Evaluación de las Consecuencias de la Nueva Regulación de la OMI sobre Combustibles Marinos

El 10 de octubre de 2008 la Organización Marítima Internacional (OMI) firmó una modificación al Anexo VI del convenio MARPOL 73/78, por la que estableció una reducción progresiva de las emisiones de óxidos de azufre (SOx) procedentes de los buques, una reducción adicional de las emisiones de óxidos de nitrógeno (NOx), así como límites en las emisiones de dióxido de Carbono (CO2) procedentes de los motores marinos y causantes de problemas medioambientales como la lluvia ácida y efecto invernadero. Centrándonos en los límites sobre las emisiones de azufre, a partir del 1 de enero de 2015 esta normativa obliga a todos los buques que naveguen por zonas controladas, llamadas Emission Control Area (ECA), a consumir combustibles con un contenido de azufre menor al 0,1%. A partir del 1 de enero del año 2020, o bien del año 2025, si la OMI decide retrasar su inicio, los buques deberán consumir combustibles con un contenido de azufre menor al 0,5%. De igual forma que antes, el contenido deberá ser rebajado al 0,1%S, si navegan por el interior de zonas ECA. Por su parte, la Unión Europea ha ido más allá que la OMI, adelantando al año 2020 la aplicación de los límites más estrictos de la ley MARPOL sobre las aguas de su zona económica exclusiva. Para ello, el 21 de noviembre de 2013 firmó la Directiva 2012 / 33 / EU como adenda a la Directiva de 1999. Tengamos presente que la finalidad de estas nuevas leyes es la mejora de la salud pública y el medioambiente, produciendo beneficios sociales, en forma de reducción de enfermedades, sobre todo de tipo respiratorio, a la vez que se reduce la lluvia ácida y sus nefastas consecuencias. La primera pregunta que surge es ¿cuál es el combustible actual de los buques y cuál será el que tengan que consumir para cumplir con esta Regulación? Pues bien, los grandes buques de navegación internacional consumen hoy en día fuel oil con un nivel de azufre de 3,5%. ¿Existen fueles con un nivel de azufre de 0,5%S? Como hemos concluido en el capítulo 4, para las empresas petroleras, la producción de fuel oil como combustible marino es tratada como un subproducto en su cesta de productos refinados por cada barril de Brent, ya que la demanda de fuel respecto a otros productos está bajando y además, el margen de beneficio que obtienen por la venta de otros productos petrolíferos es mayor que con el fuel. Así, podemos decir que las empresas petroleras no están interesadas en invertir en sus refinerías para producir estos fueles con menor contenido de azufre. Es más, en el caso de que alguna compañía decidiese invertir en producir un fuel de 0,5%S, su precio debería ser muy similar al del gasóleo para poder recuperar las inversiones empleadas. Por lo tanto, el único combustible que actualmente cumple con los nuevos niveles impuestos por la OMI es el gasóleo, con un precio que durante el año 2014 estuvo a una media de 307 USD/ton más alto que el actual fuel oil. Este mayor precio de compra de combustible impactará directamente sobre el coste del trasporte marítimo. La entrada en vigor de las anteriores normativas está suponiendo un reto para todo el sector marítimo. Ante esta realidad, se plantean diferentes alternativas con diferentes implicaciones técnicas, operativas y financieras. En la actualidad, son tres las alternativas con mayor aceptación en el sector. La primera alternativa consiste en “no hacer nada” y simplemente cambiar el tipo de combustible de los grandes buques de fuel oil a gasóleo. Las segunda alternativa es la instalación de un equipo scrubber, que permitiría continuar con el consumo de fuel oil, limpiando sus gases de combustión antes de salir a la atmósfera. Y, por último, la tercera alternativa consiste en el uso de Gas Natural Licuado (GNL) como combustible, con un precio inferior al del gasóleo. Sin embargo, aún existen importantes incertidumbres sobre la evolución futura de precios, operación y mantenimiento de las nuevas tecnologías, inversiones necesarias, disponibilidad de infraestructura portuaria e incluso el desarrollo futuro de la propia normativa internacional. Estas dudas hacen que ninguna de estas tres alternativas sea unánime en el sector. En esta tesis, tras exponer en el capítulo 3 la regulación aplicable al sector, hemos investigado sus consecuencias. Para ello, hemos examinado en el capítulo 4 si existen en la actualidad combustibles marinos que cumplan con los nuevos límites de azufre o en su defecto, cuál sería el precio de los nuevos combustibles. Partimos en el capítulo 5 de la hipótesis de que todos los buques cambian su consumo de fuel oil a gasóleo para cumplir con dicha normativa, calculamos el incremento de demanda de gasóleo que se produciría y analizamos las consecuencias que este hecho tendría sobre la producción de gasóleos en el Mediterráneo. Adicionalmente, calculamos el impacto económico que dicho incremento de coste producirá sobre sector exterior de España. Para ello, empleamos como base de datos el sistema de control de tráfico marítimo Authomatic Identification System (AIS) para luego analizar los datos de todos los buques que han hecho escala en algún puerto español, para así calcular el extra coste anual por el consumo de gasóleo que sufrirá el transporte marítimo para mover todas las importaciones y exportaciones de España. Por último, en el capítulo 6, examinamos y comparamos las otras dos alternativas al consumo de gasóleo -scrubbers y propulsión con GNL como combustible- y, finalmente, analizamos en el capítulo 7, la viabilidad de las inversiones en estas dos tecnologías para cumplir con la regulación. En el capítulo 5 explicamos los numerosos métodos que existen para calcular la demanda de combustible de un buque. La metodología seguida para su cálculo será del tipo bottom-up, que está basada en la agregación de la actividad y las características de cada tipo de buque. El resultado está basado en la potencia instalada de cada buque, porcentaje de carga del motor y su consumo específico. Para ello, analizamos el número de buques que navegan por el Mediterráneo a lo largo de un año mediante el sistema AIS, realizando “fotos” del tráfico marítimo en el Mediterráneo y reportando todos los buques en navegación en días aleatorios a lo largo de todo el año 2014. Por último, y con los datos anteriores, calculamos la demanda potencial de gasóleo en el Mediterráneo. Si no se hace nada y los buques comienzan a consumir gasóleo como combustible principal, en vez del actual fuel oil para cumplir con la regulación, la demanda de gasoil en el Mediterráneo aumentará en 12,12 MTA (Millones de Toneladas Anuales) a partir del año 2020. Esto supone alrededor de 3.720 millones de dólares anuales por el incremento del gasto de combustible tomando como referencia el precio medio de los combustibles marinos durante el año 2014. El anterior incremento de demanda en el Mediterráneo supondría el 43% del total de la demanda de gasóleos en España en el año 2013, incluyendo gasóleos de automoción, biodiesel y gasóleos marinos y el 3,2% del consumo europeo de destilados medios durante el año 2014. ¿Podrá la oferta del mercado europeo asumir este incremento de demanda de gasóleos? Europa siempre ha sido excedentaria en gasolina y deficitaria en destilados medios. En el año 2009, Europa tuvo que importar 4,8 MTA de Norte América y 22,1 MTA de Asia. Por lo que, este aumento de demanda sobre la ya limitada capacidad de refino de destilados medios en Europa incrementará las importaciones y producirá también aumentos en los precios, sobre todo del mercado del gasóleo. El sector sobre el que más impactará el incremento de demanda de gasóleo será el de los cruceros que navegan por el Mediterráneo, pues consumirán un 30,4% de la demanda de combustible de toda flota mundial de cruceros, lo que supone un aumento en su gasto de combustible de 386 millones de USD anuales. En el caso de los RoRos, consumirían un 23,6% de la demanda de la flota mundial de este tipo de buque, con un aumento anual de 171 millones de USD sobre su gasto de combustible anterior. El mayor incremento de coste lo sufrirán los portacontenedores, con 1.168 millones de USD anuales sobre su gasto actual. Sin embargo, su consumo en el Mediterráneo representa sólo el 5,3% del consumo mundial de combustible de este tipo de buques. Estos números plantean la incertidumbre de si semejante aumento de gasto en buques RoRo hará que el transporte marítimo de corta distancia en general pierda competitividad sobre otros medios de transporte alternativos en determinadas rutas. De manera que, parte del volumen de mercancías que actualmente transportan los buques se podría trasladar a la carretera, con los inconvenientes medioambientales y operativos, que esto produciría. En el caso particular de España, el extra coste por el consumo de gasóleo de todos los buques con escala en algún puerto español en el año 2013 se cifra en 1.717 millones de EUR anuales, según demostramos en la última parte del capítulo 5. Para realizar este cálculo hemos analizado con el sistema AIS a todos los buques que han tenido escala en algún puerto español y los hemos clasificado por distancia navegada, tipo de buque y potencia. Este encarecimiento del transporte marítimo será trasladado al sector exterior español, lo cual producirá un aumento del coste de las importaciones y exportaciones por mar en un país muy expuesto, pues el 75,61% del total de las importaciones y el 53,64% del total de las exportaciones se han hecho por vía marítima. Las tres industrias que se verán más afectadas son aquellas cuyo valor de mercancía es inferior respecto a su coste de transporte. Para ellas los aumentos del coste sobre el total del valor de cada mercancía serán de un 2,94% para la madera y corcho, un 2,14% para los productos minerales y un 1,93% para las manufacturas de piedra, cemento, cerámica y vidrio. Las mercancías que entren o salgan por los dos archipiélagos españoles de Canarias y Baleares serán las que se verán más impactadas por el extra coste del transporte marítimo, ya que son los puertos más alejados de otros puertos principales y, por tanto, con más distancia de navegación. Sin embargo, esta no es la única alternativa al cumplimiento de la nueva regulación. De la lectura del capítulo 6 concluimos que las tecnologías de equipos scrubbers y de propulsión con GNL permitirán al buque consumir combustibles más baratos al gasoil, a cambio de una inversión en estas tecnologías. ¿Serán los ahorros producidos por estas nuevas tecnologías suficientes para justificar su inversión? Para contestar la anterior pregunta, en el capítulo 7 hemos comparado las tres alternativas y hemos calculado tanto los costes de inversión como los gastos operativos correspondientes a equipos scrubbers o propulsión con GNL para una selección de 53 categorías de buques. La inversión en equipos scrubbers es más conveniente para buques grandes, con navegación no regular. Sin embargo, para buques de tamaño menor y navegación regular por puertos con buena infraestructura de suministro de GNL, la inversión en una propulsión con GNL como combustible será la más adecuada. En el caso de un tiempo de navegación del 100% dentro de zonas ECA y bajo el escenario de precios visto durante el año 2014, los proyectos con mejor plazo de recuperación de la inversión en equipos scrubbers son para los cruceros de gran tamaño (100.000 tons. GT), para los que se recupera la inversión en 0,62 años, los grandes portacontenedores de más de 8.000 TEUs con 0,64 años de recuperación y entre 5.000-8.000 TEUs con 0,71 años de recuperación y, por último, los grandes petroleros de más de 200.000 tons. de peso muerto donde tenemos un plazo de recuperación de 0,82 años. La inversión en scrubbers para buques pequeños, por el contrario, tarda más tiempo en recuperarse llegando a más de 5 años en petroleros y quimiqueros de menos de 5.000 toneladas de peso muerto. En el caso de una posible inversión en propulsión con GNL, las categorías de buques donde la inversión en GNL es más favorable y recuperable en menor tiempo son las más pequeñas, como ferris, cruceros o RoRos. Tomamos ahora el caso particular de un buque de productos limpios de 38.500 toneladas de peso muerto ya construido y nos planteamos la viabilidad de la inversión en la instalación de un equipo scrubber o bien, el cambio a una propulsión por GNL a partir del año 2015. Se comprueba que las dos variables que más impactan sobre la conveniencia de la inversión son el tiempo de navegación del buque dentro de zonas de emisiones controladas (ECA) y el escenario futuro de precios del MGO, HSFO y GNL. Para realizar este análisis hemos estudiado cada inversión, calculando una batería de condiciones de mérito como el payback, TIR, VAN y la evolución de la tesorería del inversor. Posteriormente, hemos calculado las condiciones de contorno mínimas de este buque en concreto para asegurar una inversión no sólo aceptable, sino además conveniente para el naviero inversor. En el entorno de precios del 2014 -con un diferencial entre fuel y gasóleo de 264,35 USD/ton- si el buque pasa más de un 56% de su tiempo de navegación en zonas ECA, conseguirá una rentabilidad de la inversión para inversores (TIR) en el equipo scrubber que será igual o superior al 9,6%, valor tomado como coste de oportunidad. Para el caso de inversión en GNL, en el entorno de precios del año 2014 -con un diferencial entre GNL y gasóleo de 353,8 USD/ton FOE- si el buque pasa más de un 64,8 % de su tiempo de navegación en zonas ECA, conseguirá una rentabilidad de la inversión para inversores (TIR) que será igual o superior al 9,6%, valor del coste de oportunidad. Para un tiempo en zona ECA estimado de un 60%, la rentabilidad de la inversión (TIR) en scrubbers para los inversores será igual o superior al 9,6%, el coste de oportunidad requerido por el inversor, para valores del diferencial de precio entre los dos combustibles alternativos, gasóleo (MGO) y fuel oil (HSFO) a partir de 244,73 USD/ton. En el caso de una inversión en propulsión GNL se requeriría un diferencial de precio entre MGO y GNL de 382,3 USD/ton FOE o superior. Así, para un buque de productos limpios de 38.500 DWT, la inversión en una reconversión para instalar un equipo scrubber es más conveniente que la de GNL, pues alcanza rentabilidades de la inversión (TIR) para inversores del 12,77%, frente a un 6,81% en el caso de invertir en GNL. Para ambos cálculos se ha tomado un buque que navegue un 60% de su tiempo por zona ECA y un escenario de precios medios del año 2014 para el combustible. Po otro lado, las inversiones en estas tecnologías a partir del año 2025 para nuevas construcciones son en ambos casos convenientes. El naviero deberá prestar especial atención aquí a las características propias de su buque y tipo de navegación, así como a la infraestructura de suministros y vertidos en los puertos donde vaya a operar usualmente. Si bien, no se ha estudiado en profundidad en esta tesis, no olvidemos que el sector marítimo debe cumplir además con las otras dos limitaciones que la regulación de la OMI establece sobre las emisiones de óxidos de Nitrógeno (NOx) y Carbono (CO2) y que sin duda, requerirán adicionales inversiones en diversos equipos. De manera que, si bien las consecuencias del consumo de gasóleo como alternativa al cumplimiento de la Regulación MARPOL son ciertamente preocupantes, existen alternativas al uso del gasóleo, con un aumento sobre el coste del transporte marítimo menor y manteniendo los beneficios sociales que pretende dicha ley. En efecto, como hemos demostrado, las opciones que se plantean como más rentables desde el punto de vista financiero son el consumo de GNL en los buques pequeños y de línea regular (cruceros, ferries, RoRos), y la instalación de scrubbers para el resto de buques de grandes dimensiones. Pero, por desgracia, estas inversiones no llegan a hacerse realidad por el elevado grado de incertidumbre asociado a estos dos mercados, que aumenta el riesgo empresarial, tanto de navieros como de suministradores de estas nuevas tecnologías. Observamos así una gran reticencia del sector privado a decidirse por estas dos alternativas. Este elevado nivel de riesgo sólo puede reducirse fomentando el esfuerzo conjunto del sector público y privado para superar estas barreras de entrada del mercado de scrubbers y GNL, que lograrían reducir las externalidades medioambientales de las emisiones sin restar competitividad al transporte marítimo. Creemos así, que los mismos organismos que aprobaron dicha ley deben ayudar al sector naviero a afrontar las inversiones en dichas tecnologías, así como a impulsar su investigación y promover la creación de una infraestructura portuaria adaptada a suministros de GNL y a descargas de vertidos procedentes de los equipos scrubber. Deberían además, prestar especial atención sobre las ayudas al sector de corta distancia para evitar que pierda competitividad frente a otros medios de transporte por el cumplimiento de esta normativa. Actualmente existen varios programas europeos de incentivos, como TEN-T o Marco Polo, pero no los consideramos suficientes. Por otro lado, la Organización Marítima Internacional debe confirmar cuanto antes si retrasa o no al 2025 la nueva bajada del nivel de azufre en combustibles. De esta manera, se eliminaría la gran incertidumbre temporal que actualmente tienen tanto navieros, como empresas petroleras y puertos para iniciar sus futuras inversiones y poder estudiar la viabilidad de cada alternativa de forma individual. ABSTRACT On 10 October 2008 the International Maritime Organization (IMO) signed an amendment to Annex VI of the MARPOL 73/78 convention establishing a gradual reduction in sulphur oxide (SOx) emissions from ships, and an additional reduction in nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from marine engines which cause environmental problems such as acid rain and the greenhouse effect. According to this regulation, from 1 January 2015, ships travelling in an Emission Control Area (ECA) must use fuels with a sulphur content of less than 0.1%. From 1 January 2020, or alternatively from 2025 if the IMO should decide to delay its introduction, all ships must use fuels with a sulphur content of less than 0.5%. As before, this content will be 0.1%S for voyages within ECAs. Meanwhile, the European Union has gone further than the IMO, and will apply the strictest limits of the MARPOL directives in the waters of its exclusive economic zone from 2020. To this end, Directive 2012/33/EU was issued on 21 November 2013 as an addendum to the 1999 Directive. These laws are intended to improve public health and the environment, benefiting society by reducing disease, particularly respiratory problems. The first question which arises is: what fuel do ships currently use, and what fuel will they have to use to comply with the Convention? Today, large international shipping vessels consume fuel oil with a sulphur level of 3.5%. Do fuel oils exist with a sulphur level of 0.5%S? As we conclude in Chapter 4, oil companies regard marine fuel oil as a by-product of refining Brent to produce their basket of products, as the demand for fuel oil is declining in comparison to other products, and the profit margin on the sale of other petroleum products is higher. Thus, oil companies are not interested in investing in their refineries to produce low-sulphur fuel oils, and if a company should decide to invest in producing a 0.5%S fuel oil, its price would have to be very similar to that of marine gas oil in order to recoup the investment. Therefore, the only fuel which presently complies with the new levels required by the IMO is marine gas oil, which was priced on average 307 USD/tonne higher than current fuel oils during 2014. This higher purchasing price for fuel will have a direct impact on the cost of maritime transport. The entry into force of the above directive presents a challenge for the entire maritime sector. There are various alternative approaches to this situation, with different technical, operational and financial implications. At present three options are the most widespread in the sector. The first option consists of “doing nothing” and simply switching from fuel oil to marine gas oil in large ships. The second option is installing a scrubber system, which would enable ships to continue consuming fuel oil, cleaning the combustion gases before they are released to the atmosphere. And finally, the third option is using Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), which is priced lower than marine gas oil, as a fuel. However, there is still significant uncertainty on future variations in prices, the operation and maintenance of the new technologies, the investments required, the availability of port infrastructure and even future developments in the international regulations themselves. These uncertainties mean that none of these three alternatives has been unanimously accepted by the sector. In this Thesis, after discussing all the regulations applicable to the sector in Chapter 3, we investigate their consequences. In Chapter 4 we examine whether there are currently any marine fuels on the market which meet the new sulphur limits, and if not, how much new fuels would cost. In Chapter 5, based on the hypothesis that all ships will switch from fuel oil to marine gas oil to comply with the regulations, we calculate the increase in demand for marine gas oil this would lead to, and analyse the consequences this would have on marine gas oil production in the Mediterranean. We also calculate the economic impact such a cost increase would have on Spain's external sector. To do this, we also use the Automatic Identification System (AIS) system to analyse the data of every ship stopping in any Spanish port, in order to calculate the extra cost of using marine gas oil in maritime transport for all Spain's imports and exports. Finally, in Chapter 6, we examine and compare the other two alternatives to marine gas oil, scrubbers and LNG, and in Chapter 7 we analyse the viability of investing in these two technologies in order to comply with the regulations. In Chapter 5 we explain the many existing methods for calculating a ship's fuel consumption. We use a bottom-up calculation method, based on aggregating the activity and characteristics of each type of vessel. The result is based on the installed engine power of each ship, the engine load percentage and its specific consumption. To do this, we analyse the number of ships travelling in the Mediterranean in the course of one year, using the AIS, a marine traffic monitoring system, to take “snapshots” of marine traffic in the Mediterranean and report all ships at sea on random days throughout 2014. Finally, with the above data, we calculate the potential demand for marine gas oil in the Mediterranean. If nothing else is done and ships begin to use marine gas oil instead of fuel oil in order to comply with the regulation, the demand for marine gas oil in the Mediterranean will increase by 12.12 MTA (Millions Tonnes per Annum) from 2020. This means an increase of around 3.72 billion dollars a year in fuel costs, taking as reference the average price of marine fuels in 2014. Such an increase in demand in the Mediterranean would be equivalent to 43% of the total demand for diesel in Spain in 2013, including automotive diesel fuels, biodiesel and marine gas oils, and 3.2% of European consumption of middle distillates in 2014. Would the European market be able to supply enough to meet this greater demand for diesel? Europe has always had a surplus of gasoline and a deficit of middle distillates. In 2009, Europe had to import 4.8 MTA from North America and 22.1 MTA from Asia. Therefore, this increased demand on Europe's already limited capacity for refining middle distillates would lead to increased imports and higher prices, especially in the diesel market. The sector which would suffer the greatest impact of increased demand for marine gas oil would be Mediterranean cruise ships, which represent 30.4% of the fuel demand of the entire world cruise fleet, meaning their fuel costs would rise by 386 million USD per year. ROROs in the Mediterranean, which represent 23.6% of the demand of the world fleet of this type of ship, would see their fuel costs increase by 171 million USD a year. The greatest cost increase would be among container ships, with an increase on current costs of 1.168 billion USD per year. However, their consumption in the Mediterranean represents only 5.3% of worldwide fuel consumption by container ships. These figures raise the question of whether a cost increase of this size for RORO ships would lead to short-distance marine transport in general becoming less competitive compared to other transport options on certain routes. For example, some of the goods that ships now carry could switch to road transport, with the undesirable effects on the environment and on operations that this would produce. In the particular case of Spain, the extra cost of switching to marine gas oil in all ships stopping at any Spanish port in 2013 would be 1.717 billion EUR per year, as we demonstrate in the last part of Chapter 5. For this calculation, we used the AIS system to analyse all ships which stopped at any Spanish port, classifying them by distance travelled, type of ship and engine power. This rising cost of marine transport would be passed on to the Spanish external sector, increasing the cost of imports and exports by sea in a country which relies heavily on maritime transport, which accounts for 75.61% of Spain's total imports and 53.64% of its total exports. The three industries which would be worst affected are those with goods of lower value relative to transport costs. The increased costs over the total value of each good would be 2.94% for wood and cork, 2.14% for mineral products and 1.93% for manufactured stone, cement, ceramic and glass products. Goods entering via the two Spanish archipelagos, the Canary Islands and the Balearic Islands, would suffer the greatest impact from the extra cost of marine transport, as these ports are further away from other major ports and thus the distance travelled is greater. However, this is not the only option for compliance with the new regulations. From our readings in Chapter 6 we conclude that scrubbers and LNG propulsion would enable ships to use cheaper fuels than marine gas oil, in exchange for investing in these technologies. Would the savings gained by these new technologies be enough to justify the investment? To answer this question, in Chapter 7 we compare the three alternatives and calculate both the cost of investment and the operating costs associated with scrubbers or LNG propulsion for a selection of 53 categories of ships. Investing in scrubbers is more advisable for large ships with no fixed runs. However, for smaller ships with regular runs to ports with good LNG supply infrastructure, investing in LNG propulsion would be the best choice. In the case of total transit time within an ECA and the pricing scenario seen in 2014, the best payback periods on investments in scrubbers are for large cruise ships (100,000 gross tonnage), which would recoup their investment in 0.62 years; large container ships, with a 0.64 year payback period for those over 8,000 TEUs and 0.71 years for the 5,000-8,000 TEU category; and finally, large oil tankers over 200,000 deadweight tonnage, which would recoup their investment in 0.82 years. However, investing in scrubbers would have a longer payback period for smaller ships, up to 5 years or more for oil tankers and chemical tankers under 5,000 deadweight tonnage. In the case of LNG propulsion, a possible investment is more favourable and the payback period is shorter for smaller ship classes, such as ferries, cruise ships and ROROs. We now take the case of a ship transporting clean products, already built, with a deadweight tonnage of 38,500, and consider the viability of investing in installing a scrubber or changing to LNG propulsion, starting in 2015. The two variables with the greatest impact on the advisability of the investment are how long the ship is at sea within emission control areas (ECA) and the future price scenario of MGO, HSFO and LNG. For this analysis, we studied each investment, calculating a battery of merit conditions such as the payback period, IRR, NPV and variations in the investors' liquid assets. We then calculated the minimum boundary conditions to ensure the investment was not only acceptable but advisable for the investor shipowner. Thus, for the average price differential of 264.35 USD/tonne between HSFO and MGO during 2014, investors' return on investment (IRR) in scrubbers would be the same as the required opportunity cost of 9.6%, for values of over 56% ship transit time in ECAs. For the case of investing in LNG and the average price differential between MGO and LNG of 353.8 USD/tonne FOE in 2014, the ship must spend 64.8% of its time in ECAs for the investment to be advisable. For an estimated 60% of time in an ECA, the internal rate of return (IRR) for investors equals the required opportunity cost of 9.6%, based on a price difference of 244.73 USD/tonne between the two alternative fuels, marine gas oil (MGO) and fuel oil (HSFO). An investment in LNG propulsion would require a price differential between MGO and LNG of 382.3 USD/tonne FOE. Thus, for a 38,500 DWT ship carrying clean products, investing in retrofitting to install a scrubber is more advisable than converting to LNG, with an internal rate of return (IRR) for investors of 12.77%, compared to 6.81% for investing in LNG. Both calculations were based on a ship which spends 60% of its time at sea in an ECA and a scenario of average 2014 prices. However, for newly-built ships, investments in either of these technologies from 2025 would be advisable. Here, the shipowner must pay particular attention to the specific characteristics of their ship, the type of operation, and the infrastructure for supplying fuel and handling discharges in the ports where it will usually operate. Thus, while the consequences of switching to marine gas oil in order to comply with the MARPOL regulations are certainly alarming, there are alternatives to marine gas oil, with smaller increases in the costs of maritime transport, while maintaining the benefits to society this law is intended to provide. Indeed, as we have demonstrated, the options which appear most favourable from a financial viewpoint are conversion to LNG for small ships and regular runs (cruise ships, ferries, ROROs), and installing scrubbers for large ships. Unfortunately, however, these investments are not being made, due to the high uncertainty associated with these two markets, which increases business risk, both for shipowners and for the providers of these new technologies. This means we are seeing considerable reluctance regarding these two options among the private sector. This high level of risk can be lowered only by encouraging joint efforts by the public and private sectors to overcome these barriers to entry into the market for scrubbers and LNG, which could reduce the environmental externalities of emissions without affecting the competitiveness of marine transport. Our opinion is that the same bodies which approved this law must help the shipping industry invest in these technologies, drive research on them, and promote the creation of a port infrastructure which is adapted to supply LNG and handle the discharges from scrubber systems. At present there are several European incentive programmes, such as TEN-T and Marco Polo, but we do not consider these to be sufficient. For its part, the International Maritime Organization should confirm as soon as possible whether the new lower sulphur levels in fuels will be postponed until 2025. This would eliminate the great uncertainty among shipowners, oil companies and ports regarding the timeline for beginning their future investments and for studying their viability.

Temperature dependence of amyloid β-protein fibrillization

Fibrillogenesis of the amyloid β-protein (Aβ) is believed to play a central role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease. Previous studies of the kinetics of Aβ fibrillogenesis showed that the rate of fibril elongation is proportional to the concentration of monomers. We report here the study of the temperature dependence of the Aβ fibril elongation rate constant, ke, in 0.1 M HCl. The rate of fibril elongation was measured at Aβ monomer concentrations ranging from 50 to 400 μM and at temperatures from 4°C to 40°C. Over this temperature range, ke increases by two orders of magnitude. The temperature dependence of ke follows the Arrhenius law, ke = A exp (−EA/kT). The preexponential factor A and the activation energy EA are ≈6 × 1018 liter/(mol·sec) and 23 kcal/mol, respectively. Such a high value of EA suggests that significant conformational changes are associated with the binding of Aβ monomers to fibril ends.

A substance P (neurokinin-1) receptor mutant carboxyl-terminally truncated to resemble a naturally occurring receptor isoform displays enhanced responsiveness and resistance to desensitization

Two isoforms of the substance P (SP) receptor, differing in the length of the cytoplasmic carboxyl-terminus by ≈8 kDa, have been detected previously in rat salivary glands and other tissues. The binding and functional properties of these two isoforms have been investigated using full-length (407 amino acids) and carboxyl-terminally truncated (324 amino acids) rat SP receptors transfected stably into Chinese hamster ovary cells. Both the full-length and the truncated receptor bound radiolabeled SP with a similar Kd (≈0.1 nM). The average number of high affinity SP binding sites per cell was 1.0 × 105 and 0.3 × 105 for the full-length and the truncated SP receptor, respectively. In both cell lines, SP induced a rapid but transient increase in cytosolic calcium concentration ([Ca2+]i), which consisted of the release of Ca2+ from intracellular stores and the influx of extracellular Ca2+. Both components are dependent on phospholipase C activation. Although the full-length and the truncated receptor utilize the same calcium pathways, they differ in their EC50 values (0.28 nM for the full-length; 0.07 nM for the truncated). These differences in responsiveness may be related to the observed differences in receptor desensitization. The truncated receptor, in contrast to the full-length receptor, does not undergo rapid and long-lasting desensitization. Cells possessing the short isoform of the SP receptor would thus be expected to exhibit a prolonged responsiveness.

7-Chloro-3-methyl-3,4-dihydro-2H-1,2,4-benzothiadiazine S,S-dioxide (IDRA 21), a congener of aniracetam, potently abates pharmacologically induced cognitive impairments in patas monkeys.

We report here on the ability of IDRA 21 and aniracetam, two negative allosteric modulators of glutamate-induced DL-alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor desensitization, to attenuate alprazolam-induced learning deficit in patas monkeys working in a complex behavioral task. In one component of a multiple schedule (repeated acquisition or "learning"), patas monkeys acquired a different four-response chain each session by responding sequentially on three keys in the presence of four discriminative stimuli (geometric forms or numerals). In the other component (performance) the four-response chain was the same each session. The response chain in each component was maintained by food presentation under a fixed-ratio schedule. When alprazolam (0.1 or 0.32 mg/kg p.o.) was administered alone, this full allosteric modulator of gamma-aminobutyric acid type A (GABAA) receptors produced large decreases in the response rate and accuracy in the learning component of the task. IDRA 21 (3 or 5.6 mg/kg p.o.) and aniracetam (30 mg/kg p.o.) administered 60 min before alprazolam, having no effect when given alone, antagonized the large disruptive effects of alprazolam on learning. From dose-response studies, it can be estimated that IDRA 21 is approximately 10-fold more potent than aniracetam in antagonizing alprazolam-induced learning deficit. We conclude that IDRA 21, a chemically unrelated pharmacological congener of aniracetam, improves learning deficit induced in patas monkeys by the increase of GABAergic tone elicited by alprazolam. Very likely IDRA 21 exerts its behavioral effects by antagonizing AMPA receptor desensitization.

Identification of endothelin 1 and big endothelin 1 in secretory vesicles isolated from bovine aortic endothelial cells.

Vesicles containing endothelin 1 (ET-1) were isolated from bovine aortic endothelial cells (BAECs) by fractionation of homogenates on sucrose density gradients by ultracentrifugation. The vesicles were localized at the 1.0/1.2 M sucrose interface using a specific anti-ET-1-(16-21) RIA. Identification of ET-1 and big ET-1 in this fraction was confirmed by HPLC analysis combined with RIA. Morphological examination of the ET-1-enriched fraction by electron microscopy identified clusters of vesicles approximately 100 nm in diameter. Immunostaining of ultrathin cryosections prepared from the vesicle fraction for ET-1 or big ET-1 showed clusters of 15-nm gold particles attached to or within vesicles. Immunofluorescence staining of whole BAECs using a specific ET-1-(16-21) IgG purified by affinity chromatography revealed punctate granulation of the cell cytoplasm viewed under light microscopy. This distinct pattern of staining was shown by confocal light microscopy to be intracellular. Immunofluorescence staining of whole cells with a polyclonal antiserum for big ET-1-(22-39) showed a defined perinuclear localization of precursor molecule. Hence, several different approaches have demonstrated that ET-1 and big ET-1 are localized within intracellular vesicles in BAECs, suggesting that these subcellular compartments are an important site for processing of big ET-1 by endothelin-converting enzyme.

Lipocortin 1 mediates the inhibition by dexamethasone of the induction by endotoxin of nitric oxide synthase in the rat.

Administration of Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS; 10 mg/kg i.v.) to male Wistar rats caused within 240 min (i) a sustained fall (approximately 30 mmHg) in mean arterial blood pressure, (ii) a reduction (> 75%) in the pressor responses to norepinephrine (1 microgram/kg i.v.), and (iii) an induction of nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) as measured in the lung. Dexamethasone (1 mg/kg i.p. at 2 h prior to LPS) attenuated the hypotension and the vascular hyporeactivity to norepinephrine and reduced (by approximately 77%) the expression of iNOS in the lung. These effects of dexamethasone were prevented by pretreatment of LPS-treated rats with a neutralizing antiserum to lipocortin 1 (anti-LC1; 60 mg/kg s.c. at 24 h prior to LPS) but not by a control nonimmune sheep serum. Stimulation of J774.2 macrophages with LPS (1 microgram/ml for 24 h) caused the expression of iNOS and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) protein and significantly increased nitrite generation; this was prevented by dexamethasone (0.1 microM at 1 h prior to LPS), which also increased cell surface lipocortin 1. Pretreatment of J774.2 cells with anti-LC1 (1:60 dilution at 4 h prior to LPS) also abolished the inhibitory effect of dexamethasone on iNOS expression and nitrite accumulation but not that on COX-2 expression. A lipocortin 1 fragment (residues 1-188 of human lipocortin 1; 20 micrograms/ml at 1 h prior to LPS) also blocked iNOS in J774.2 macrophages activated by LPS (approximately 78% inhibition), and this too was prevented by anti-LC1. We conclude that the extracellular release of endogenous lipocortin 1 (i) mediates the inhibition by dexamethasone of the expression of iNOS, but not of COX-2, and (ii) contributes substantially to the beneficial actions of dexamethasone in rats with endotoxic shock.

Caracterização da farinha e do amido isolado da semente de jaca e comportamento reológico de dispersões de amido

O amido é um ingrediente com grande versatilidade de aplicação, e as sementes de jaca, fruto bem difundido, porém pouco aproveitado no Brasil, contêm uma quantidade considerável de amido, sendo ainda fonte de ferro e proteínas. Dessa maneira, os objetivos desse projeto foram a obtenção da farinha de sementes de jaca das variedades mole e dura, a extração do amido utilizando diferentes solventes, e a caracterização de suas propriedades físico-químicas, estruturais e funcionais, bem como a caracterização reológica de dispersões/géis de amido em cisalhamento estacionário e oscilatório. A extração alcalina do amido, além de reduzir significativamente o conteúdo de lipídeos e proteínas, deixando o amido mais puro, promoveu um aumento no teor de amilose e influenciou diretamente as características de inchamento e solubilidade, que apresentaram aumento significativo a partir da temperatura de 70 °C. O aumento da temperatura ocasionou aumento no poder de inchamento e solubilidade, que foi mais pronunciado para a variedade dura, porém esses valores ainda foram considerados baixos (< 17%). Os amidos de sementes de jaca apresentaram grânulos lisos, arredondados e em forma de sino, com formato mais truncado para o amido extraído com hidróxido de sódio. O diâmetro médio dos grânulos de amido foi menor para a extração alcalina, mas sempre com comportamento monomodal. Foi observado um padrão de difração de Raios-X do tipo A para todas as amostras estudadas, e o índice de cristalinidade foi maior para os amidos de sementes de jaca dura, com uma redução estimada em 70% para os amidos obtidos por extração alcalina. A temperatura de gelatinização dos amidos de semente de jaca foi considerada alta (70-100 °C). Os amidos de sementes de jaca dura obtidos na extração com água apresentaram maiores valores de viscosidade de pico e de Breakdown, que representa menor resistência mecânica. A extração com solução de NaOH 0,1 M aumentou a tendência a retrogradação de ~36% (extração aquosa) para 64% e 45% dos amidos de sementes de jaca das variedades mole e dura, respectivamente. Todas as amostras apresentaram comportamento pseudoplástico (n < 1) nas concentrações e temperaturas estudadas, e as dispersões e/ou géis de amido obtidos pela extração alcalina com NaOH apresentaram menor tixotropia e maiores valores de viscosidade. Os modelos Lei da Potência e Herschel Bulkley apresentaram ótimos ajustes aos pontos experimentais (R² ~0,998) para as amostras com 2 e 6 % de amido, respectivamente, porém para a concentração de 5%, o melhor modelo foi função da variedade do fruto usado na obtenção do amido. A dependência das propriedades reológicas com a temperatura foi analisada pela equação de Arrhenius e a energia de ativação foi baixa (15-25 kJ/mol). Quanto ao comportamento viscoelástico, as amostras com 5 e 6% de amido apresentaram comportamento de gel fraco e o aumento da concentração desse polissacarídeo produziu um aumento na elasticidade do material. Os módulos de armazenamento (G\') associados à elasticidade do gel de amido aumentaram durante o seu resfriamento nos ensaios de varredura de temperatura, o que pode ser relacionado à recristalização da amilose durante esse processo e mantiveram-se praticamente constantes no aquecimento isotérmico a 80 °C, sugerindo boa estabilidade térmica do gel. A farinha isolada da semente de jaca pode ser considerada fonte de fibras e apresentou elevados teores de proteínas (~14-16%) e ferro (~85-150 mg/kg). A distribuição do tamanho de partículas da farinha apresentou comportamento bimodal, com grânulos arredondados, presença de fibras e uma matriz proteica envolvendo os grânulos de amido. As propriedades de pasta revelaram maior pico de viscosidade para a farinha de semente de jaca mole. As características encontradas sugerem que os amidos de semente de jaca poderiam ser aplicados na produção de filmes biodegradáveis, e a farinha da semente de jaca poderia ser utilizada em substituição parcial à farinha convencional na fabricação de bolos e biscoitos.

Investigating evidence for different black hole accretion modes since redshift z ∼ 1

Chandra data in the COSMOS, AEGIS-XD and 4 Ms Chandra Deep Field South are combined with multiwavelength photometry available in those fields to determine the rest-frame U − V versus V − J colours of X-ray AGN hosts in the redshift intervals 0.1 < z < 0.6 (mean z¯=0.40) and 0.6 < z < 1.2 (mean z¯=0.85). This combination of colours provides an effective and least model-dependent means of separating quiescent from star-forming, including dust reddened, galaxies. Morphological information emphasizes differences between AGN populations split by their U − V versus V − J colours. AGN in quiescent galaxies consist almost exclusively of bulges, while star-forming hosts are equally split between early- and late-type hosts. The position of AGN hosts on the U − V versusV − J diagram is then used to set limits on the accretion density of the Universe associated with evolved and star-forming systems independent of dust induced biases. It is found that most of the black hole growth at z≈ 0.40 and 0.85 is associated with star-forming hosts. Nevertheless, a non-negligible fraction of the X-ray luminosity density, about 15–20 per cent, at both z¯=0.40 and 0.85, is taking place in galaxies in the quiescent region of the U − V versus V − J diagram. For the low-redshift sub-sample, 0.1 < z < 0.6, we also find tentative evidence, significant at the 2σ level, that AGN split by their U − V and V − J colours have different Eddington ratio distributions. AGN in blue star-forming hosts dominate at relatively high Eddington ratios. In contrast, AGN in red quiescent hosts become increasingly important as a fraction of the total population towards low Eddington ratios. At higher redshift, z > 0.6, such differences are significant at the 2σ level only for sources with Eddington ratios ≳ 10^− 3. These findings are consistent with scenarios in which diverse accretion modes are responsible for the build-up of supermassive black holes at the centres of galaxies. We compare these results with the predictions of theGALFORM semi-analytic model for the cosmological evolution of AGN and galaxies. This model postulates two black hole fuelling modes, the first is linked to star formation events and the second takes place in passive galaxies. GALFORM predicts that a substantial fraction of the black hole growth at z < 1 is associated with quiescent galaxies, in apparent conflict with the observations. Relaxing the strong assumption of the model that passive AGN hosts have zero star formation rate could bring those predictions in better agreement with the data.

(Table 1) Soil density and concentration of 10Beryllium and 26Aluminium in samples from two ash deposits in the McMurdo Dry Valleys

The McMurdo Dry Valleys, Antarctica (MDV) are among the oldest landscapes on Earth, and some landforms there present an intriguing apparent contradiction such that millions of years old surface deposits maintain their meter-scale morphology despite the fact that measured erosion rates are 0.1-4 m/Ma. We analyzed the concentration of cosmic ray-produced 10Be and 26Al in quartz sands from regolith directly above and below two well-documented ash deposits in the MDV, the Arena Valley ash (40Ar/39Ar age of 4.33 Ma) and the Hart ash (K-Ar age of 3.9 Ma). Measured concentrations of 10Be and 26Al are significantly less than expected given the age of the in situ air fall ashes and are best interpreted as reflecting the degradation rate of the overlying sediments. The erosion rate of the material above the Arena Valley ash that best explains the observed isotope profiles is 3.5 ± 0.41 x 10**-5 g/cm**2/yr (~0.19 m/Ma) for the past ~4 Ma. For the Hart ash, the erosion rate is 4.8 ± 0.21 x 10**-4 g/cm**2/yr (~2.6 m/Ma) for the past ~1 Ma. The concentration profiles do not show signs of mixing, creep, or deflation caused by sublimation of ground ice. These results indicate that the slow, steady lowering of the surface without vertical mixing may allow landforms to maintain their meter-scale morphology even though they are actively eroding.