constituted  of  renewable  energy  sources.  This 
makes promoting OPS an environmental-friendly choice in the future if it is not already. 

A zero-pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment 

The majority of cruise ships use fossil fuels, even when berthing. Greenhouse gases 
are released as a side effect of burning fuel in an internal combustion engine (ICE). By 
reducing the amount of fuel that are burnt, greenhouse gas emissions are prevented, 
and  the  environment  moves  towards  a  toxic-free  future.  The  ESI  at-berth  module 
contributes to the zero pollution action plan for air pollution. It specifically applies to 
the goal of “improving air quality to reduce the number of premature deaths caused 
by air pollution by 55%.”23  

Accelerating the shift to sustainable and smart mobility 

The EU Green Deal includes the target of reducing transport-related greenhouse gas 
(GHG) emissions by 90% by 2050. Moreover, its objective is that the price of transport 
must  reflect  its  impact  on  the  environment  and  health.  The  ESI  at-berth  module 

23 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

connects environmental and financial impacts. If a cruise ship is more environmentally-
friendly, it is financially incentivised. 

Other key considerations to implementing the ESI at-berth module 

Apart from a user-friendly interface of the ESI at-berth module and the need for a high 
participation rate, there are other considerations for successful implementation. 

Public governance is preferred over private governance  

Openness  and  transparency  are  preferred  by  all  stakeholders.  When  information 
regarding the system  is openly accessible, this helps in the adoption of the system. 
Potentially, stakeholders who do not have access to assessment criteria and reports of 
all  participating  stakeholders  may  confide  less  in  this  system  due  to  the  lack  of 
openness and transparency. Public governance contributes to the possibility to make 
it an open and accessible system.  

Extension of sustainability criteria 

The module considers air pollution as a proxy for sustainability. More factors contribute 
to the sustainability of cruise ships. In the future, more sustainability criteria could be 
assessed  and  included  as  a  benchmark  for  sustainability.  Biofouling  on  the  hulls  of 
cruise ships could – for example - be included in the ESI at berth module. 

Detailed calculation of current ESI score 

The formula to calculate the current total ESI score consists of four data items: ESI 
CO2, ESI NOx, ESI SOx and OPS, and it is expressed as follows: 

𝐸𝑆𝐼 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 = 𝐸𝑆𝐼 𝐶𝑂2 + 𝐸𝑆𝐼 𝑁𝑂𝑥 + 𝐸𝑆𝐼 𝑆𝑂𝑥 + 𝑂𝑃𝑆 (𝑚𝑎𝑥. 100 𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠)  

The calculation of the individual items is described in detail below. 

ESI CO2 

The ESI CO2 is composed of two categories - points awarded when a cruise ship reports 
data, and points awarded due to efficiency gains. Ships must report fuel consumption 
and their distance sailed to be eligible for awarding points in the former category. Ships 
are eligible for points in the latter category if the ship sails more efficiently. 

Efficiency  gains  are  calculated  by  comparing  the  efficiency  of  the  last  year  with  a 
baseline period of three years. Efficiency is based on the total of fuel consumption and 
distance sailed in those periods, the relative prevention of emissions acts as an input 
for the formula.  

ESI NOx  

The ESI NOx is calculated via the rated power per engine – including both auxiliary and 
main engines; the maximum possible score is 33.3 points. The rated power and NOx 
rating are obtained  from the Engine International Air Pollution Prevention certificate 
(IEAPP). It is an obligation to carry this certificate onboard as described in Annex VI 
of MARPOL. The certificate contains details on the engine, including the manufacturer, 
model number, serial number, test cycles, engine approval number, and rated power 
and speed. The NOx limit value is based on Tier I regulations.   

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

ESI SOx 

The  type  of  fuel  bunkered  in  the  last  two  quarters  determines  the  ESI  SOx  score. 
Bunker  Delivery  Notes  (BDNs)  of  the  preceding  two  quarters  must  be  submitted  to 
prove the bunkering of fuel. BDNs contain information on the type of bunkered fuel, 
and mass and %age of sulphur. When scrubbers are used, the sulphur contents of the 
fuel do not correspond to the emitted sulphur.  

Therefore,  BDNs  of  the  fuel  used  for  scrubbing  are  converted  into  virtual  BDNs, 
adjusting the sulphur emissions downwards. There are three categories of fuels: 

•  High:  Heavy  fuel  oil  with  a  sulphur  content  greater  than  0.50%  but  not 

exceeding 3.50%; 

•  Mid: Marine diesel oil/Gasoil with sulphur content equal to or less than 0.50% 

but greater than 0.10%; 

•  Low: Marine diesel oil/Gasoil with sulphur contents equal to or less than 0.10%. 

If only high-category fuels are used, the cruise ships do not receive SOx points. When 
a cruise ship only uses mid-category fuels, the ship can earn 16.7 points. If the ship 
only uses low-category fuels, it is eligible for 33.3 points. If a ship sails on fuels with 
varying fuel categories in a given period, the points are adjusted based on the rate of 
usage. 

OPS 

Ships are awarded points if fitted with onboard equipment suitable to connect to OPS 
installations.  To  receive  the  points,  ships  must  connect  to  the  OPS  whenever  it  is 
present in the port. Additional onboard generators may run less than 5% of the time; 
the time between berthing and connecting to the OPS should take a  maximum of 3 
hours.  10  points  are  awarded  to  ships  that  have  the  OPS  fitted  and  fulfil  the 
aforementioned criteria. 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

SUSTAINABLE CRUISE TERMINAL IN THE PORT OF TALLINN 

This  practice  involved  constructing  and  maintaining  a  sustainable  cruise  terminal  in 
the Port of Tallinn (Estonia). The new terminal has a positive environmental and social 
impact on the city. 

What is the new sustainable cruise terminal in the Port of Tallinn? 

The Port of Tallinn has built a sustainable, modern and multifunctional cruise terminal 
in the city centre of Tallinn.24 The primary goal of building the new cruise terminal was 
to facilitate bigger cruise ships and offer an indoor passenger reception facility for the 
increasing  volumes  of  passengers  –  before  the  new  terminal  was  built,  cruise 
passengers  were  received  in  an  outdoor  space.  The  cruise  terminal  in  Tallinn  is  the 
first and last point of contact where the cruise passengers experience the city and the 
country –  a hospitable  welcome influences the perception of  a destination. The new 
state-of-the-art cruise terminal incorporates, amongst others, an information desk and 
souvenir  shops  of  local  businesses.  The  costs  to  construct  the  cruise  terminal  were 
approximately EUR 15 million.25 

As the terminal is located in the heart of the capital of Estonia, it was designed keeping 
aesthetics in mind and to reduce its negative impact on the environment. Before the 
building was constructed, various architects competed by submitting their designs for 
the  cruise  terminal.  A  jury  of  different  stakeholder  groups  including  representatives 
from architects, the city government and the port authority selected the design that 
maximised the advantages across different stakeholder groups and the city.  

The  cruise  terminal  of  Tallinn  has  won  various  prizes  for  its  design,  including  the 
Monocle  design  award26  and  a  prize  for  real  estate  development  projects  that 
contribute to creating a modern urban space favourable to businesses or tourism and 
creating  an  attractive  living  environment.  The  terminal  handles  over  half  a  million 
cruise  passengers  per  year  and  it  receives  more  than  300  cruise  ship  calls  from 
approximately 40 cruise lines per year27. 

The terminal is multifunctional, i.e. it can host events with scope  outside the cruise 
tourism  industry,  such  as  concerts  and  conferences,  accommodating  up  to  2,000 
people  per  event.  The  cruise  terminal  can  be  split  into  three  separate  rooms  which 
means it can receive cruise passengers and host events at the same time. The outside 
areas of the terminal are designed to create spaces for the community. The roof of the 
cruise terminal acts as an 850-metre-long boulevard that connects the seafront with 
the Culture Kilometre – a popular walking trail in Tallinn. The boulevard on top of the 
cruise terminal harbours seating areas, a playground, an outdoor gym, a restaurant 
and Estonian artworks.28    

In addition to the fact that the terminal was constructed with the local community in 
mind,  the  terminal  is  also  environmentally  sustainable.  The  technical  design  of  the 

24 https://www.architectural-review.com/buildings/cruise-terminal-in-tallinn-estonia-by-salto-architects-
and-stuudio-tallin, and https://www.espo.be/practices/new-sustainable-cruise-terminal-opens-at-port-
of-t  

25 Riho Joala, Port of Tallinn and https://keskkonnatehnika.ee/yit-ehitab-tallinna-sadama-uue-

kruiisiterminali/  

26 https://monocle.com/  
27 https://www.ts.ee/en/cruise-area/  
28 https://www.ts.ee/en/cruise-area/  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

terminal  was  inspired  by  a  study  that  was  carried  out  as  part  of  the  Green  Cruise 
Port  project,  co-financed  by  the  European  Commission  through  the  Interreg  Baltic 
Sea  programme.29  The  terminal  is  mainly  composed  of  sustainably  sourced  Kebony 
wood30, and the building’s energy needs are met by solar panels adapted to the Nordic 
climate.  Furthermore,  the  facility  is  cooled  and  heated  by  an  innovative  heat  pump 
powered  by  marine  energy.31  Lastly,  there  are  innovative  wastewater  reception 
facilities  at  the  berth.  This  innovation,  called  the  micro  tunnel,  reduces  the  flow  of 
wastewater  to  the  city’s  sewer  systems  as  the  sewers  in  Tallinn  cannot  handle  the 
wastewater volume – approximately 200 m3 per hour and ship - from cruise ships all 
at once.  

Figure 2 A view of the cruise terminal of the Port of Tallinn  

Source: https://www.ts.ee/en/cruise-area/ 

29 https://www.ts.ee/tallinna-vanasadamas-avati-uus-kruiisiterminal-ja-promenaad/    
30 Kebony’s carbon footprint is significantly lower than tropical wood equivalents. Brazilian ipe’s carbon 

footprint is 7,500 – 15,000 kilogrammes per m3 while the carbon footprint of Kebony is approximately 
459 kilogrammes per m3. These statistics include the treatment of the woods and the transportation to 
Northern Europe. Source: https://kebony.com/blog/kebony-adds-sustainability-to-city-hang-out/ 

31 https://digitaalehitus.ee/ajaveeb/anna-oma-haal-parimatele-aasta-tegu-ja-aasta-

innovatsiooniprojektnominentidele  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

What are the differences between the old terminal and the newly 
constructed terminal in the Port of Tallinn? 

The  port  reception  area  in  Tallinn  was  outdoor  before  the  new  cruise  terminal  was 
constructed. Passengers from the cruise ship walked into an open space before being 
transported to the city centre. Residents were denied access to the area, as it was a 
closed area fully dedicated to the reception of cruise passengers. The cruise terminal 
as  of  now  –  with  the  new  cruise  terminal  in  operation  –  is  able  to  house  cruise 
passengers indoors. When the weather is bad, cruise passengers can choose to stay 
inside the cruise terminal. Residents and the local community can also access the new 
cruise  terminal.  The  boulevard  is  always  accessible  for  residents  to  relax,  walk  and 
exercise.  The  cruise  terminal  can  be  rented  to  external  companies  to  host  events. 
Environmentally, it is challenging to compare the new and the old cruise terminal. The 
old  cruise  terminal  was  a  cruise-dedicated  area,  while  the  new  cruise  terminal  is  a 
physical building.   

The objective of the sustainable cruise terminal in the Port of Tallinn 

The  sustainable  cruise  terminal  aims  to  be  an  ideal  location  to  receive  cruise 
passengers  which  is  as  sustainable  as  possible.  Additionally,  the  terminal  aims  to 
create an inviting urban space for the local community and to facilitate a location where 
events can be hosted. 

Why  is  the  sustainable  cruise  terminal  of  the  Port  of  Tallinn  a  good  practice  for 
sustainable cruise tourism? 

The cruise terminal in Tallinn is regarded as an innovative cruise terminal in the EU, 
as  it  impacts  positively  both  the  environment  and  society.  The  selection  of  the 
sustainable cruise terminal in the Port of Tallinn is based on it being: 

•  Cruise-tourism specific: The main objective of the cruise terminal of the Port 

of Tallinn is to accommodate cruise passengers.   

•  An example of collaboration among stakeholders: The Port of Tallinn and 
cruise lines work together to make passenger experiences in the cruise terminal 
as  smooth  as  possible.  Mainly,  the  new  cruise  terminal  in  Tallinn  offers  the 
possibilities  for  cruise  lines  to  receive  passengers  with  dedicated  information 
booths inside the cruise terminal. Additionally, the Port stimulates interaction 
between the local community, the Port, cruise lines and organisers of events.  

•  The example is supported with evidence of sustainability: The terminal 
is  constructed  using  Kebony  wood  which  has  a  lower  carbon  footprint  than 
equivalent hardwoods. The solar plans meet 35% of the energy requirement in 
the cold part of the year and 100% in the summertime32. Excess energy is fed 
into the public network. The building is heated and cooled by two heat pumps 
that are connected to an innovative seawater heat exchanger33.  

In terms of the social impact of the cruise terminal in Tallinn, every week on average 
two events were (planned to be) hosted in the cruise terminal in 2022. The promenade 
on the roof of the cruise terminal is frequently visited during summer days. To operate 

32 https://www.detail.de/en/de_en/kreuzfahrt-terminal-in-tallinn-von-salto-architects  
33http://www.greencruiseport.eu/files/public/download/events/final_conference/14_Green%20Cruise%20P

ort_Port%20of%20Tallinn.pdf  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

the  cruise  terminal,  approximately  20  jobs  are  created  in  the  restaurant  on  the 
boulevard, and circa 10 seasonal jobs are  created in the information points and the 
souvenir shops in the cruise terminal.  

•  The example is within the European Union (EU): The cruise terminal is in 

Tallinn, Estonia, which is in the EU. 

Impact of the sustainable cruise terminal on the stakeholders  

The cruise terminal is a practice with a positive impact  on environmental and social 
sustainability. However, as the installation requires financial commitments, it has an 
adverse  effect  on  the  financials  of  the  stakeholders  involved.  The  effects  for  each 
stakeholder - positive and negative - are discussed in the table below. 

Table 6 Impacts by stakeholder group 

Stakeholder 
group 

Cruise lines 

Impacts (positive and negative) 

As a new facility was built, the reception of passengers is enhanced. 
The cruise ships benefit from this as the new cruise terminal offers 
the cruise lines an indoor place to set up their hospitality desks and 
facilitates an indoor waiting area for cruise passengers. The costs for 
cruise  lines  to  berth  remains  approximately  equal  to  the  situation 
before the new cruise terminal in Tallinn was constructed. 

Local 
municipality 

The local municipality is involved as the cruise terminal is located in 
the centre of Tallinn. Representatives of the local municipality gave 
their  opinions  during  the  selection  of  the  design  of  the  cruise 
terminal. 

Port 

The Port of Tallinn is the key contributor towards the financial aspect 
of  the  cruise  terminal.  It  paid  to  invest  in  and  maintain  the  cruise 
terminal. These investment and maintenance costs allow the Port of 
Tallinn to receive more passengers and bigger ships. Therefore, it is 
expected  to  increase  the  revenues  of  the  Port  of  Tallinn.  The 
maintenance  costs  are  initially  negligible  as  the  cruise  terminal  is 
under warranty from the construction company. The Port of Tallinn 
supervised the construction of and owns the cruise terminal. 

Local 
communities 

The local community of Tallinn benefits from attending and hosting 
events in the cruise terminal, and the local community profits from 
the  enhanced  outdoor  urban  space.  The  cruise  terminal  is 
multifunctional and can be used for  events  - such as  concerts and 
conferences.  Moreover,  the  residents  in  the  local  community  can 
enjoy  the  boulevard  with  -  amongst  others  -  an  outdoor  gym,  a 
relaxing zone, a restaurant and a playground. 

Destination 
management 
organisations 
(DMOs) 

The destination management organisations (DMOs) have an indoor 
space to inform cruise passengers. 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Hard impacts 

The practices are evaluated from a sustainability standpoint which means that the hard 
impacts include economic, environmental, and social impacts. 

Environmental impact 

The  cruise  terminal  in  the  Port  of  Tallinn  positively  impacts  the  environment.  The 
terminal  is  constructed  with  Kebony  wood  which  has  a  lower  carbon  footprint  than 
equivalent  hardwoods.  The  roof  of  the  cruise  terminal  contains  725  solar  panels 
(Suntech  Single  Crystal  360Wp).  Altogether,  these  panels  generate  261  kWp34.  It 
covers 35% of the energy requirement of the cruise terminal in the cold part of the 
year, while up to 100% of the energy requirements in the summertime35. The solar 
panels produce more than 23,500 kWh yearly36. Excess energy is fed into the public 
network. The building is heated and cooled by two heat pumps that are connected to 
an innovative seawater heat exchanger37. The heat pump system cools and heats with 
respectively a maximum power of 430 kW and 170 kW38. The building is entirely gas-
free, which means that the cruise terminal is fossil-free for most of the year. 

Economic impact 

The  practice  influences  the  financials  of  governments  and  the  Port.  The  total 
investment costs for the sustainable cruise terminal in Tallinn were approximately EUR 
15 million The Port financed this investment and has to maintain the terminal.   

Social impact 

The local community benefits socially from the cruise terminal in the Port of Tallinn. 
Based on the awards that the cruise terminal received, experts think it is a construction 
that is pleasant to the eye. The local community benefits from attending and hosting 
events in the cruise terminal, and they profit from the enhanced outdoor urban space. 
Additionally, the cruise terminal in Tallinn is the first and last point of contact where 
the  cruise  passengers  experience  the  city  and  the  country  –  a  nice  and  hospitable 
welcome stimulates the positive perception of Tallinn. 

Soft impact 

Soft  impacts  constitute  the  intangible  impacts  and  comprise  the  structure, 
implementation effectiveness and, monitoring and reporting of the practice. 

Practice structure 

The  Port  owns  the  cruise  terminal  and  coordinated  the  construction  of  the  cruise 
terminal. The Port of Tallinn has a sustainable development policy39 – as represented 
in  Figure  3  -  that  aligns  with  the  goals  of  the  sustainable  cruise  terminal.  The 
sustainable cruise terminal, for instance, contributes to high-quality public space and 
regional development, and to the aim to be energy efficient. Regarding the high-quality 

34 https://sunergia.ee/tallinna-kruiisiterminali-paikesepark/  
35 https://www.detail.de/en/de_en/kreuzfahrt-terminal-in-tallinn-von-salto-architects  
36 https://sunergia.ee/tallinna-kruiisiterminali-paikesepark/  
37http://www.greencruiseport.eu/files/public/download/events/final_conference/14_Green%20Cruise%20P

ort_Port%20of%20Tallinn.pdf  

38 Riho Joala, Port of Tallinn 
39 https://www.ts.ee/en/social-responsibility/  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

public space and regional development, residents are included in the process from the 
beginning to think about how the cruise terminals could make a positive social impact. 
Moreover, the cruise terminal facilitates a new event building which is rented to event 
organisers, the Port Authority does not organise non-cruise-related events. DMOs and 
cruise lines have dedicated points of contact in the new cruise terminal. The aim to be 
energy-efficient is supported by the new cruise terminal as it includes solar panels on 
its roof, a novel heat pump and lacks natural gas connections. 

Figure 3 The Port of Tallinn plans to develop sustainably  

Source: https://www.ts.ee/en/social-responsibility/. 

Implementation effectiveness 

The port's ambition for high-quality public space and regional development, and the 
aim to be energy efficient align with the objectives of the sustainable cruise terminal. 

The governance of the building is perceived as successful by the Port of Tallinn. The 
Port aligns with  cruise  stakeholders to discuss the  cruise  operations,  while the non-
cruise-related  events  are  outsourced  to  other  parties.  Communication  with  event 
organisers  occurs  ad-hoc  as  the  number  of  events  organised  differs  weekly.  One 
person within the organisation of the Port of Tallinn coordinates the renting out of the 
building.  She  introduces  the  building  and  prepares  agreements  and  invoices.  The 
cleaning  in  the  terminal  is  outsourced  to  other  parties,  while  the  decision  of 
maintaining  the  building  by  the  Port  of  Tallinn’s  employees  or  external  companies 
depends  on  the  nature  of  the  maintenance  operation.  More  complex  maintenance 
procedures are outsourced to external companies. As the building is still in its warranty 
period, the maintenance costs are negligible. 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Monitoring and reporting 

The number of events that are hosted every year is registered – in 2022, on average 
2 events are hosted per week - and the residents that visit the boulevard on top of the 
cruise  terminal  are  visually  inspected.  These  statistics  are  available  on  request. 
Moreover, the generation of electricity from the solar panels is measured and reported 
in  the  yearly  report.  Additionally,  objectives  to  take  energy-efficiency  measures  for 
2030 are set and stated in the annual report. As an example, the Port of Tallinn aims 
to upgrade outdoor lightning for sustainable alternatives in 2030. The rate of the actual 
replacements is reported every year in the annual report40. 

Contribution to the EU Green Deal 

The  practice  contributes  to  two  aspects  of  the  EU  Green  Deal.  These  are  supplying 
clean,  affordable  and  secure  energy,  and  building  and  renovating  in  an  energy  and 
resource-efficient way. 

Supplying clean, affordable and secure energy 

The cruise terminal in the Port of Tallinn contributes to supplying clean, affordable and 
secure energy by using electricity from solar panels for its operations. The generated 
electricity originates from a sustainable source and thus contributes to this EU Green 
Deal target.  

Building and renovating in energy and resource-efficient way 

The cruise terminal of Tallinn contributes to the objective of building and renovating in 
an energy and resource-efficient way. The cruise terminal in Tallinn used Kebony wood 
for  the  exterior  cladding  and  decking  of  the  cruise  terminal.  This  timber  is  more 
sustainable than tropical wood. The cruise terminal generates  sustainable  electricity 
from  solar  panels  and  draws  on  energy-efficient  technologies  such  as  a  heat  pump 
driven by marine energy.  

Other key considerations to constructing a sustainable cruise terminal 

Apart  from  involving  stakeholders  before  and  during  the  construction  of  the  cruise 
terminal, there are other considerations for a successful implementation. 

Rough environmental conditions 

Cruise  terminals  are  located  next  to  salt  water,  and  are  experiencing  rough 
environmental  conditions.  The  cruise  terminals  should  be  robustly  constructed. 
Innovative  techniques  might  be  incompatible  with  the  specific  environmental 
conditions of a destination.  

Traffic solutions 

(Un)loading cruise passengers and hosting events could introduce logistical challenges 
for neighbouring infrastructure. When constructing a terminal, a holistic view should 
be adopted to prevent traffic jams and account for the resident and/or cruise passenger 
flows. A possible solution would be to offer sustainable alternatives – such as walking 

40 https://www.ts.ee/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Tallinna-Sadam-Annual-Report-2021-pdf-copy.pdf  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

routes  and  providing  bikes  –  to  encourage  people  to  transport  sustainably  from  the 
cruise terminal to the city and vice versa. 

Seasonality 

The cruise season is limited to a couple of months in many destinations. To decrease 
the seasonality, innovative solutions could be implemented such as the ability to host 
events  outside  the  cruise  tourism  industry  during  low  season.  The  cruise  terminal 
should  be  designed  with  this  in  mind.  For  instance,  the  roof  of  the  cruise  terminal 
should enable the mounting of lighting used for concerts and shows.  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

DUBROVNIK’S COLLABORATION WITH CRUISE TOURISM  

This  practice  involves  the  collaboration  between  the  City  of  Dubrovnik,  cruise  lines, 
and the Cruise  Lines International Association  (CLIA) with the aim of  making cruise 
tourism more sustainable within the city. 

Why did the collaboration happen?  

The Old Town of Dubrovnik became one of the first UNESCO World Heritage Sites in 
1979.41 Up and until the coronavirus pandemic, the quantity of tourists in Dubrovnik 
had been increasing rapidly on an annual basis, with a total of a 137% increase during 
the period 2011-2019.42  Cruise tourism contributes to a  significant  extent to tourist 
arrivals43 in Dubrovnik, and thus, to the phenomenon of overcrowding in the city over 
the last decade. This has resulted in great dissatisfaction over the loss of quality of life 
from  the  locals,  as  well  as  migration  out  of  the  Old  Town  area.44,45  Upon  being 
cautioned by UNESCO in 2015 to reduce the number of tourists,46 the city of Dubrovnik 
took action. In the case  of cruise tourism, this action to the form  of  a collaboration 
between the  city, cruise lines, the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) and 
the port authority to ensure a better quality of life for both residents and tourists of 
Dubrovnik.  

Overview of the collaboration  

The City of Dubrovnik took action to combat overcrowding and overtourism in August 
2017, which encompassed a wide variety of actions and measures - such as a smart 
and sustainable urban mobility strategy, plans to raise sustainability awareness among 
tourists  and  marketing  Dubrovnik  as  a  sustainable  destination,  as  well  as  a 
collaboration between the City of Dubrovnik, cruise lines, CLIA and the port authority. 
The main objective of the collaboration is to reduce the negative effects of overtourism 
through the continued cooperation of stakeholders and a combination of visitor-limiting 
measures, a better organisation of cruise calls, improvements in passenger flows and 
crowd reduction solutions.47  

41 https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/95/  
42 https://www.statista.com/statistics/886613/dubrovnik-tourist-arrivals/  
43 https://www.statista.com/statistics/888969/dubrovnik-call-cruise-passenger-numbers/  
44 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/croatia/dubrovnik/articles/dubrovnik-faces-

overcrowding-cruise-ship-visitors-/  

45 https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/places-to-avoid-2018/index.html  
46 https://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/141053  
47 https://tzdubrovnik.hr/lang/en/get/kultura_i_povijest/75284/respect_the_city.html  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 4 A cruise ship sailing past Dubrovnik  

Source: Getty Images

In  2019,  the  City  of  Dubrovnik  and  CLIA  signed  a  Memorandum  of  Understanding 
(MoU), formalising four key areas of focus48 to stimulate more sustainable governance 
of the city. One of those areas is tailored specifically to sustainable cruise tourism and 
will be the focus here.49 

Besides the collaboration with CLIA, the City of Dubrovnik cooperates closely with local 
stakeholders.  As  the  City  of  Dubrovnik  is  governed  by  the  national  authorities,  its 
policies  align  with  the  local  government  without  influence  from  commercial  parties, 
making it easier to implement non-profit sustainability-driven initiatives. As a result, 
various initiatives to increase cruise tourism sustainability of the city as a whole were 
introduced, including a berthing policy, smart city tools, a coordination committee, and 
a cruise ship tax.  

The  berthing  policy  sets  a  clear  timetable  published  in  advance  and  prevents  there 
being  an  excessive  number  of  passengers  in  the  Old  Town.  The  objective  of  the 
berthing policy is to limit cruise passengers in the Old Town  to 4 000. The minimum 
stay  of  cruise  ships  is  eight  hours  to  prevent  disturbing  the  local  community  with 
frequent  berthings,  and  12  hours  for  cruise  ships  that  carry  more  than  4 000 

48 (1) Engagement of key stakeholders, including the local community and international organisations, 

through the establishment of a dedicated working group; (2) Collaborating on a destination stewardship 
roadmap for the city based on UN sustainable tourism criteria; (3) Communicating and implementing the 
cruise ship berthing policy; (4) Developing and implementing the ‘Respect the City’ visitor education 
campaign 

49 https://cruising.org/en-gb/news-and-research/press-room/2019/july/cruise-industry-and-city-of-

dubrovnik-partner 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   37 

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

passengers. Berthings create an instantaneous increase in passengers in the city which 
causes  blockages  –  e.g.  traffic  jams  and  queues  to  enter  facilities  and  attractions  - 
throughout the city50. 

Smart  city  tools  include,  amongst  others,  the  pre-booking  of  bus  stops.  When 
passengers  leave  the  cruise  ships,  they  spread  through  transportation  to  the  city 
centre, the Old Town, and other destinations on the periphery. To stimulate passenger 
flow, several bus stops are reserved for cruise passengers.   

A coordination committee is in place in Dubrovnik. The task is to gather representatives 
of  local,  public  institutions  to  coordinate  in  managing  cruise  tourist  flows  after  the 
arrival of cruise ships. The means of communication depends on the required degree 
of coordination. In the low season, e-mails suffice, while in the high season real-life 
meetings  may  be  organised  to  engage  more  directly  with  the  local  community  and 
other cruise-related stakeholders. 

Starting in 2021, as provided by the National Tourism Tax law, any cruise ship docked 
at port or at anchorage in the Dubrovnik area is subject to a cruise ship tax51, similar 
to other forms of tourism. The amount owed differs depending on ship size and can 
amount to up to  HRK 40 000 (or around EUR  5,30052) at the time  of  writing of this 
document, and within a range provided by national law. By decision of the Municipal 
Council,  revenue  generated  from  this  tax  is  exclusively  used  to  improve  municipal 
transportation infrastructure.53  

Why is the collaboration within the city of Dubrovnik a good practice for 
sustainable cruise tourism? 

The collaboration in the city of Dubrovnik is considered a good practice for sustainable 
cruise  tourism  based  on  four  criteria:    cruise-tourism  specificity  of  the  practice, 
collaborative efforts of the practice, hard data availability on the impact of the practice 
and the geography (EU) of the practice. It is: 

•  Cruise-tourism  specific:  The  practice  addresses  sustainable  tourism  issues 
directly  by  including  specific  provisions  for  cruise  tourism  in  the  municipal 
destination  management  plan.  Factoring  cruise  tourism  in  the  overall  plan, 
allows the authorities to better manage the tourism flows in the destination and 
the destination itself.  

•  An  example  of  collaboration  among  stakeholders:  In  collaboration  with 
CLIA and the Municipality, the Port of Dubrovnik establishes rules for docking 
while the City sets limits on the number of cruise tourists that can visit the Old 
Town of Dubrovnik  simultaneously. Individual  cruise lines work with the Port 
Authority in the City of Dubrovnik’s coordination committee to determine which 
cruise ship will dock when, and the city collaborates with local bus and other 
transportation companies to ensure transport is arranged from the port to the 
city centre, the Old Town of Dubrovnik, and other destinations on the periphery. 

50 https://www.portdubrovnik.hr/datoteke/cruise-ship-berthing-policy202320211112164657.pdf  
51 https://www.themayor.eu/en/a/view/dubrovnik-to-introduce-foreign-cruise-ships-tax-3464  
52 Conversion rate of 1 EUR = 7.52 HRK, retrieved on 06-07-2022 
53 According to Mato Franković, mayor of Dubrovnik. Source: https://www.total-croatia-

news.com/business/50020-dubrovnik-expects-hrk-14-million-in-tourist-tax  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

•  The example is supported with evidence of sustainability: The improved 
management of cruise ship traffic is a direct impact of the practice. With better 
management of cruise tourism flows, there is a lower negative impact on local 
natural and cultural heritage sites, facilitating their preservation.  

This practice also  contributes to the  social sustainability of cruise tourism. The local 
community  is  involved  as  a  stakeholder  within  the  programme  and  benefits  from  a 
better  quality  of  life  due  to  less  crowding  by  cruise  tourists,  fewer  traffic  jams,  and 
less noise. As cruise traffic picks up again after the COVID-19 pandemic, it is expected 
that Dubrovnik will see 328 cruise ship calls and a total of 511,000 cruise tourists54. 
These figures are 33% and 34% lower than those of 2019, the last year before the 
coronavirus pandemic.55  

Impact of the collaboration on stakeholders  

The  practice  has  a  positive  impact  on  sustainable  cruise  tourism.  However,  it  also 
affects  cruise  lines,  cruise  passengers,  and  local  communities.  The  effects  for  each 
stakeholder (positive and negative) are discussed in the table below.   

Table 7 Impacts by stakeholder group 

Stakeholder 
group 
Cruise lines 

Cruise 
passengers 

Local 
communities 

Impacts (positive and negative) 

Cruise lines need to comply with the stricter berthing policies of the 
Port of Dubrovnik. Therefore, they experience additional complexity 
of having to plan and coordinate their visit to the Old Town, which, 
combined  with  limiting  their  docking  options  at  an  attractive 
destination, could reduce their overall profitability. As a result, cruise 
lines  are  exploring  alternatives  for  berthing  berth  at,  for  instance, 
Kotor, Split, Zadar, Sibenik or Rijeka. 
Cruise passengers benefit from the reduced crowds during their visit, 
enabling  a  better  experience  and  possibly  increased  spending.  In 
addition, the cruise passengers spend longer in  Dubrovnik, making 
it  possible  to  visit  a  greater  part  of  the  city  and  the  surrounding 
areas, and spend more time (and money) during their visit. 
Local communities benefit from less crowded areas and better quality 
of  life.  Given  less  frequent  docking  of  cruise  ships  due  to  the 
spreading  of  port  calls,  local  communities  also  experience  reduced 
noise  and  air  pollution.  Additionally,  due  to  better  accessibility  to 
local  businesses  and  more  time  spent  in  the  city,  local  businesses 
see an overall positive economic effect despite the reduction in the 
number of cruise tourists. According to Jelka Tepšić, Deputy Mayor 
of  Dubrovnik,  visitors  who  stay  for  a  short  period  in  the  city  of 
Dubrovnik  spend  small  amounts  compared  to  tourists  who  stay 
longer. The main contributor to the positive effect is, therefore, that 
the cruise tourist remains in the city of Dubrovnik for longer. 

54 Interview with Jelka Tepšić, Deputy Mayor of Dubrovnik 
55 https://www.ovpm.org/2021/04/14/management-plan-for-unesco-world-heritage-site-the-old-city-of-

dubrovnik/  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
  
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Hard impacts 

The practices are evaluated from a sustainability standpoint, meaning the hard impacts 
include economic, environmental, and social impacts. 

Environmental impact 

By allowing fewer cruise tourists to visit the Old Town of Dubrovnik simultaneously, 
there is a lower chance of damage occurring to local nature and historic sites.  

Economic impact 

Though  the  overall  economic  impact  of  the  practice  is  difficult  to  evaluate  with 
quantitative  data,  the  collaboration  positively  affects  the  local  economy.  First, 
limitations on the overall number of cruise tourists reduces overcrowding and enables 
a larger proportion  of tourists to  spend money and time in the city. Second, as the 
minimum berthing time has been increased to 8 hours – and 12 hours for ships carrying 
more than 4,000 passengers, cruise tourists spend more time in the city and therefore 
could  allocate  their  money  to  local  businesses  they  would  not  have  otherwise 
considered.56 Additionally, with the dispersion of cruise tourists, the city benefits from 
lower costs associated with the negative aspects of tourism such as littering.  

Cruise  lines  are  slightly  negatively  affected  by  the  practice  due  to  potentially  being 
able to offer fewer trips to Dubrovnik per year and having additional costs associated 
with coordinating and scheduling their arrival in the city. However, many nearby ports 
offer good alternatives, such as Kotor, Split, Zadar, Sibenik or Rijeka.  

Social impact 

This practice contributes to a significant social impact on the quality of life of tourists 
and residents. By spreading the number of cruise ship calls throughout the week and 
increasing the minimum time at the Port for cruise ships, the residents benefit from a 
reduction in noise and sea traffic disturbances. In reducing crowding throughout the 
Old  Town,  residents  and  tourists  alike  benefit  from  a  better  quality  of  life,  faster 
transportation  times  within  the  city,  less  overall  noise  from  cruise  ships,  better 
availability of city facilities, and a generally lower negative impact of tourism on the 
city. 

Soft impacts 

Soft  impacts  constitute  the  intangible  impacts  and  comprise  the  structure, 
implementation effectiveness and, monitoring and reporting of the practice.  

Practice structure 

The City of Dubrovnik initiated this practice while the Port is the authority responsible 
for the establishment and enforcement of rules for docking and the number of cruise 
tourists. The City collaborates with local bus companies to ensure transport is arranged 
from the port to the city centre, the Old Town and other destinations on the periphery. 
The City of Dubrovnik is responsible for reporting and monitoring the progress. Cruise 
lines are responsible for ensuring compliance with the Port’s berthing policy.  

56 Interview with Jelka Tepšić, Deputy Mayor of Dubrovnik 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Implementation effectiveness 

The  definitive  effectiveness  is  difficult  to  monitor.  The  number  of  cruise  tourists  fell 
during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as in 2022 (as of mid-year), which has been 
a mostly normal year for tourism so far.57 Public perception of government handling of 
cruise  tourism  has  improved,  and  these  efforts  were  recognised  by  the  Global 
Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC).58 The research by GSTC is a consequence of an 
MoU with CLIA. CLIA sponsored the research for the GSTC report. 

Monitoring and reporting 

The project’s progress is monitored quantitatively by monitoring the number of cruise 
tourists  and  cruise  ship  calls.  Qualitatively,  progress  is  monitored  via  visually 
monitoring  crowd  levels  in  the  city  and  the  perceptions  of  experts.  More  than  100 
cameras are spread over 48 locations to be able to assess crowding levels.59 This data 
can be accessed by contacting DURA (Dubrovnik Development Agency).60 Progress is 
shared  with  stakeholders  in  annual  government  meetings,  the  reports  of  which  are 
made public.12  

Contribution to the EU Green Deal 

The  practice  contributes  toward  overall  sustainability  of  the  destination,  notably  by 
spreading the environmental impacts, including on the natural environment, cultural 
sites and as a result of cruise ship noise.  

Other key considerations to implementing the collaboration 

To  ensure  successful  implementation  of  a  cruise  tourism  sustainability  practice,  two 
key items must be considered prior to initiation.   

Align and communicate with stakeholders 

A cruise tourism sustainability practice as part of the overall sustainable destination 
planning  involves  many  stakeholders,  such  as  the  city,  the  local  port  authority,  the 
cruise lines, CLIA, residents, tourists, and local business owners. To ensure successful 
implementation,  it  is  key  to  have  clear  communication  channels  between  the 
stakeholders. The creation of a dedicated government body in charge of handling the 
practice and ensuring successful implementation can be helpful in that regard.  

Review of economic impact  

Though the social impact of reducing cruise tourism can be positive, locations whose 
economies  depend  heavily  on  cruise  tourism  can  be  disproportionately  negatively 
affected by a reduction in the number of cruise tourists. It is therefore important to 
assess the net economic impact of such a practice and attempt to compensate for this 
impact in other ways if it is negative, either by introducing other economic initiatives 
or by compensating through environmental and social impact.  

57 Interview with Jelka Tepšić, Deputy Mayor of Dubrovnik 
58 https://www.gstcouncil.org/once-overrun-dubrovnik-plans-for-sustainability/  
59 https://webunwto.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2021-

07/Keynote%20Dubrovnik_UNWTO%20Porto%20forum_Smart%20citis%20and%20Tourism_1.pdf?Versi
onId=ZIeJ80j9I0u4fB6LRVenrGlDUrpEyj_I  

60 https://dura.hr/  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

4GOODFOOD: HALVING FOOD WASTE BY 2020 

This practice involves the 4GOODFOOD programme of Costa Crociere, a cruise line and 
subsidiary of Carnival Corporation. The aim of the programme involves halving food 
waste generated by Costa Crociere ships. 

Why is cruise ship food waste significant?  

For most cruise lines, any food that is not consumed is ground and expelled into the 
ocean.61  Even  unprocessed  food  scraps  can  be  expelled  into  the  ocean  if  the  cruise 
ship  is  more  than  12  nautical  miles  from  shore.  Other  than  generally  being 
unsustainable in terms of the excess waste and resources used, cruise ship food waste 
can also cause problems for local marine life. The fruit and vegetables will have been 
treated with pesticides, and meats and proteins may have been treated with antibiotics 
and hormones. These chemicals can have adverse effects on the health of local marine 
life, and the excess food introduced into the ecosystem can disrupt the balance in the 
predator-prey  chain.62  The  level  of  food  waste  can  be  up  to  40%  of  the  total  food 
prepared in terms of mass, 60% of which is due to overproduction of food that is not 
consumed by the customer.63 

Overview of the 4GOODFOOD programme 

4GOODFOOD is a food waste reduction programme aimed at reducing food waste on 
board  Costa  Crociere  ships.  The  goal  of  the  practice  is  to  reach  or  exceed  the  UN’s 
Sustainable Development Agenda by reducing food waste by 50% by 2020, ten years 
ahead of the UN’s schedule. The practice consists of five distinct phases, executed in 
partnership  with  Università  di  Scienze  Gastronomiche  di  Pollenzo,  Winnow, 
Cittadinanzattiva, and Fondazione Banco Alimentare Onlus.64  

Figure 5 Costa Crociere’s food waste reduction programme  

Source: https://www.costacruises.co.uk/sustainability/magazine/tomorrow/4goodfood.html 

61 https://powerknot.com/2021/06/15/cruise-ships-set-sail-with-power-knot-biodigesters-on-board/ 
62 https://foe.org/blog/where-do-cruise-ships-dump-their-waste/ 
63 https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/650776/Insight%20Report%20/Quarterly%20Report_V03.pdf 
64 https://hospitality-on.com/en/worldwide-hospitality-awards/costa-crociere/4goodfood-50-food-waste-

2020 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

There are five steps in the programme: 

1. Review of the food experience: The first phase involved a sustainability review 
and remodelling of the food experience on board Costa Crociere ships. This included a 
review  of  the  food  and  wine  offerings  to  select  quality  products  and  ingredients, 
prioritising local production and the  seasonal availability of products.  Costa Crociere 
also reviewed its buffet service offering and restructured the food available to include 
more vegetarian options, especially focusing on vegetarian protein alternatives.  

2.  Reduction  of  food  waste  during  preparation:  The  second  phase  involved  an 
analysis  and  quantification  of  the  amount  of  food  discarded  during  preparation, 
including  mapping  of  waste  at  each  step  of  the  food  preparation  process.  This  data 
was used to restructure the food preparation process across all Costa Crociere ships.  

3. Inclusion of guests in responsible consumption: To highlight the importance 
of  good  eating  habits,  both  in  terms  of  health  and  sustainability,  Costa  Crociere 
launched ‘Taste Don’t Waste’, a programme aimed at communicating a call to action 
to guests for responsible consumption. The programme involved drawing attention to 
the importance of a balanced diet and good eating habits in relation to both health and 
environmental impact.  

4. Management of excess food: Costa Crociere introduced an excess food donation 
scheme involving the retrieval of ready-to-eat meals prepared on board but not served. 
These  leftover  meals,  despite  being  of  high  quality  in  terms  of  ingredients  and 
nutritional  value,  would  otherwise  be  thrown  away.  Instead,  they  were  donated  to 
communities in need with the help of local food banks. 

5. Giving back to the community: Costa Crociere supported the network of Food 
Gardens in Africa by contributing funding for the establishment of 50 food gardens in 
Mozambique, South Africa and Tanzania. As this donation was not directly related to 
best sustainable practices within the cruise tourism industry, the focus below is on the 
first four steps. 

Why is the 4GOODFOOD programme a good practice for sustainable cruise 
tourism? 

The  4GOODFOOD  programme  is  considered  a  good  practice  as  it  has  a  positive 
economic, environmental and societal impact. It is: 

•  Cruise-tourism  specific:  The  4GOODFOOD  programme  addresses  food 
sustainability  issues  in  a  cruise  tourism  setting.  This  relates  to  all  the  food 
prepared on board a cruise ship and served to guests and staff.  

•  An  example  of  collaboration  among  stakeholders:  Throughout  the 
4GOODFOOD  programme,  Costa  Crociere  has  collaborated  with  a  variety  of 
stakeholders  to  ensure  successful  implementation,  including  a  university,  a 
food  waste  consulting  firm,  and  various  foodbanks  which  serve  as  the 
intermediary  between  Costa  Crociere  and  local  communities.  The  main 
collaboration is between the cruise passengers and the  cruise lines: with the 
aim of reducing leftovers of food and hence waste of food. 

•  The example is supported with evidence of sustainability: The impact of 
the 4GOODFOOD programme on sustainability within the cruise ship sector is 
threefold.  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

First,  the  reduction  in  food  waste  during  preparation  reduces  the  need  for 
additional  products,  reducing  the  overall  environmental  impact  of  the  cruise 
ship operations due to lower consumption of resources.  

Second,  the  restructuring  of  the  food  offerings  increases  the  availability  and 
awareness  of  alternatives,  and  encourages  a  reduction  in  animal  meat 
consumption, such as a reduction in beef or lamb consumption, further reducing 
the cruise ships’ total indirect greenhouse gas emissions.  

Third, the 4GOODFOOD programme also contributes to social sustainability by 
providing  local  communities,  and  especially  vulnerable  groups  within  those 
communities, with high-quality, nutritious meals.  

During  the  4GOODFOOD  pilot,  it  was  estimated  that  the  waste  reduction  efforts 
resulted in an annual reduction of food waste during the preparation by 54% and an 
annual reduction of plate waste by 20%. This reduction equals an estimated annual 
emissions reduction of 1 189 tons of CO2 per ship65. Before a pause in activities due to 
the Covid pandemic, a total of 200 000 portions of food had been donated across the 
11  ports  visited  by  Costa  Crociere's  ships  in  the  years  2018,  2019  and  2020. 
Furthermore, 35 tonnes of foodstuff were donated to local communities in 2020.  

Impact of the 4GOODFOOD programme on stakeholders  

The 4GOODFOOD programme is a practice with a positive impact on sustainability. It 
also affects cruise lines’ finances, guests, and local communities. The effects for each 
stakeholder (positive and negative) are discussed in the table below.   

Table 8 Impact on stakeholder groups 

Stakeholder 
group 
Cruise lines 

Cruise 
passengers 

Local 
communities 

Impacts (positive and negative) 

ingredients.  Additionally,  by 

By introducing food waste reduction programmes, cruise lines benefit 
from  being  more  sustainable  and  having  to  spend  less  money  on 
products  and 
introducing  such 
programmes, cruise lines receive positive publicity and improve their 
overall  image.  Furthermore,  as  less  food  is  prepared  and  thrown 
away,  this  also  has  a  positive  financial  impact  on  cruise  lines. 
However,  there  are  initial  costs  in  identifying  food  waste  areas, 
training staff to address them, and restructuring the contents of the 
onboard menu.  
Guests benefit from having more nutritious and sustainable food on 
board. A part of the waste reduction comes from decreasing the size 
of portions to minimise uneaten food.  
Local  communities  benefit  from  having  Costa  Crociere’s  food 
ingredients  locally  sourced,  as  well  as  through  Costa  Crociere’s 
collaboration  with  local  food  banks  to  donate  excess  meals  to 
vulnerable groups within the community.  

65 https://hospitality-on.com/en/worldwide-hospitality-awards/costa-crociere/4goodfood-50-food-waste-

2020 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Hard impacts 

The practices are evaluated from a sustainability standpoint, meaning the hard impacts 
include economic, environmental, and social impacts. 

Environmental impact 

The  production,  transportation,  and  preparation  of  food  generate  significant  CO2 
emissions. Therefore, by having more efficient use of food, cruise ships indirectly emit 
fewer overall greenhouse gas emissions when reducing food waste66. Additionally, a 
restructuring  of  the  menu  to  include  more  vegetarian  protein  alternatives  helps 
incentivise a reduction in consumption of animal proteins such as lamb and beef that 
require many greenhouse gases in production.67 With these indirect greenhouse gas 
emissions  reductions,  Costa  Crociere  contributes  to  the  reduction  of  the  cruise  ship 
industry’s global warming impact.  

Additionally, by donating ready-made meals, Costa Crociere is avoiding the processing 
and dumping of leftover food into the ocean, reducing their effect on the local marine 
life.  

Economic impact 

The practice has both an initial investment and a positive overall impact on costs. To 
identify the stages at which food waste was significant and addressable, Costa Crociere 
worked  with  a  food  waste  reduction  consulting  firm.  Then,  Costa  had  to  invest  in 
training its staff to address this food waste and actively reduce it during operations. 
These efforts reduce food waste significantly and enable Costa Crociere to use fewer 
products  and  other  foodstuffs  in  its  preparation,  lowering  the  overall  cost  of  food 
produced.  

Social impact 

The social impact of the programme is highest for local communities around the ports 
at  which  Costa  Crociere’s  ships  dock.  These  directly  benefit  from  the  food  waste 
reduction effort by receiving high-quality ready-to-eat meals. The meals are especially 
beneficial  for  vulnerable  groups  in  local  communities,  which  Costa  Crociere 
collaborates with through local food banks.  

Soft impacts 

Soft  impacts  constitute  the  intangible  impacts  and  comprise  the  structure, 
implementation effectiveness and, monitoring and reporting of the practice. 

Practice structure 

Costa Crociere initiated the programme. The first step of redesigning the food offerings 
was taken based on Costa Crociere’s internal experience. The second step in reducing 
waste  during  preparation  was  driven  by  a  collaboration  between  a  company 
specialising in reducing food waste and Costa. The third step was to raise awareness 
among  cruise  passengers.  To  realise  the  full  potential  of  this  third  step,  Costa  and 

66 https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2022/01/24/food-waste-and-its-links-greenhouse-gases-and-

climate-change 

67 https://ourworldindata.org/carbon-footprint-food-methane 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   45 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

cruise  passengers  cooperate.  The  fourth  step  wa  to  decrease  food  waste  after 
preparation. Collaboration with onshore stakeholders was crucial in this step. The fifth 
and last step of this programme was to give back to foreign communities. This step 
required partnering with organisations in African countries. 

Implementation effectiveness 

The programme was set up on one ship and at one destination (Savona) first. After 
the successful pilot in the first destination and on the ship, it was extended to other 
destinations and ships.  

The ‘Taste don’t waste’ campaign reaped benefits. In 2018, the food waste reduction 
by  cruise  passengers  was  35%  compared  to  previous  years.  Comments  from  cruise 
passengers  we  mostly  favourable  towards  the  food  offerings.  As  part  of  the 
implementation of the ‘Taste don’t waste’ campaign, the crew was trained by means o 
tailored online courses. 

Residents who received the remaining food from Costa’s cruise ships were positive. It 
makes a significant difference to the beneficiaries’ lives: it allows them to eat well, but 
it also boosts the individual’s welfare, well-being and feeling of conviviality. All of these 
aspects improve the beneficiary’s quality of life.  

Additionally,  the  onboard  crew  of  the  cruise  ship  aligned  with  Costa’s  objective  to 
distribute leftover foods at the destinations. The crew is committed to helping people 
in need, and from the beginning, the crew responded enthusiastically.  

Monitoring and reporting 

Several statistics are available to define the improvements of the programme. Waste 
is  monitoring  at  each  step  as  indicated  above.  An  estimate  of  the  CO2  emission 
reduction in altering the food offerings is calculated, and the reduced food waste – in 
tonnes – during preparation is measured. Moreover, plate waste reduction – in tonnes 
– of both cruise passengers and crew is monitored, and the number and mass of dishes 
that are delivered to local communities is registered. 

Contribution to the EU Green Deal 

The  practice  directly  contributes  to  three  aspects  of  the  EU  Green  Deal.  These  are 
Mobilising  industry  for  a  clean  and  circular  economy,  accelerating  the  shift  to 
sustainable  and  smart  mobility,  and  ‘From  Farm  to  Fork’:  a  fair,  healthy,  and 
environmentally friendly food system. 

Mobilising industry for a clean and circular economy 

The 4GOODFOOD programme directly contributes to the development of a clean and 
circular economy. In particular, lowering raw material used and preventing food waste 
are two key points in the circular economy model68, both of which are key outcomes 
of the 4GOODFOOD programme.  

68 https://europeansting.com/2019/02/15/4-key-steps-towards-a-circular-economy/ 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Accelerating the shift to sustainable and smart mobility 

The EU Green Deal includes the target of reducing transport-related greenhouse gas 
(GHG)  emissions  by  50%  by  2030.  One  of  the  objectives  is  to  make  sustainable 
alternative  solutions  available  to  the  public  and  businesses.  Though  factors  such  as 
exhaust  emissions are the most significant contributors to the cruise ship industry’s 
carbon  footprint,  the  4GOODFOOD  programme  reduces  the  total  needs  for  produce 
during  food  production  and  encourages  local  sourcing,  both  of  which  indirectly  also 
lower the GHG emissions of cruise lines.  

‘From Farm to Fork’: a fair, healthy, and environmentally friendly food system 

The objective of this EU Green Deal target is to stimulate sustainable food consumption 
and promote affordable healthy food for all. In the ‘Taste Don’t Waste’ campaign, Costa 
Crociere  specifically  attempts  to  encourage  responsible  consumption  of  food. 
Furthermore, in working with food banks to donate ready meals, Costa Crociere also 
contributes  to  providing  healthy  food  for  all.  Finally,  with  the  reduction  in  waste 
generated and lower  raw material use, the 4GOODFOOD programme  also created a 
more sustainable food experience on board of Costa Crociere’s ships.  

Other key considerations to implement the 4GOODFOOD programme 

To successfully implement a food reduction programme on a cruise ship there are some 
key considerations to take into account. 

Implementation complexity 

The Costa Cruises programme requires collaboration with many stakeholders, some of 
which are for-profit companies whose expertise was key in achieving the end-result of 
the  programme.  This  means  that  there  could  be  (large)  initial  investments  and 
significant lead time until the entirety of the food production process is analysed, the 
food  waste  issues  are  identified,  and  staff  is  trained  to  adequately  address  those 
issues.  

Supply chain complexity depending on the itineraries  

The 4GOODFOOD programme requires iterations as the food offerings change between 
ships and across seasons. Different foods have different food waste potential and must 
be treated differently. Additionally, it is challenging to coordinate with local suppliers 
in destination ports to source local produce as cruise ships do not sail regularly between 
ports and every cruise ship follows a different route.  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG) SHIP-TO-SHIP BUNKERING IN THE PORT 
OF BARCELONA 

This practice involves the use of two existing barges (Coral Methane and New Frontier 
1)  since  2019,  and  the  construction  of  a  new  ship  (Haugesund  Knutsen)  to  bunker 
liquefied  natural  gas  (LNG)  ship-to-ship  in  the  Port  of  Barcelona.  These  barges  are 
used to bunker large LNG-powered cruise ships in the Port of Barcelona, among other 
vessels.   

What is ship-to-ship bunkering of LNG? 

Ship-to-ship bunkering is one of the three main ways to deliver LNG to an LNG-fuelled 
vessel,  the  other  two  being  truck-to-vessel  and  shore-to-vessel69  bunkering.  While 
ship-to-ship  bunkering  requires  a  large  investment  in  a  dedicated  barge,  it  offers 
benefits in the flexibility of bunkering location and vessel size, due to the possibility of 
changing position. Additionally, as the bunkering barge is in the  water alongside the 
vessel, there is a possibility for  simultaneous  bunkering and unloading of cargo and 
passengers, saving time and allowing for more efficient use of port resources.  

Overview of LNG bunkering in the Port of Barcelona 

This practice consists of the construction of the Haugesund Knutsen and the operation 
of existing LNG ship-to-ship bunkering barges (Coral Methane and New Frontier 1) to 
supply large LNG-powered cruise ships with LNG in the Port of Barcelona. The practice 
involves  several  stakeholders,  including  the  Port  of  Barcelona,  Enagás,  the  Spanish 
National  Ports  and  Harbour  Authority,  Knutsen  O.A.S.  Shipping  AS,  Scale  Gas  (a 
subsidiary  of  Enagás),  Shell  España  SA,  and  the  EC.  Due  to  be  completed  on  30 
December 2022, the Haugesund Knutsen, for Knutsen O.A.S. Shipping, has a capacity 
of 5 000 cubic metres of LNG. On charter to Shell, the Haugesund Knutsen will operate 
from the Port of Barcelona. 

Figure 6 The Haugesund Knutsen LNG bunker vessel 

Source: https://www.helderline.com/tanker/haugesund-knutsen 

69 https://sustainableworldports.org/clean-marine-fuels/lng-bunkering/ports/lng-bunker-infrastructure/ 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

The objective of the LNG bunkering in the Port of Barcelona 

This practice is part of a wider programme aimed at fostering the use of LNG as an 
alternative, more sustainable fuel in the maritime sector. The wider programme aims 
to improve the availability of LNG support infrastructure for cruise ships, investments 
in bunkering barges, fixed LNG infrastructure, and the LNG fitting of vessels to support 
the  development  of  LNG  maritime  bunkering  stations  in  Spain.  Ultimately,  this 
programme supports the development of more sustainable cruise tourism.  

This  practice  creates  a  well-located  LNG  bunkering  station  in  the  Mediterranean, 
enabling  the  bunkering  of  LNG-powered  vessels.  Utilising  the  cost-effectiveness  of 
LNG, the construction of the LNG bunkering barge provides an attractive, cost-effective 
solution,  that  fosters  the  demand  for  LNG.  This  practice  is  expected  to  create  or 
maintain  at  least  100  jobs  in  a  European  Shipyard  (ARMON)  where  the  Haugesund 
Knutsen was built.70 As of July 2022, a total of 52 LNG bunkering operations have been 
carried  out  for  cruise  ships,  supplying  a  total  of  108 000  m3  of  LNG  to  six  different 
cruise ships71.  

Why is LNG bunkering a good practice for sustainable cruise tourism? 

Ship-to-ship LNG bunkering in the Port of Barcelona is considered a good practice for 
a  sustainable  cruise  tourism  based  on  four  criteria:  cruise-tourism  specificity  of  the 
practice, collaborative efforts of the practice, hard data availability on the impact of 
the practice and the geography (EU) of the practice. It is: 

•  Cruise-tourism specific: The LNG bunkering barge in the Port of Barcelona 
is,  to  a  large  extent,  used  for  cruise  ships.  In  2021,  the  Port  of  Barcelona 
bunkered a total of 65 050 m3 of LNG, of which 38 000 m3, or 58% of the total 
bunkered LNG in the port, was bunkered to cruise ships6.  

•  An example of collaboration among stakeholders: Collaboration between 
stakeholders  was  key  in  carrying  out  both  the  construction  of  the  LNG 
bunkering barge and the LNG bunkering operations. To supply LNG in the Port 
of Barcelona, the LNG supplier must obtain a licence, and LNG supply operations 
must  be  authorised  with  administrative  and  technical  documentation  by  the 
three parties involved: the LNG supplier, the receiving vessel, and the terminal 
where the supply takes place.  

Parties involved in the LNG supply, together with the Port Authority, Maritime 
Captaincy, and other port stakeholders must participate in the risk analysis of 
the  operation.  Regular  Hazard  Identification  (HAZID)  sessions  of  the  new 
Knutsen-Scale gas barge are held. The list of participants during these sessions 
includes  Shell,  as  the  commercial  operator  of  the  barge,  Carnival,  as  the 
receiver of this LNG, and Enagás as the supplier of LNG from the regasification 
plant  to  the  barge,  as  well  as  the  Port  Authority,  Maritime  Captaincy,  pilots, 
Knutsen-Scale Gas, and others.  

•  The  example  is  supported  with  evidence  of  sustainability:  LNG  is  the 
cleanest-burning  fossil  fuel,  reducing  sulphur  emissions  by  up  to  100%, 
nitrogen oxide emissions by up to 80%, and carbon dioxide emissions by up to 

70 https://trimis.ec.europa.eu/project/efficient-lng-bunker-barge-port-barcelona 
71 Interview with Daniel Ruiz, Senior Environmental Consultant at Port of Barcelona 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
  
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

30% relative to low-sulphur marine diesel.72 Additionally, it largely eliminates 
particulate matter from ship exhausts, expelling almost no solid or liquid matter 
in its exhaust gases. 

While cruise ships have traditionally used marine diesel as the main source of power,73 
LNG-powered vessels use LNG as fuel to generate the energy needed for propulsion 
and to generate energy for their facilities while at berth. The first cruise ship to employ 
LNG  was  AIDAnova,  which  started  operating  in  2018.  Since  then,  more  than  20 
additional LNG cruise ships have been announced to sail on LNG in the future, including 
ships from Carnival, Disney, MSC cruises and Royal Caribbean.  

In 2021, as the Port of Barcelona bunkered around 38 000 m3 of LNG to cruise ships 
alone,74 this represents an equivalent of around 24 804 m3 of diesel by calorific value75. 
The Table shows the difference in total CO2 emissions for the two. Calorific value was 
used to convert LNG to its diesel equivalent quantity, which was then used to calculate 
CO2 and NOx emissions. These emissions are calculated theoretically and assume equal 
leakages  of  LNG and diesel. Additionally, it is  assumed that LNG and  diesel engines 
operate  with  uniform  efficiencies  –  among  others,  it  is  assumed  that  thermal 
efficiencies,  energy  conversion  and  maintenance  are  equal.  CO2  emissions  and  NOx 
are significantly lower when LNG is used as the primary fuel as the following two tables 
show. 

Table 9 CO2 emissions by diesel-powered and LNG-powered ship, Barcelona, 2021 

Total CO2 
emissions 
(t, 2021) 

78,014 

Difference between 
diesel and LNG-powered 
cruise ship NOX 
emissions  
(t, 2021) 
- 

54,610 

23,404 

Equivalent  CO2  Emissions  by  diesel-
powered  cruise  ship76 
(Emission 
factor: 3,146 kg CO2/t) 
CO2 Emissions by LNG-powered cruise 
ship (Emission factor: 2,202 kg CO2/t, 
70% of Diesel) 

Table 10 NOx emissions by diesel-powered and LNG-powered ship, Barcelona, 2021  

NOX 

Total 
emissions 
(t, 2021) 

Difference between diesel 
and  LNG-powered  cruise 
ship NOX emissions  
(t, 2021) 

2,724 

545 

2,179 

ship4 

cruise 

Equivalent  NOX  Emissions  by  diesel-
powered 
(Emission 
factor: 110 kg NOX/t) 
NOX  Emissions  by  LNG-powered 
cruise  ship  (Emission  factor:  22  kg 
NOX/t, 20% of Diesel) 

72 https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/65509 
73 https://carnivalsustainability.com/pioneering-lng 
74 https://www.bunkerspot.com/europe/55279 
75 https://www.iangv.org/natural-gas-vehicles/natural-gas 
76 https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/12/9/1108 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Though sulphur emissions can vary widely depending on specific engine performance 
and the type of fuel – Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel (ULSD), Very Low Sulphur Fuel (VLSF), 
Marine Gas Oil (MGO) and diesel contain respectively 0.1%, 0.5%, 0.5%, and 0.1% of 
Sulphur, the usage of LNG effectively nullifies them as no sulphur is present in LNG.  

As the number of active LNG-fuelled cruise ships is due to increase in the coming years 
and the Port of Barcelona is only a single stop in cruise ships’ itineraries, a reduction 
of  23 404  tonnes  of  CO2  and  2 179  m3  of  NOX  was  achieved  in  2021.  However,  an 
average cruise ship uses around 56 400 m3 of diesel per year,77 which emits 53 200 t 
more  CO2  and  3 234  t  more  NOX  per  year  than  its  LNG  equivalent.  These  emission 
figures represent the annual emissions savings for every cruise ship that is built with 
LNG as the primary fuel for propulsion. 

As  of  2023,  the  EU  Emissions  Trading  System  (ETS)  will  apply  to  maritime 
transport,78,79 specifically to ships with a gross tonnage of over 5 000 gross tonnage80 
(with  a  possibility  that  the  limit  may  drop  to  400  gross  tonnage).  This  implies  that 
cruise lines will have to pay the EU for  every  CO2  equivalent ton of  emissions. With 
these changes, it is expected that LNG will prove even more competitive than marine 
diesel from a cost perspective.  

Impact of LNG bunkering on stakeholders  

LNG  bunkering  is  a  practice  with  a  positive  impact  on  environmental  sustainability. 
However,  as  the  installation  requires  (large)  financial  commitments,  it  has  a  cost 
impact on the financials of some of the stakeholders involved. The impacts for each 
stakeholder (positive and negative) are discussed in the table below. 

Table 11 Impact on stakeholder groups 

Impacts (positive and negative) 

Stakeholder 
group 
Cruise Lines  By  utilising  LNG,  cruise  ships  emit  fewer  greenhouse  gases. 
Additionally, a longer maintenance interval can be expected due to 
less engine wear, as well as lower operating costs due to the absence 
of  the  need  for  scrubber  systems.  However,  cruise  lines  have  to 
invest in new LNG-fuelled vessels, as the conversion is difficult, and 
LNG  is  at  this  moment81  more  expensive  than  conventional  fuels. 
These aspects financially impact the cruise lines negatively.  

Government  The EU funds a part of the initial investment in the LNG bunkering 

Port 

ship and supports the development of LNG infrastructure.  
The  Port  of  Barcelona  offers  docking  discounts  to  ships  bunkering 
and  utilising  LNG  in  their  auxiliary  engines,  and  further  financially 
incentivises ships utilising LNG as the primary fuel for propulsion, to 
attract  more  sustainable  vessels  to  the  Port.  The  Port  is  also 
responsible  for  any  investment  and  maintenance  costs  associated 
with operating the ship that bunkers cruise ships. However, the Port 
also  generates  revenue  from  chartering  the  barge  to  the  barge 
operator. 

77 https://www.cruise1st.co.uk/blog/cruise-tips/cruise-facts/how-much-fuel-do-cruise-ships-use/ 
78 https://safety4sea.com/cm-eu-parliament-proposes-amendments-to-ets-for-maritime-industrys-

response-and-considerations/  

79 https://www.ship-technology.com/news/eu-council-inclusion-shipping-ets/  
80 https://ec.europa.eu/clima/eu-action/transport-emissions/reducing-emissions-shipping-sector_en 
81 July 2022 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Impacts (positive and negative) 

Local  communities  benefit  from  less  air  pollution  and  fewer 
greenhouse gases generated by cruise ships, improving the local air 
quality. Therefore, there is a positive impact on improving the living 
conditions at in a destination. Additionally, the project has led to the 
generation or maintenance of around 100 jobs in an EU shipyard. 

Stakeholder 
group 
Local 
Communities 

Hard impacts 

The practices are evaluated from a sustainability standpoint, meaning the hard impacts 
include economic, environmental, and social impacts. 

Environmental impact 

Cruise  ships  emit  23%  fewer  greenhouse  gases  -  such  as  CO2  and  NOX  -  from 
well-to-wake when using LNG compared to current oil-based marine fuels82. CO2 and 
NOX contribute directly to global warming. While it does not directly contribute to global 
warming, SOX is sometimes called an indirect greenhouse gas, as it contributes to the 
creation of particulate matter, which directly contributes to global warming.83 NOX and 
SOX gases also have adverse effects on human and animal health, causing respiratory 
disease  and  harming  sensitive  ecosystems.84,85  In  supporting  the  availability  of  LNG 
infrastructure  for  cruise  ships,  the  Port  of  Barcelona  indirectly  contributes  to  the 
reduction in these emissions and the reduction of the cruise ship industry’s contribution 
to global warming and adverse health effects.  

Economic impact 

The practice influences the financials of cruise lines, governments and ports. The total 
investment costs for an LNG ship-to-ship bunkering barge in the Port of Barcelona are 
around EUR 46 million, of which approximately EUR 9 million was provided by the EC 
in the case of the Port of Barcelona. Ports usually have to contribute the largest part 
of the investments, and in general government support and funding are necessary to 
facilitate a viable business case.  

The Port of Barcelona offers docking discounts to ships utilising LNG to attract more 
sustainable vessels to the Port. The discount – applied in all Spanish ports - is 50% if 
the ship technician can prove with certificates that a ship can sail on LNG and there is 
LNG in the cruise ship’s tank. Theoretically, it is possible for the cruise ship to sail on 
LNG and have LNG in the tank, but to have combusted another fuel during travel and 
berthing. However, regardless of the actual combustion, a 50% discount is provided.  

In addition to the general discount, the Port of Barcelona provides additional discounts 
for which the criteria are stricter and based on real fuel combustion. Cruise lines are 
eligible for a 10% discount if the cruise ship can prove that it sailed on LNG from the 
last  port  of  call  to  the  Port  of  Barcelona.  Lastly,  cruise  lines  obtain  a  30%  discount 
when it is proved that auxiliary engines run on LNG during berth. The maximum bonus 

82 https://sphera.com/research/2nd-life-cycle-ghg-emission-study-on-the-use-of-lng-as-marine-fuel/  
83 https://www.beyondtoxics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/OTA_Report-

BiomassContributors_to_ClimateChange7-28-09.pdf 

84 https://phys.org/news/2015-09-nox-gases-diesel-car-fumes.html 
85 https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/sulfur-dioxide-basics 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

that cruise lines  can achieve is 68.5% of the  berthing fee  – indicated as the T1 fee 
within Spanish ports.86,87,88,89 

In  addition  to  the  current  discount  schemes,  the  Port  of  Barcelona  is  exploring 
discounts to directly reduce NOx emissions – for example by financially incentivising 
scrubber use during berth or stimulating moving from tier II to tier III emission limits. 
These are, however, plans for the future.90  

By  utilising  LNG,  cruise  lines  can  expect  a  longer  maintenance  interval  due  to  less 
engine  wear91,  as  well  as  lower  operating  costs  due  to  lack  of  need  for  scrubber 
systems,  and  lower  EU  ETS  fees.  However,  cruise  lines  have  to  invest  in  new-built 
LNG-fuelled vessels, as the fuel density of LNG requires twice the fuel tank volume for 
the  same  range92.  Moreover,  the  prices  of  LNG  are,  due  to  the  circumstances  in 
Ukraine, at the moment of writing,93 higher than for low-sulphur marine diesel. A cost 
calculation of the Puertos del Estado can be used to assess the consequences of using 
LNG as a marine fuel.94   

Social impact 

The local community benefits socially from the LNG bunkering barge in two ways. The 
emissions caused by cruise ships decrease, causing less air pollution which results in 
a healthier community in the Port of Barcelona vicinity. Furthermore, the development 
and operation of the LNG bunkering barge have led to the generation or maintenance 
of around 100 jobs in the shipyard that buildt the new barge. In the port itself, the 
LNG facility created approximately 20 jobs. 

Soft impacts 

Soft  impacts  constitute  the  intangible  impacts  and  comprise  the  structure, 
implementation effectiveness and, monitoring and reporting of the practice. 

Practice structure 

The practice is framed within the ‘LNGhive2’ strategy, co-financed by the EU, with the 
main  aim  of  promoting  environmental  sustainability  in  maritime  transport.95  This 
practice is coordinated by Enagás, and led by the Spanish National Ports and Harbour 
Authority.  The  practice  is  driven  by  Knutsen  O.A.S.  Shipping  AS  and  Scale  Gas,  a 
subsidiary  of  Enagás,  which  has  built  the  bunkering  barge  and  will  be  the  eventual 
owner. The barge is chartered by Shell España SA and uses the Enagás LNG terminal 
for the loading and supply of LNG.  

86 1- ((1-0.5) x (1-0.3) x (1-0.1)) = 68.5% 
87 http://www.ngvjournal.com/s1-news/c7-lng-h2-blends/lng-powered-ships-will-save-86-when-docking-

in-the-port-of-barcelona/ 

88 https://contentv5.portdebarcelona.cat/cntmng/gd/d/workspace/SpacesStore/de47ab53-6c70-4683-

8fac-bc3f95b52814/T1_vaixell_es.pdf  

89 Interview with Daniel Ruiz, Senior Environmental Consultant at Port of Barcelona 
90 https://www.bunkerspot.com/europe/52281-europe-port-of-barcelona-highlights-discounts-for-

environmentally-friendly-shipping 

91 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245387227 
92 https://www.ship-technology.com/analysis/future-fuel-the-pros-and-cons-of-lng-cruise-ships/ 
93 July 2022 
94 Accessible via: https://cero2050.es/es/herramientas/simulador-gnl/  
95 https://lnghive.com/work-progresses-on-the-first-lng-supply-vessel-built-in-spain/?lang=en 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Implementation effectiveness 

Since 2019, 52 operations have been carried out to supply cruise ships, with a total of 
108 000m3 of LNG supplied96. The cruise vessels supplied are mostly from subsidiaries 
of  Carnival  Corporation  and  include  Aida  Nova,  Aida  Cosma,  Costa  Smeralda,  Costa 
Toscana, Iona, and Mardi Gras. New LNG cruise ships are expected to start operations 
from Carnival Corporation, as well as from Royal Caribbean, MSC, and Disney, which 
is  expected  to  lead  to  an  increase  in  demand  for  LNG.  However,  the  COVID-19 
pandemic and the Ukraine invasion crisis, reduced growth expectations for LNG ships 
as the supply chain of LNG is at risk  due to these unforeseen circumstances. Cruise 
lines desire a reliable source of fuel to enable their ships to remain in operation.  

Monitoring and reporting 

The  key  metric  measured  for  the  success  of  LNG  bunkering  is  the  data  on  the  LNG 
consumption  of  the  cruise  ships  entering  the  Port  of  Barcelona.  Assuming  the 
availability of this infrastructure leads to more LNG-powered cruise ships, this can be 
used  as  a  proxy  to  derive  the  greenhouse  gas  reductions  when  compared  to  diesel 
usage. As a secondary KPI, the Port of Barcelona monitors the quality of LNG delivered 
and the number of service incidents.22   

Contribution to the EU Green Deal 

The practice directly contributes to two aspects of the EU Green Deal. These are the 
zero-pollution  ambition  for  a  toxic-free  environment  and  accelerating  the  shift  to 
sustainable and smart mobility. 

A zero-pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment 

The majority of cruise ships use diesel fuels. Greenhouse gases are released as a side 
effect of burning fuel in an internal combustion engine (ICE). By reducing greenhouse 
gases via the utilisation of LNG, the environment is moving towards a toxic-free future. 
It contributes to the zero pollution action plan for air pollution. It specifically applies 
to the goal of “improving air quality to reduce the number of premature deaths caused 
by air pollution by 55%”.97. 

Accelerating the shift to sustainable and smart mobility 

The  EU  Green  Deal  includes  the  target  of  reducing  transport-related  greenhouse  gas 
(GHG)  emissions  by  50%  by  2030.  One  of  the  objectives  is  to  make  sustainable 
alternative solutions available to the public and businesses.  

LNG  still  emits  CO2  and  NOX  and  is  itself  a  fossil  fuel.  However,  it  shows  better 
sustainability performance than marine diesel98 and is currently the only scalable, safe, 
and technologically mature alternative to traditional fuels.99,100 Though LNG may not 
be the ultimate solution to maritime sustainability, it provides an intermediary step to 
move  away  from  using  diesel.  By  building  an  LNG  bunkering  barge,  the  Port  of 

96 Interview with Daniel Ruiz, Senior Environmental Consultant at Port of Barcelona 
97 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en 
98 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652620311161 
99 https://carnivalsustainability.com/pioneering-lng 
100 https://www.seatrade-cruise.com/news/biofuels-development-urged-lng-supply-chain-challenges-

remain 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Barcelona supported this objective by offering a more sustainable alternative to marine 
diesel in the form of LNG.   

Other key considerations to implementing LNG ship-to-ship bunkering as a 
fuel 

Apart from clear communication between stakeholders and the financial viability of the 
LNG bunkering barge, there are other considerations for a successful implementation. 

Standards of technical requirements and operations 

The operation of LNG bunkering barges must be considered in relation to port layout 
and in compliance with all the current technical requirements and regulations, which 
are  constantly  being  developed  and  updated101.  Guidelines  for  LNG  bunkering  are 
provided by EMSA102. 

LNG volume security  

To secure adequate volumes of LNG and ensure consistent availability, an appropriate 
LNG  terminal  should  be  considered  depending  on  the  port's  geographical  location, 
barge size, and expected annual LNG volumes.   

LNG safety   

To prevent harmful gas leaks and inappropriate handling of LNG, proper LNG safety 
measures and equipment should be taken into consideration. This includes performing 
risk  analyses,  knowing  all  the  rules  and  regulations,  and  providing  staff  with  safety 
training. 

101 https://www.gasum.com/en/sustainable-transport/maritime-transport/ship-to-ship-bunkering/ 
102 https://www.parismou.org/sites/default/files/EMSA%20Guidance%20on%20LNG%20Bunkering.pdf  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

WASTE PROCESSING FACILITIES IN THE PORT OF STOCKHOLM 

Every  cruise  ship  carries  waste  as  its  passengers  consume  beverages,  foods  and 
consumables. Furthermore, cruise passengers go to the bathroom and shower onboard 
the cruise ship. The cruise ship itself produces waste due to residual waste generated 
during the normal operation of a vessel.  

This practice involves the smooth handling and processing facilities of waste of cruise 
ships by the Port of Stockholm (Sweden). The waste processing facilities in the Port of 
Stockholm excel as these are operationally sound and the majority of waste coming 
from cruise ships is recycled or converted to energy. 

What are the international regulations regarding the disposal of waste in 
open waters? 

MARPOL Annex V’s simplified overview presents five different types of waste that cruise 
ships can release into the waters or are obliged to keep depending on the cruise ship’s 
location  (see  Table).  The  identified  wastes  are  food  waste,  cargo  residues,  cleaning 
agents and additives, animal carcasses and other garbage including plastics, synthetic 
ropes,  fishing  gear,  plastic  garbage  bags,  incinerator  ashes,  clinkers,  cooking  oil, 
floating  dunnage,  lining  and  packing  materials,  paper,  rags,  glass,  metal,  bottles, 
crockery and similar refuse.   

Table 12 MARPOL Annex V: simplified overview.  

Garbage type 

waste 

Food  waste  comminuted 
or ground 
Food 
comminuted or ground 
Cargo 
contained in washwater 
Cargo  residues  contained 
in washwater 

residues 

not 

not 

Regulation 4 
Outside  special  areas  and 
Arctic  waters  (Distances 
are from the nearest land) 

>3 nm, en route and as far 
as practicable 
>12  nm,  en  route  and  as 
far as practicable 
> 12 nm, en route and as 
far as practicable 
> 12 nm, en route and as 
far as practicable 

agents 
Cleaning 
additives 
contained 
cargo hold washwater 

and 
in 

Discharge permitted 

Cleaning 
additives 
external 
washwater 

and 
agents 
in  deck  and 
surfaces 

Discharge permitted 

Regulation 6 
Within  special  areas  and 
Arctic  waters  (Distances 
are  from  nearest  land, 
or 
nearest 
nearest fast ice) 
>12  nm,  en  route  and  as 
far as practicable 
Discharge prohibited 

ice-shelf 

Discharge prohibited 

and 

> 12 nm, en route and as 
far as practicable (subject 
to conditions in regulation 
6.1.2 
paragraph 
5.2.1.5 of part II-A of the 
Polar Code) 
> 12 nm, en route and as 
far as practicable (subject 
to conditions in regulation 
6.1.2 
paragraph 
5.2.1.5 of part 
II-A of the Polar Code) 
Discharge permitted 

and 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   56 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Regulation 4 
Outside  special  areas  and 
Arctic  waters  (Distances 
are from the nearest land) 

Must  be  en  route  and  as 
far  from  the  nearest  land 
as  possible.  Should  be 
>100  nm  and  maximum
water depth
Discharge prohibited 

Regulation 6 
Within  special  areas  and 
Arctic  waters  (Distances 
are  from  nearest  land, 
or 
nearest 
nearest fast ice) 
Discharge prohibited 

ice-shelf 

Discharge prohibited 

Garbage type 

Animal  Carcasses  (should 
split  or  otherwise 
be 
the 
to  ensure 
treated 
carcasses 
sink 
will 
immediately) 
All other garbage including 
plastics,  synthetic  ropes, 
fishing 
plastic 
gear, 
garbage  bags,  incinerator 
ashes,  clinkers,  cooking 
dunnage, 
oil, 
packing 
lining 
rags, 
materials,  paper, 
bottles, 
glass,  metal, 
crockery 
similar 
and 
refuse 

floating 
and 

Source: International Maritime Organization 

Why would cruise ships rather dispose of their wastes in the waters than 
onshore? 

Cruise ships can release some of their wastes into the waters during their travels as 
discussed  in  the  previous  subsection  and  displayed  in  MARPOL  Annex  V.  This  is 
convenient for cruise lines as it is less time-consuming than disposing of their waste 
onshore, and it is beneficial for the fuel consumption of the cruise ships as the weight 
of  the  cruise  ship  decreases.  Releasing  of  wastes  during  travels  requires  only  the 
opening  of  the  hatches  instead  of  additional  effort  such  as  aligning  with  shoreside 
parties  and  connecting  to  onshore  installations.  Moreover,  it  could  be  more  cost-
efficient,  as  releasing  waste  into  waters  by  cruise  ships  is  financially  free  of  charge 
while ports can demand a fee for processing waste.  

Overview of the Waste Processing Facilities in the Port of Stockholm 

The  Port  of  Stockholm  follows  a  four-step  process  related  to  the  disposal  of  waste 
onshore: 

Cruise lines submit the waste plan 24 hours in advance, indicating what amounts and 
types of waste they would like to dispose of; 

Waste handlers – depending on the waste – are informed that a cruise ship will berth 
and will dispose of a certain amount and type of waste; 

When  the  cruise  ship  berths,  the  wastes  are  collected  by  the  waste  handlers  and 
subsequently checked on the amount and type of waste as no mix of waste is allowed. 
If cruise lines deliver at least three  separated  categories  of waste (such as plastics, 
paper, and metal), cruise lines receive a discount on the berthing fees (13.5% of total 
received the discount in 2019); 

 Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 

 57 

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

The  waste  handlers  transport  the  wastes  to  a  recycling  plant.  65%  of  the  waste  is 
converted to biogas, district heating or electricity, 34% of the waste is recycled, and 
(only) 1% of the waste is landfilled103. 

The berthing fees of the Port of Stockholm include amongst others a charge to dispose 
of  the  wastes  and  general  operational  fees.  The  berthing  fee  is  all-encompassing, 
except for extraordinary waste volumes such as more than a truckload of sludge (> 
20 m3).  

Why are the Port of Stockholm’s waste processing facilities efficient? 

Based on expert interviews, Stockholm has been selected as one of the most advanced 
ports  regarding  waste  processing.  Stockholm  processes  relatively  a  high  volume  of 
sewage water. The unique value proposition that the Port of Stockholm offers to the 
cruise lines is the following combination104:  

Separate  containers  are  offered  to  cruise  ships  for  different  fractions  (glass,  paper, 
metal, mixed) to ensure proper recycling at no extra cost; 

The Port of Stockholm documents the disposed waste and its volumes; 

The Port of Stockholm accepts all kinds of ordinary garbage and specific fractions of 
operational waste as well, only in very special cases such as very significant volumes 
of waste, an additional fee is levied; 

The  Port  of  Stockholm  can  receive  additional  containers  on  short  notice,  it  tries  to 
accommodate the needs of the cruise ship, and trying to support the various challenges 
during routine operation; 

For  every  disposal,  a  vendor  representative  is  present  with  whom  the  operation  is 
discussed beforehand and who can react to short notice requests of the cruise lines; 

Uncomplicated  wastewater  discharges  (grey  and  black  water)  are  offered  via  a 
shoreside connection (no trucks); 

The objective of the waste processing facility at the Port of Stockholm 

This  practice  is  part  of  a  programme  aimed  at  taking  care  of  the  environment  by 
preventing waste from ending in open waters, recycling the major part of the waste105 
and, therefore, contributing to the environmental aspect of sustainability. 

103 Representatives of the Port Authority of Stockholm, and the Swedish Waste Management Association, 

source:https://www.avfallsverige.se/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationer/Svensk_Avfallshantering_2021
_EN.pdf 

104 Representatives of Carnival Corporation acknowledge this value proposition. 
105 Stefan Scheja, Port Authority of Stockholm. The story corresponds with news published by the Swedish 

Waste Management Association, 
source:https://www.avfallsverige.se/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationer/Svensk_Avfallshantering_2020
_EN_01.pdf 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Why is the waste processing facility a good practice for sustainable cruise 
tourism? 

The waste processing facility in the Port of Stockholm is considered a good practice for 
sustainable  cruise  tourism  based  on  four  criteria:    cruise-tourism  specificity  of  the 
practice, collaborative efforts of the practice, hard data availability on the impact of 
the practice and the geography (EU) of the practice. It is: 

•  Cruise-tourism  specific:  The  waste  processing  facility  in  the  Port  of 
Stockholm is, to a large extent, used for cruise ships. After all, cargo ships 
carry a lower volume of waste as passengers are limited.  

•  An  example  of  collaboration  among  stakeholders:  Collaboration 
between stakeholders is key in carrying out waste processing activities. To 
treat  the  waste  in  the  Port  of  Stockholm,  there  should  be  a  collaboration 
between the cruise lines and the port authority, and the port authorities and 
waste handlers should cooperate. 

•  The example is supported  with evidence  of sustainability: The  Port 
of Stockholm processed 1,244 tonnes of solid waste, 2,107 tonnes of sludge, 
677 tonnes of scrubber waste and 82,450 m3 of sewage water in 279 port 
calls. The major part of the waste that is retrieved from the cruise ship is 
recycled or converted to energy. 65% of the waste is converted to biogas, 
district heating or electricity, 34% of the waste is recycled, and 1% of the 
waste  is  landfilled106.  The  total  annual  costs  to  enable  smooth  waste 
processing facilities in the Port of Stockholm totalled 623,698 EUR in 2019 
(excluding the handling costs of scrubber waste). In 2019, 38 cruise ships 
of the 281 (13.5%) cruise  ships received a discount as a  consequence of 
separating their waste.  

•  The practice is EU-based: The practice is executed in Stockholm, Sweden, 

which is located within the EU. 

Impact of the waste processing facilities on stakeholders  

The  waste  processing  facility  in  the  Port  of  Stockholm  is  a  practice  with  a  positive 
impact towards environmental sustainability. However, as the facilities require (large) 
financial  commitments,  it  has  a  cost  impact  towards  the  financials  of  some  of  the 
involved stakeholders. The impacts for each stakeholder (positive and negative) are 
discussed in the table below. 

106 Stefan Scheja, Port Authority of Stockholm. The story corresponds with news published by the Swedish 

Waste Management Association, source: 
https://www.avfallsverige.se/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationer/Svensk_Avfallshantering_2020_EN_01
.pdf 

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   59 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Table 13 Impact on stakeholder groups 

Impacts (positive and negative) 

Stakeholder 
group 
Cruise Lines  Cruise lines are legally required to dispose of (some of) their waste 
onshore;  thus,  the  waste  processing  facilities  in  Stockholm 
contribute positively as the operations run smoothly and no (direct) 
additional  costs  for  cruise  lines  -  besides  the  berthing  fees  -  are 
involved107.  
The Port of Stockholm contributes a significant amount of money to 
the  waste  handlers  to  facilitate  efficient  cruise  ship  waste  disposal 
operations. 
The local community profits as processing the waste of cruise ships 
results in additional jobs in the transfer of the waste from the cruise 
ship  to  onshore  bins/trucks,  in  the  transport  of  the  waste  to  the 
recycling plant, and in the recycling plant itself. 

Local 
community 

Port 

Hard impacts 

The practices are evaluated from a sustainability standpoint, meaning the hard impacts 
include environmental, economic, and social impacts. 

Environmental impact 

A significant amount of waste is processed onshore rather than potentially disposed of 
in open waters. The waste is recycled onshore to be used for alternative purposes such 
as for new products or the generation of energy. Less than 1% of Sweden’s waste is 
sent  to  landfills,  the  rest  of  the  waste  is  purposefully  used.  According  to  the  OECD, 
Sweden is one of the frontrunners in waste processing108. 

Economic impact 

Cruise lines require fewer manhours in comparison with other ports to dispose of the 
waste due to the efficient waste processing operations in the Port of Stockholm. This 
results in a competitive advantage for the Port of Stockholm and an incentive for cruise 
lines to dispose of their waste in the Port of Stockholm. 

In 2019, the costs for processing were 318,744 EUR for solid waste, 123,462 EUR for 
sludge, an unknown amount of EUR for scrubber waste and 57,492 EUR for sewage 
water. The additional costs such as material costs and personnel costs were 124,000 
EUR in 2019. The total annual costs to enable smooth waste processing facilities in the 
Port  of  Stockholm  totalled  623,698  EUR  in  2019  (excluding  the  handling  costs  of 
scrubber waste).   

107  The fees for waste processing are included in the berthing fees. If the waste processing operations 
become more expensive for the Port of Stockholm, the Port can reduce its profit margin or increase 
berthing fees. 

108  https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/f5670a8d-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/f5670a8d-

en  

                          Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries                                   60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Social impact 

The  waste  processing  facilities  need  employees  to  be  able  to  run  the  operations  to 
process the waste. These jobs would be non-existent or to a lesser extent if the waste 
processing facility in the Port of Stockholm was less efficient. 

Soft impacts 

Soft  impacts  constitute  the  intangible  impacts  and  comprise  the  structure, 
implementation effectiveness and monitoring and reporting of the practice. 

Practice structure 

The port authority arranges efficient operations of waste processing. The cruise lines 
pay the port fees, and the waste handlers receive payment for their work. 

Implementation effectiveness 

Since 2019, the waste  of 279 cruise  ships has been taken  off to process this waste 
onshore. The cruise lines see the Port of Stockholm as an exemplary port regarding 
waste  processing  operations109.  The  waste  that  is  collected  from  cruise  ships  is 
primarily used for energy conversion and recycling. 

Monitoring and reporting 

The  total  waste  per  category  is  registered  and  monitored.  Moreover,  the  costs  to 
process the waste are stated in the previous subsection. The volumes  of waste that 
can be disposed of in open waters, but are processed by the Port of Stockholm can be 
taken as a proxy to determine what Stockholm’s contribution is to the environment. 
For  example,  sewage  water  can  be  discharged  if  a  ship  sails  more  than  12  nautical 
miles from the nearest shore, except for the Baltic Sea (MARPOL IV), or if cruise ships 
purify the  sewage water. Therefore, a  maximum of 82,450 m3 - total  sewage water 
processed by the Port of Stockholm – is prevented from discharging in the waters. 

Contribution to the EU Green Deal 

The  practice  directly  contributes  to  three  aspects  of  the  EU  Green  Deal.  These  are 
mobilising  industry  for  a  clean  and  circular  economy,  preserving  and  restoring 
ecosystems and biodiversity and a zero pollution for a toxic-free environment. 

Mobilising industry for a clean and circular economy 

By  separating  and  processing  waste  in  a  dedicated  waste  processing  facility,  rather 
than disposing of waste in the sea, a larger part of the waste can be practically used. 
The  waste’s  economic  value  is  recovered  and  the  impact  on  the  environment  and 
climate change is minimized by this means. 

Preserving and restoring ecosystems and biodiversity 

The pressure on water ecosystems is reduced as less waste is disposed of by cruise 
lines. It contributes, therefore, to a sustainable blue economy. 

109  Interview with representatives of Carnival Corporation Plc. 

 Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 

 61 

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

A zero-pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment 

As discussed previously in this practice, cruise ships are legally allowed to dispose of 
some of their waste in open waters. The Port  of Stockholm discourages disposing of 
wastes  in  open  waters  by  facilitating  an  efficient  waste  processing  facility.  It 
contributes, therefore, to the zero pollution action plan for water pollution.   

Other key considerations to implementing waste processing facilities 

Apart  from  clear  communication  between  stakeholders,  there  are  two  other 
considerations for a successful implementation. 

Integration of waste separation and disposal in incentive schemes 

Separating and disposing of waste onshore could be implemented in incentive schemes 
such as the Clean Shipping Index (CSI) or the Environmental Shipping Index (ESI). 
This could increase the adoption rate of separating and disposing of waste onshore. 

Waste facilities improve image 

Adopting waste facilities could increase the image of the port. Local communities and 
other  stakeholders  see  that  the  waste  is  removed  from  the  cruise  ship,  and 
demonstrates  that  waste  has  a  renewed  purpose.  On  the  other  hand,  if  cruise  lines 
know that a port has well-organised port reception facilities, the cruise lines happily 
return, potentially even for a higher berthing fee. 

 Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 

 62 

/

3
1
9
1
2
0
1
7
7
2
0
1

.

:
I

O
D
-
5
-
8
0
6
1
6
-
6
7
-
2
9
-
8
7
9

N
B
S

I