A Bayesian Belief Network Model for Integrated Energy Efficiency of Shipping

  • Onder CanbulatEmail author
  • Murat Aymelek
  • Osman Turan
  • Evangelos Boulougouris
Part of the WMU Studies in Maritime Affairs book series (WMUSTUD, volume 6)


Climate change is one of the major problems in today’s world and shipping has a direct influence on climate change by the amount of energy consumed and volume of emissions generated during shipping and port operations. The energy efficiency and port operation relationship has been widely mentioned in the existing literature under the term of energy efficiency management. However, there is still a need for detailed research on the ship-port interface development regarding holistic energy efficiency. The complex logistic processes should include a port performance study to avoid the inevitable delays and to obtain a more energy efficient transport system. Therefore, ports and fleets can be managed together within a conceptual communication framework. The primary purpose of this research is to enhance the scientific understanding of port and ship operation inter-operability based on energy efficiency interactions. A theoretical framework is developed to investigate how ports and ships could work together to reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions. The integrated shipping system is analysed to create a unique Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) model aiming to support the operational optimisation of the ship and port interface. In this research, the BBN theory is applied to an oil tanker case study in order to examine the energy efficiency of voyages between two ports. This paper aims to provide a guide to the holistic energy efficiency of oil/product tanker shipping operations.


Integrated shipping system Energy efficiency Bayesian networks Tanker shipping Ship-port interface 



This research is funded by Turkish Government. Authors specially thank to National Education Ministry of Turkey and Bursa Technical University, University of Strathclyde, and Izmir Katip Celebi University for their support.


