Measurement 47 (2014) 982–988

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Measurement

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/ locate /measurement

Estimation of ship emissions in the port of Taranto

0263-2241/$ - see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2013.09.012

⇑ Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: adamo@misure.poliba.it (F. Adamo), andria@misure.

poliba.it (G. Andria), cavone@misure.poliba.it (G. Cavone), claudio.decapua@unirc.it (C. De Capua), lanzolla@misure.poliba.it (A.M.L. Lanzolla),rosario.morello@unirc.it (R. Morello), spadavecchia@misure.poliba.it (M.Spadavecchia).

1 Twenty foot Equivalent Unit; one TEU is the capacity of a20-foot-long intermodal container.

Francesco Adamo a, Gregorio Andria a,⇑, Giuseppe Cavone a, Claudio De Capua b,Anna Maria Lucia Lanzolla a, Rosario Morello b, Maurizio Spadavecchia a

a Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e dell’Informazione, Politecnico di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italyb Department of Information Engineering, Infrastructure and Sustainable Energy, University ‘‘Mediterranea’’ of Reggio Calabria, Reggio Calabria, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Available online 27 September 2013

Keywords:Environmental pollutionEmission reductionCold IroningMeasurements for power systemsEnvironmental monitoring and controlsystems

The shore-side electrical power supply to a ship at berth (also known as Cold Ironing – CI)is an important issue to obtain the reduction of ship emissions and to make ports moreenvironmental-friendly. Due to European Commission recommendations the principalEuropean ports are planning to install this technology, especially for harbour areas withhigh pollution levels.

In this context, the municipality of Taranto (Italy) is focusing its attention on new actionsaimed at the environmental requalification of port area based on Cold Ironing.

In this paper, the authors gather and analyze the data associated with the berthing oper-ations and resulting emissions to better define suitable actions for emissions reduction andto suggest some possible strategies for bringing down pollutants, in order to reach a wealthbased on environmental preservation.

� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The town of Taranto is living a decisive phase of its his-tory, since it is called to find a suitable balance between thepresence of some big hazardous industrial plants and thestrong demand of eco-sustainable development. Theincreasing of manufacturing industries has leaded anundeniable economic and social growth, but, at the sametime, has exposed the whole urban area to great environ-mental stress.

Several studies have proved a strong correlation be-tween high level of inhalable particles and mortality andmorbidity increase [1]. As an example, a longtime exposureto nitrogen and carbon compounds and particulate mattercan cause respiratory problems or tissues modification [2].

This is true also for the Port of Taranto (PoT) becausethe combustion process produced by the ship engines isresponsible for emission of high-concentrations of noxioussubstances that can lead to poisoning [3]. Moreover theharbour area is very close to the city; therefore air pollu-tion exposes people to risk of serious health hazards [4].Although the PoT activity had not a relevant impact on to-tal pollutant emissions in the area, its location makes man-datory an environmental requalification [5,6].

Actually, PoT acts as trans-shipment centre and facilityserving the near industrial plants. Moreover the port con-tainer terminal is an important hub for services to theNear, Middle and Far East, the Americas and Europe. Thethroughput of PoT has grown steadily from 150,000 TEU1

in 2002 to about 900,000 TEU in 2006 [7]. Its goal, for thenext future, is to become one of the main Mediterraneanlogistics platform directly linked with production and trans-port chains.

Environmental pollution in the PoT area comes from alot of sources; therefore the pollutant abatement problem

standard

F. Adamo et al. / Measurement 47 (2014) 982–988 983

should be engaged from different points of view. As it iswell known, one of main reasons for air pollution inharbour is the use of the on-board auxiliary diesel enginesto supply different systems (such as lightning, loadmovement, air conditioning, emergency equipment) withelectric energy while the vessel is at the dock (referred toas hotelling). This kind of diesel electric group commonlyemits noxious gases, like:

� Nitrogen oxides NOX and sulphur oxides SOX.� Carbon monoxide (CO) and carbon dioxide (CO2).� Particulate matters PM (in particular PM10).� A broad range of volatile organic compounds

(VOCs – benzene, formaldehyde, toluene, etc.).

In this study, air pollution emissions in PoT area areinvestigated; the aim is to analyze the data collected in orderto determine the berths which more significantly affect thepollution on urban air quality and to develop the suitablestrategies for reducing emissions from ship hotelling.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 outlines theanalyzed case of study, highlighting the critical environ-mental conditions of PoT. In Section 3 a review of rulesand regulations for harbour areas is described. Section 4,provides an estimate of pollutant emitted from hotellingships related to some traffic information. In Section 5 pos-sible strategies to reduce air pollution are specified andsome technical and economic consideration about shore-side power supply are made in order to evaluate the feasi-bility and to assess the possible expected reduction ofenvironmental impacts. Finally, Section 6 presents thework conclusions.

2. Case study and materials

Taranto (Apulia Region, South of Italy) is a coastal city ofthe Mediterranean Sea. The city has a wide harbour areainterested by maritime and military activities; it could bedefined as a high environmental risk area due to the pres-ence of the larger European steel manufacturing plant, anoil refinery and a cement plant all located near it. The PoT,which is in turn very close to the heart of the city, includes5 quays, 5 piers, with addition of an oil terminal and a Mul-tipurpose Pier. It has an extension of about 2.7 km2 and a to-tal berth length of about 10 km [7]. The main activities ofPoT include: containers loading/unloading and handlingiron and steel products, oil products and cement (as shownin Table 1).

Due to the presence of wide industrial area near the ur-ban centre (Fig. 1), as mentioned above, the city is consid-ered at high environmental risk so a pollutant-emissionassessment is recommended.

A not negligible factor is that the population growth hasstrongly increased the request of high level quality of life bypeople living in the surrounding area. To address this issueand to monitor the air quality, about ten years ago, a lot ofenvironmental monitoring stations have been installed allaround the city of Taranto; at the same time a lot of model-ing studies have been carried out to manage polluting emis-sions and to forecast emergency events [4,8–12].

The sea transport sector business in Italy representsabout 3% of total manufacturing activities; the relevantgreenhouse gas emissions are less than 3% for CO2, lessthan 15% for NOX and around 5% for SOX. Most part of theseemissions is released during shipping, and then it could beconsidered low harmful. Nevertheless, a more in-depthanalysis has to consider the whole scenario since the terri-tory of Taranto is already stressed by a combination of dif-ferent pollutants arising from many other industrialactivities; therefore the air pollution in PoT is a not negli-gible environmental hazardous factor. For all these reasonsany possible effort to reduce the environmental impact atPoT is strongly desirable.

3. Environmental regulations for port areas

The monitoring and the data collection required forenvironmental assessment of PoT area are rather complex;therefore, to correctly assess the effect of different air-pol-lutant activities a complete analysis of the dispersion andtransportation phenomena is mandatory.

Several studies about air quality in Taranto [13–15]have highlighted the presence of a high concentration ofvanadium, which is one of the typical substances emittedby ships, near the port. These concentrations increasewhen wind coming from South is blowing. Moreover ithas been proved that port activities are the main cause ofPM10 emissions [15].

During the last decades, several regulations have beenissued to regulate NOX and SOX emissions from ships; e.g.IMO (International Maritime Organization)/MARPOL andEU have set absolute limits on sulphur content in fueland sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from ships[16]. NOX emissions from marine diesel engine are closelyrelated to a set of parameters representing the use of theengine, mainly: the fuel type, the temperature of combus-tion and the cruise speed.

The Annex IV of MARPOL 73/78 [16] sets the thresholdsfor NOX emissions, depending on marine engine rpm values(Table 2).

The main changes introduced with the Annex VI ofMARPOL 73/78 are:

(i) A global progressive reduction in emissions of SOX,NOX and particulate matter.

(ii) The introduction of the Emission Control Areas(ECAs), defined as zones (such as ports close to bigtowns) where admissible emissions limits are highlyreduced. Worldwide the threshold limit for SOX aris-ing from the combustion process is <4.5%. The AnnexVI of MARPOL 73/78 reduces this limit for port areasto the following values:

<1.0% till 2015/01/01<0.1% after 2015/01/01

The deadline for the latter threshold has moved upto January 1st 2015 by EU Directive 2005/33/EC, whichlimits the amount of sulphur oxides to 0.1% in all mar-ine fuels used during hotelling for more than two hoursin European ports and by vessels on inland waterways[17].

Table 1Outline of PoT docks.

Dock Length(m)

Draft(m)

Maximumdeadweighttonnage (dwt)

Movablegoods

Quay #1 240 8.5 20,000 VariousPier #1 – seaward est 320 9.5 25,000 VariousPier #1 – west side 330 12.5 25,000 VariousQuay #2 290 12.5 22,000 VariousPier #2 – east side 515 16.0 100,000 Metallurgical

materialPier #2 – seaward end 143 16.0 40,000 Fuel and tarPier #2 west side 550 10.5 40,000 Metallurgical

materialQuay #3 230 12.5 12,000 Iron and slagPier #3 – east side 615 12.5 45,000 Metallurgical

materialPier #3 – seaward end 230 12.5 30,000 Fuel and tarPier #3 – west side 630 12.5 45,000 Metallurgical

materialQuay #4 300 12.5 15,000 CementPier #4 – east

side landward167 12.5 6000 Cement

Pier #4 – east side 434 25.0 300,000 Iron and coalOil terminal 560 11.0 50,000 Petroleum

productsBuoy moornings 600 22 300,000 CrudePier #5 1200 14.0 100,000 Metallurgical

materialMultipurpose Pier 2000 14.0 100,000 ContainersQuay #5 1200 12.5 45,000 Metallurgical

material

Table 2NOX thresholds for marine engine.

Date Engine speed Emission thresholds(g/kW h)

Till 2011/01/01 rpm < 130 17.0130 < rpm < 2000 45.0 rpm�0.2

rpm > 2000 9.8From 2011/01/01 to

2016/01/01rpm < 130 14.4

130 < rpm < 2000 44.0 rpm�0.23

rpm > 2000 7.7After 2016/01/01 rpm < 130 3.4

130 < rpm < 2000 9.0 rpm�0.2

rpm > 2000 2.0

984 F. Adamo et al. / Measurement 47 (2014) 982–988

4. Emissions estimation

The Task 2 of the European Commission contract onShip Emissions [18] focused the attention on the emissionmeasurements and on the abatement technologies formain and auxiliary engines installed on the ships. In orderto assess the resulting reduction, [18] presents general orcommon underlying assumptions and methods that canbe useful in all the cases where available data are particu-

Fig. 1. Map of the Po

larly limited or are affected by significant measurementuncertainty. For the sake of clarity, in Table 3 the emissionfactors arising from auxiliary engines using 0.1% sulphurfuel extracted from Task 2 are compared with those carriedout from a typical Italian electrical system.

This means that using the shore-side electrical systemto supply the ships at berth would imply a probable reduc-tion of about 94% for NOX, 42% for CO2 and 90% for PMemissions.

In its first phase, this study focused on the estimation ofenvironmental pollution due to the marine traffic at PoTfor a period of two years (2010–2012) by analyzing thevessel types and their relevant Gross Register Tonnage(GRT) to assess the emission of main pollutants duringthe berthing [7]. Some studies have highlighted that thehotelling operations contribute to the total pollutantsemission for a percentage of 95%, while naval maneuversare responsible for the remaining 5% [19]. Table 4 reportsthe relevant data for each dock, giving a clear representa-tion of the obtained results.

Since not enough data were available about the PowerConsumption (PC) for each ship, a rough value was esti-mated by considering the approximate proportionality be-tween the GRT and PC by means of a Power Tonnage Ratio(PTR):

rt of Taranto.

Table 3Comparison between emission factor from low-sulphur fuel and electricalsystems.

Pollutant Emission factor fromauxiliary engines using0.1% sulphur (g/kW h)

Emission factor from atypical Italian electricalsystem (g/kW h)

NOx 11.80 0.35SO2 0.46 0.46CO2 700 406PM 0.30 0.03

Fig. 2. Estimation of yearly averaged SO2 emissions due to the shiphotelling in PoT.

F. Adamo et al. / Measurement 47 (2014) 982–988 985

PC ¼ GRT � PTR ð1Þ

Moreover, the auxiliary engines Average Power (AP)consumption during hotelling can be estimated by meansof

AP ¼ PC � LF ð2Þ

where LF is the Load Factor that practically is a percentageof the PC. We hypothesized for this work a reasonablevalue of PTR = 0.2 kW/tons and a berthing LF = 0.40. Thechoice of these values is commonly accepted in technicalliterature [20,21].

Then, in the best case when the fuel with 0.1% ofsulphur is used, the emissions per year due to the shiphotelling are very high. Fig. 2 shows the estimation ofSO2 emission per year for each dock. It is possible to high-light that SO2 emissions are greater than 25 t/year in 15docks, while 7 of them exceed the limit of 2000 t/year.Pier#2, Pier#5, Oil terminal and Multipurpose Pier arethe most critical cases where the emissions are close to10,000 t/year.

Fig. 3 shows the estimation of early averaged NOx

emissions in PoT. Even though the data highlight a moreuniform behavior of the emission in all docks, it is possibleto observe that Pier #2, Pier #5, Oil terminal and Multipur-

Table 4Analysis of the results for each dock.

Dock 2-Year periodnumber of vessels

AP (MW) Mean tihotellin

Roadster ‘‘Mar Grande’’ 2501 10191.4 89,508Quay #1 35 27.5 1122Pier #1 – seaward end 14 8.0 507Pier #1 – west side 215 330.0 10,425Quay #2 182 177,0 415Pier #2 – east side 464 2771.6 21,600Pier #2 – seaward end 10 6.0 423Pier #2 west side 150 368.5 6048Quay #3 147 88.5 6708Pier #3 – east side 586 1036.6 22,575Pier #3 – seaward end 80 70.5 2688Pier #3 – west side 644 932.6 30,444Quay #4 2 1.0 108Pier #4 – east side landward 116 58.0 4746Pier #4 – east side 183 2245.0 9711Oil terminal 975 3991.2 41,490Buoy moornings 54 810.0 2229Pier #5 1164 2575.2 40,233Multipurpose Pier 1154 8771.2 41,238Quay #5 83 367.5 3324

pose Pier are the main contributors to port pollution be-cause of their emission greater than 100 kt/year.

The CO2 emissions are greater than 1 Gt/year in 7 docks,and reach the value of 10 Gt/year in Pier #2, Pier #5, Oilterminal and Multipurpose Pier (Fig. 4).

Similar behavior has been estimated for PM emissionswhich reach values from 3 kt/year up to 21 kt/year (asshown in Fig. 5).

The above-mentioned pollutant emission estimationsdue to the ship hotelled in PoT, are obtained assumingthe optimistic hypothesis of using low sulphur fuel (withconcentration less than 0.1%). It has been proved that using1% sulphur fuel leads a considerable increase of noxiousgases and PM emissions.

5. Pollutant reduction strategies

As well known, the limitation of SOX can be achievedusing low sulphur fuel, while the NOX reduction can be ob-tained only using high performance new generationengines. For this reasons a suitable technology, aimed tolimit the air pollution in harbour areas, must be

me ofg (h)

Vessel per day(n�/day)

Power demanddock/day (MW/day)

Estimated energyconsumption(TWh/year)

3.43 13.96 182441.20.05 0.04 6.170.02 0.01 0.810.29 0.45 668.110.25 0.24 297.930.64 3.80 11973.100.01 0.01 0.510.21 0.50 445.770.20 0.12 118.850.80 1.42 460.240.11 0.10 37.910.88 1.28 5678.430.00 0.00 0.020.16 0.08 55.060.25 3.08 4360.301.34 5.47 33118.890.07 1.11 361.101.59 3.53 20721.641.58 12.02 72341.600.11 0.50 244.32

Fig. 3. Estimation of yearly averaged NOX emissions due to the shiphotelling in PoT.

Fig. 4. Estimation of yearly averaged CO2 emissions due to the shiphotelling in PoT.

Fig. 5. Estimation of yearly averaged PM emissions due to the shiphotelling in PoT.

986 F. Adamo et al. / Measurement 47 (2014) 982–988

considered. In this work the CI is considered. CI technologyis the process of powering a vessel with shore based elec-trical power in lieu of the board auxiliary engine generatorwhile the vessel is at the dock. This innovative technologywill undoubtedly lead to a massive reduction of air pollu-tants from ships at berth since the on board diesel electricgenerators can be switched off avoiding emission of nox-ious substances during hotelling. The EU Commission sug-gested to Member States to promote the shore-side powersupply particularly in the ports where the industrial activ-ities are predominant [20] by presenting different scenar-ios for controlling of air emissions from internationalshipping on the sea surrounding Europe [19]. The high cost

for low sulphured fuels and the opportunity to obtain taxbenefits on shore-side power supply could subsidize navi-gation companies to retrofit their on-board electricalpower plants in order to allow a suitable electrical connec-tion of their ships to the berth.

To evaluate the emission reduction for all pollutants,the estimated emissions were compared with the emissionfactor of the Italian electrical system. Table 5 reports anevaluation of yearly averaged emissions reduction for eachanalyzed dock showing a decrease greater than 90% for PMand NOx and about 40% for CO2. In particular, the main NOx,COx e PM reductions have been obtained in Pier #2, Pier #5,Oil terminal and Multipurpose Pier.

It is worth to note that the emission of NOx is a functionof the engine’s rpm and varies according (2) from a maxi-mum value, when the rated engine speed is less than130 rpm, to a minimum one, when the engine speed isequal to or above 2000 rpm. The lower engine’s speed,the more polluting is produced while higher speeds pro-duce lower NOx emissions. The limits reported in the An-nex VI for port areas after 2016 will produce a reductionof NOx emission of about 78% at low speeds and of about75% at high speeds (Fig. 6).

Since CI is a project which generally needs high initialcosts, a technical and economic analysis is required to de-rive the cost effectiveness of the infrastructure based onestimated total emissions reduction for all pollutants overthe expected life of the project; the aim of such analysis isto identify the most convenient docks to be wired.

In order to correctly assess the environmental impact ofthe harbour activities on the air quality indexes for the res-idential area located close to the PoT, robust decision-mak-ing tools based on data acquired by a suitable and efficientenvironmental monitoring system, a process control sys-tem and the relevant Source Apportionment techniquesare needed [22–24]. This approach would make the PortAuthority able to distinguish more pollutant sources andspecific contribution of each activity. An in-depth analysisbased on technical and economic aspects, suggests focus-ing further project hypotheses only about the technicallyfeasible docks which verify the following conditions:

� higher power demand� relevant higher pollutants emissions� routinely of traffic.

The data gathering points out a negligible traffic forsome berths and a significant number of ships for Piers#2, #3 and #5 and Oil and Container terminals (the latterlocated on the Multipurpose Pier). Obviously, there is aclear proportionality between traffic and power demandfor a given dock. This is the underlying reason becausePiers #2 and #3 exhibit the greater mean daily power de-mand for each ship. It could be observed that even if thePier #5 has a lower daily traffic, it needs a huge dailypower owing to the high GRT of hotelling vessels.

The previous analysis suggests limiting the CI feasibilitystudy to three piers: the Oil Terminal, the Container termi-nal and the Pier #2; this approach permits a tradeoff be-tween the air pollution reduction and the economiceffort. Therefore the proposal to limit the number of docks

Table 5Estimation of yearly average emissions reduction obtained with CI.

Dock NOx reduction CO2 reduction PM reduction

Quay #1 7.07E+01 1.81E+03 1.67E+00Pier #1 – seaward end 9.29E+00 2.39E+02 2.19E�01Pier #1 – west side 7.88E+03 2.02E+05 1.86E+02Quay #2 3.41E+03 8.76E+04 8.04E+01Pier #2 – east side 1.37E+05 3.52E+06 3.23E+03Pier #2 – seaward end 5.81E+00 1.49E+02 1.37E�01Pier #2 west side 5.10E+03 1.31E+05 1.20E+02Quay #3 1.36E+03 3.49E+04 3.21E+01Pier #3 – east side 5.36E+04 1.38E+06 1.26E+03Pier #3 – seaward end 4.34E+02 1.11E+04 1.02E+01Pier #3 – west side 6.50E+04 1.67E+06 1.53E+03Quay #4 2.47E�01 6.35E+00 5.83E�03Pier #4 – east side landward 6.30E+02 1.62E+04 1.49E+01Pier #4 – east side 4.99E+04 1.28E+06 1.18E+03Oil terminal 3.79E+05 9.74E+06 8.94E+03Buoy moornings 4.13E+03 1.06E+05 9.75E+01Pier #5 2.37E+05 6.09E+06 5.59E+03Multipurpose Pier 8.28E+05 2.13E+07 1.95E+04Quay #5 2.80E+03 7.18E+04 6.60E+01

0 500 1000 1500 2000 25000

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

engine speed [rpm]

NO

x em

issi

on th

resh

olds

[g/k

Wh]

till 2011from 2011 to 2016after 2016

Fig. 6. NOX thresholds emission vs marine engine speed.

Table 6Estimate of pollutant reduction from the CI power system project.

NOX reduction(t/year)

CO2 reduction(t/year)

Container terminal 676 15.400Oil terminal 218 5.621Pier #2 203 4.665Total 1.097 25.686

F. Adamo et al. / Measurement 47 (2014) 982–988 987

to cold-iron and to design of an analytic environmentalmonitoring and control system was the first step in ra-tional direction for purposes of environmental requalifica-tion of PoT.

On a pier basis, the emissions reduction achieved peryear by employing shore side electricity can be expressedas:

ER ¼ AP � UR � 365 � 24 � ERF ð3Þ

where UR is the Utilization Rate of shore-side electricity atberth (here it is considered the worst case, so UR = 1), andERF is the specific Emission Reduction Factor (expressed ing/kW h).

Table 6 reports an estimate of pollutant reduction forthe docks chosen for the CI power system project whenERFNOX = 11.8 g/kW h and ERFCO2 = 700 g/kW h [25,22]supposing the presence of two vessels requiring 7 MVAper each terminal.

The environmental results obtainable by CI could befurther improved by using renewable power sources (i.e.

photovoltaic [26–29], or eolic ones). In such a case a carefulanalysis should be carried out to evaluate the actual avail-ability of large areas and the possible negative impact onharbour operations.

It is worth to note that the on-board power systemshould be compatible with the dock-system; unfortunatelythere is a lack of standardization for electricity parameterssuch as voltage and frequency levels for marine power sys-tems; therefore different equipment (such as such as trans-formers, frequency converters, power cables) could benecessary to guarantee the compatibility of ships built indifferent countries. Consequently, ships have to be retrofit-ted for the shore side power supply, therefore the extracost to carry out the needed electrical infrastructures mustbe taken into account.

6. Conclusions

Cold Ironing is a promising technique which providesmany environmental and social benefits by reducing airpollution due to ship hotelling in the port areas. This solu-tion is quite effective because of the consumption reduc-tion of the low-sulphur fuel which is more expensivethan electricity and of the many forms of incentive devotedto the on-board energy supply implementation. Furtherpositive impacts are better on-board comfort while hotell-ing and a reduction in maintenance cost.

The growing awareness for sustainability works fordeep social anxiety. The requalification of the town of

988 F. Adamo et al. / Measurement 47 (2014) 982–988

Taranto needs to find the trade-off between industrial pro-duction and environmental sustainability; therefore themonitoring of noxious emissions due to hotelling ships atPoT is undoubtedly a necessary condition to fulfill thisobjective.

In this paper the authors propose a preliminary analysiswith some technical considerations by using CI. The studyhas brought to identify the most convenient docks to bepowered and to assess the relevant pollution reduction.

CI is only a first milestone to make an eco-sustainableport but further data are desirable for a more accurate sta-tistical and economic analysis. In order to make CI projectsuccessful and feasible a general agreement between PortAuthority, berth leaseholders and ships owners ispreferable.

It should be expected that in the next years EU Commu-nity will incentive the diffusion of Green Ports and theadoption of CI by highlighting their environmentalbenefits.

References

[1] G. Lammel, J. Novak, L. Landlova, A. Dvorska, J. Klanova, P. Cupr, J.Kohoutek, E. Reimer, L. Skrdlikova, Sources and distributions ofpolycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and toxicity of pollutedatmosphere aerosols, in: Urban Airborne Particulate Matter:Origins, Chemistry, Fate and Health Impact, Springer, Berlin, 2010,pp. 39–62.

[2] V.C. Liuzzi, B.E. Daresta, G. De Gennaro, C. De Giorgi, Different effectsof polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in artificial and inenvironmental mixtures on the free living nematode, J. Appl.Toxicol., vol. 32, pp. 45–50. F.E. Huggins, G.P. Huffman,Quantifyingg hazardous species in particulate matter derived fromfossil-fuel combustion, Environ. Sci. Technol. 38 (2004) 1836.

[3] F.E. Huggins, G.P. Huffman, W.P. Linak, C.A. Miller, Quantifyinghazardous species in particulate matter derived from fossil-fuelcombustion, Environ. Sci. Technol 38 (March 2004) 1836–1842.

[4] M. Cacciola, D. Pellicanò, G. Megali, A. Lay-Ekuakille, M. Versaci, F.C.Morabito, Aspects about air pollution prediction on urbanenvironment, 4th Imeko TC19 Symposium, Lecce, Italy, 3–4 June2013.

[5] A. Lay-Ekuakille, A. Trotta, Predicting VOC concentrationmeasurements: cognitive approach for sensor networks, IEEE Sens.J. 11 (11) (2011) 3030–3923.

[6] A. Lay Ekuakille, A. Trotta, Aerosol extinction uncertaintydetermination for a laser based detecting system, Trans. Syst.,Signals Dev. 1 (2006) 321–338.

[7] Taranto Port Authority, Taranto Port Handbook, <http://www.port.taranto.it/en/interactive-guide.html>.

[8] G. Andria, G. Cavone, V. Di Lecce, A.M.L. Lanzolla, Modelcharacterization of measurement environmental pollutants viadata correlation of sensor output, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 54(2005) 1061–1066.

[9] G. Andria, G. Cavone, A.M.L. Lanzolla, Modeling study for assessmentand forecasting variation in urban air pollution, Meas. J. Imeko 41 (3)(April 2008) 222–229.

[10] V. Pelillo, L. Piper, A. Lay-Ekuakille, A. Arnesano, A. Lanzolla, G.Andria, Sampling optimization for monitoring contaminated soils,4th Imeko TC19 Symposium, Lecce, Italy, 3–4 June 2013.

[11] A. Lay-Ekuakille, A. Arnesano, P. Vergallo, R. Morello, C. De Capua,Led-based architecture for air emission monitoring, 4th Imeko TC19Symposium, Lecce, Italy, 3–4 June 2013.

[12] L. Piper, A. Lay-Ekuakille, P. Vergallo, V. Pelillo, A novel pseudo-stationary modeling of pollutant measurement prediction fromindustrial emissions, XX IMEKO World Congress Metrology forGreen Growth September 9–14, Busan, Republic of Korea, 2012.

[13] M. Amodio, E. Andriani, L. Angiuli, G. Assennato, G. De Gennaro, A. DiGiglio, R. Giuia, M. Intini, M. Menegotto, A. Nocioni, J. Palmisani, M.R.Perrone, M. Placentino, M. Tutino, Chemical characterization of PMin apulia region: local and long-range transport contributions toparticulate matter, Boreal Environ. Res. 16 (June 2011) 251–261.

[14] M. Amodio, E. Andriani, G. De Gennaro, A. Di Giglio, A. Di Giglio, M.Placentino, How a steel plant affects air quality of a nearby urbanarea: a study on metals and PAH concentrations, Aerosol Air QualityRes. 13 (April 2013) 497–508.

[15] G. De Gennaro, M. Amodio, E. Andriani, A. Demarinis, A. Di Giglio, M.Placentino, An integrated approach to identify the origin of PM10exceedances, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 19 (June 2012) 3132–3141.

[16] International Maritime Organization, The International ConventionFor The Prevention Of Pollution From Ships, MARPOL, Consolidatededition (73/78), IMO press, London, 2011.

[17] Directive 2005/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council,Official Journal of the European Union, July 2005.

[18] ENTEC UK limited, Service contract on ship emissions: assignment,abatement, and market based instruments – task 2 – Shore sideElectricity, Norwich, 2005.

[19] P. Campling, L. Janssen, K. Vanherle, J. Cofala, C.Heyes, R. Sander,Specific evaluation of emission from shipping including assessmentfor the establishment of possible new Emission Control Areas ineuropean seas, Final report, VITO, March 2013.

[20] P. Ericsson, I. Fazlagic, Shore side power supply, Master of ScienceThesis, Chalmers University of technology, Goteborg Sweden, 2008.

[21] K. Browning, K. Bailey, Current methodologies and best practices forpreparing port emission inventories, in: 5th International EmissionInventory Conference, New Orleans, May 15–18, 2006.

[22] C. Trozzi, R. Vaccaro, Methodologies for estimating air pollutantemissions from ship. Technical Report MEET RF98b, August 1998.

[23] L.D. Emberson, M.R. Ashmore, F. Murray, K.E. Percy, T. Izuta, Y.Zheng, H. Shimizu, B.H. Sheu, C.P. Liu, M. Agrawal, A. Wahid, N.M.Abdel-Latif, M.V. Tienhoven, L.I. Bauer, M. Domingos, Impacts of airpollutants on vegetation in developing countries, Water, Air Pollut.130 (2001) 107–118.

[24] N. Moreno, Characterization of dust material emitted during harbouroperations (HADA Project), Atmos. Environ. 41 (30) (2007) 6331–6343.

[25] Commission Recommendation 2006/339/EC, on the promotion ofshore-side electricity for use by ships at berth in Community ports,Official Journal of the European Union, 8 May 2006.

[26] R. Carbone, C. De Capua, R. Morello, Photovoltaic systems forpowering greenhouses, in: 2011 IEEE International Conference onClean Electrical Power (ICCEP), ISBN: 978-1-4244-8927-5X, June2011.

[27] R. Carbone, C. De Capua, A. Meduri, R. Morello, energy accounting inpresence of unbalances: the case study of a photovoltaic plant, in:2010 IEEE International Instrumentation and MeasurementTechnology Conference (I2MTC 2010), May 2010.

[28] R. Carbone, R. Morello, A Single-phase to three-phase low-powerPWM adjustable speed drive with low current harmonics, in:Proceedings of the International Conference on Circuits, Systems,Signals (CSS), Published by WSEAS Press, Malta, ISSN: 1792–4324,ISBN: 978-960-474-226-4, September 15–17, 2010.

[29] A. Lay-Ekuakille, A. Arnesano, P. Vergallo, Thin-film-based CdTe PVmodule characterization: measurements and energy predictionimprovement, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 84 (2013) 15114–15117.