  1. Acomi, N., & Acomi, O. C. (2014). Improving the voyage energy efficiency by using EEOI. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 138, 531–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong, V. N., & Banks, C. (2015). Integrated approach to vessel energy efficiency. Ocean Engineering Journal, 110, 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arslan, O., Besikci, E., & Olcer, A. (2014). Improving energy efficiency of ships through optimisation of ship operations. No. FY2014-3 IAMU.Google Scholar
  4. Banks, C. (2015). Operational practices to improve ship energy efficiency. Doctoral dissertation, University of Strathclyde.Google Scholar
  5. Banks, C., Turan, O., Incecik, A., et al. (2013). Understanding ship operating profiles with an aim to improve energy efficient ship operations. In Proceedings of the Low Carbon Shipping Conference, London, 9 Sep 2013.Google Scholar
  6. Bedford, T., & Cooke, R. (2001). Probabilistic risk analysis: Foundations and methods. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buxton, I. (1985). Fuel costs and their relationships with capital and operating costs. Maritime Policy and Management Journal, 12(1), 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cao, T., Coutts, A., & Lui, F. A. (2013). Combined Bayesian belief network analysis and systems architectural approach to analyse an amphibious C4ISR system. Paper presented at the 22nd National Conference of the Australian Society for Operations Research, Adelaide, Australia, 1–6 Dec 2013.Google Scholar
  9. Coraddu, A., Figari, M., & Savio, S. (2014). Numerical investigation on ship energy efficiency by Monte Carlo simulation. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 228(3), 220–234.Google Scholar
  10. Cui, T., Turan, O., & Boulougouris, E. (2016). Development of a ship weather routing system for energy efficient shipping. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Association of Maritime Economists, 26 Aug 2016.Google Scholar
  11. Cullinane, K. (2014). Targeting the environmental sustainability of european shipping: The need for innovation in policy and technology.Google Scholar
  12. GeNIe Modeler. (2017). GeNIe modeler user manual. Accessed 17 May 2017.
  13. Hansen, S. V. (2012). Performance monitoring of ships. Doctoral dissertation, Technical University of Denmark.Google Scholar
  14. Helfre, J. F., & Boot, P. A. C. (2013). Emission reduction in the shipping industry: Regulations, exposure and solutions.Google Scholar
  15. Intertanko and OCIMF. (2010). Virtual arrival, optimising voyage management and reducing vessel. London, UK: Oil Companies International Marine Forum.Google Scholar
  16. Johnson, H. (2014). GHG emissions and the energy efficiency gap in shipping, European panel of sustainable development.Google Scholar
  17. Kwon, Y. J. (2008). Speed loss due to added resistance in wind and waves. The Naval Architect, March, RINA, UK (pp. 14–16).Google Scholar
  18. Lu, R., Turan, O., Boulougouris, E., Banks, C., et al. (2014). A semi-empirical ship operation performance prediction model for voyage optimization towards. Paper presented at 2nd International Conference on Maritime Technology (ICMT), Glasgow, 23 January 2014.Google Scholar
  19. Lu, R., Turan, O., Boulougouris, E., Banks, C., et al. (2015). A semi-empirical ship operational performance prediction model for voyage optimization towards energy efficient shipping. Ocean Engineering, 1(110), 18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McKinnon, A. C. (2014). Options for reducing logistics-related emissions from global value chains. Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Research Paper No. RSCAS, 31.Google Scholar
  21. Nandakumar, C. G. (2012). Environmental impact of non metallic hull ships. Paper presented at Green Technologies (ICGT), 2012 International Conference IEEE, 18 Dec 2012.Google Scholar
  22. Neil, M., Littlewood, B., & Fenton, N. (1996). Applying Bayesian belief networks to system dependability assessment. In Safety-critical systems: The convergence of high tech and human factors (pp. 71–94). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Parker, S., Raucci, C., Smith, T. W. P., et al. (2015). Understanding the energy efficiency operational indicator: An empirical analysis of ships from the Royal Belgian Shipowners’ Association. Energy Institute. s.l. Royal Belgian Shipowners’ Association.Google Scholar
  24. Plessas, T., Papanikolaou, A., Pytharoulis, M., Boulougouris, E., & Adamopoulos, N. (2013). Simulation of loading/discharging procedure of tankers, 7 Oct 2013. In C. Guedes Soares & F. Lopez Pena (Eds.), Developments in maritime transportation and exploitation of sea resources: IMAM 2013 (pp. 501–510). London: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. SCG. (2009). 2006 Expanded Greenhouse Gas Inventory. Available at: Accessed: 17 January 2016.
  26. Shao, W. (2013). Development of an intelligent tool for energy efficient and low environment impact shipping. Doctoral dissertation, University of Strathclyde.Google Scholar
  27. Sharma, S. (2014). Global Voyage Centre: Energy efficiency and route optimisation. Accessed 18 November 2014.
  28. Smith, R., Madsen A. L., & Barton, D. N. (2015). Bayesian Belief Networks, Preliminary guidelines describing the set of methods for mapping and modelling ecosystem service supply and their application in the WP5 case studies. Accessed 05 January 2017.
  29. Sutrisnowati, R. A., Bae, H., & Park, J. (2014). Bayesian network learning for port-logistics-process knowledge discovery. International Journal of Industrial Engineering, 21(3), 141–152.Google Scholar
  30. Tungkasthan, A., Jongsawat, N., Poompuang, P., et al. (2010). Automatically building diagnostic Bayesian networks from on-line data sources and the smile web-based interface. Rijeka: INTECH Open Access Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. UNFCCC. (2016). Background on the UNFCCC: The international response to climate change. Accessed 15 April 2015.
  32. Uusitalo, L. (2007). Advantages and challenges of Bayesian networks in environmental modelling. Ecological Modelling, 203(3), 312–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Varelas, T., Archontaki, S., Dimotikalis, J., Turan, O., Lazakis, I., & Varelas, O. (2013). Optimizing ship routing to maximize fleet revenue at Danaos. Interfaces, 43(1), 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wang, H., & Lutsey, N. (2013). Long-term potential for increased shipping efficiency through the adoption of industry-leading practices. The International Council on Clean Transportation, Retrieved July. 30 Sep 2013.Google Scholar
  35. Wessels, G. (2016). Actual market and regulation change/input [Seminar of department of NAOME]. University of Strathclyde, 31 March.Google Scholar
  36. Windischhofer, R., & Lepistö, M. (n.d.) Integrated operations: ABB’s digital business transformation for the maritime industry. Accessed 17 February 2017.
  37. Wunder Ground. (n.d.) Historical weather. Accessed 17 January 2017.
  38. Yuan, C., & Druzdzel, M. J. (2006). Importance sampling algorithms for Bayesian networks: Principles and performance. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 43(9), 1189–1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yuqing, L., & Tong, Z. (2008). Bayesian network to construct interoperability model of open source software. In Computer Science and Software Engineering, Presented at the 2008 International Conference on 12 Dec 2008 (Vol. 3, pp. 758–761). IEEE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Onder Canbulat
    • 1
    Email author
  • Murat Aymelek
    • 2
  • Osman Turan
    • 1
  • Evangelos Boulougouris
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Marine Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of StrathclydeGlasgowUK
  2. 2.Department of Marine Engineering, Faculty of Naval Architecture and Ocean EngineeringIzmir Katip Celebi UniversityIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations