by Water Revolution Foundation | 20 Oct 2024 | Insights
Author: Dr Vienna Eleuteri, Co-Chair and Initiator of Water Revolution Foundation
“Sustainability is no longer about doing less harm. It’s about doing more good”. – Joachen Zeit*
Yachting’s course toward sustainability is set, with zero emissions as the final destination. Following global climate policy goals, which have long aimed for climate neutrality by 2050, the European Union is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030.
Enter the EU ETS: the European Emission Trading Scheme, a cornerstone of EU climate action since 2005. Though currently limited to yachts over 5,000 GT, it’s only a matter of time before the entire yachting industry is included, driving significant change. The EU ETS, led by the Greenhouse Gas Emission Allowance Directive, encourages cost-effective emissions reductions for a more environmental yachting future.
Achieving true impact
The goals are clear and impact all of us, but how can we truly achieve effective change that signals a real shift in direction? After all, this is a challenge that finds us all “in the same boat.” The 2022 IPCC Report and 2023 Synthesis Report highlight the private sector’s role in spreading climate misinformation and contributing to “maladaptation”—actions meant to address climate change but ultimately worsening risks and harming biodiversity. Though maladaptation is described as an “unintentional side effect,” the evidence is clear: current actions are falling short, and the entire private sector is still off course.
Staying with the nautical metaphor—and beyond it—we’re charting a well-defined course, but with tools that lack precision, risking both our destination and the optimization of our efforts toward a goal that demands a bold shift in direction. Unless we break through the rhetoric and recognize that continuing on this same path won’t relieve natural ecosystems from relentless exploitation and climate stress, we’re simply repeating a cycle expecting a different outcome—a notion Einstein famously defined as madness.
Debunking sustainability myths
Before diving into the solutions, let’s clarify a common misconception: yachting’s emissions are cited by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) as just 0.3% of global maritime emissions (2-3% overall) yet this figure only reflects fuel use and overlooks the full ecological impact. Beyond propulsion, yacht construction, maintenance, disposal, and infrastructure like marinas and ports all contribute significantly to ecological footprints – disrupting biodiversity, destroying habitats, and contributing to pollution—while not reflected in operational emissions figures.
An additional issue is carbon inequity: yachting serves a small, affluent population with a disproportionately high per-capita carbon footprint. Despite advances in resource efficiency, the benefits are often offset by rising consumption, especially within affluent sectors.
As we sail further into the 21st century, it’s clear that simply aspiring to carbon neutrality isn’t enough—it’s akin to anchoring in shallow waters. This moment calls for the yachting industry to assume genuine leadership by moving from mere harm reduction to the promotion of regenerative practices that actively enhance environmental health. Only by adopting this approach can the yachting sector embark on a path that meets net-zero goals in a serious, proactive, and, above all, credible way.
Establishing a roadmap to 2050 with the 3-R model
This ambition aligns with the recent Water Revolution Foundation industry leadership summit, hosted for its second edition in 2024 by Feadship in Hoofddorp, the Netherlands. At this gathering, industry leaders came together to outline a roadmap to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 and establish the strategic framework necessary for realizing this goal.
The 3-R model introduced at the event provides a structured, measurable framework to achieve both net-zero emissions and a nature-positive impact — making it the first sector to adopt this model systematically. Recently validated at COP28 in Dubai during a Water Revolution Foundation-hosted panel at the UN Sustainable Development Goals pavilion, the model has gained international recognition for its scientific rigor and relevance.
Starting with Reduce, the model pushes organizations to set clear net-zero targets, embedding emission reduction into their core strategies. Remove goes further, encouraging investment in proactive emissions offsetting, such as renewable energy projects replacing fossil fuels. However, the true innovation lies in Restore, which emphasizes the restoration of ecosystems. This stage unlocks the potential of blue carbon solutions like seagrass meadows, mangroves, coral reefs, and key biodiversity marine ecosystems that sequester carbon while revitalizing marine resources impacted by human activities.
Putting this vision into action, the Foundation’s Ocean Assist program provides a practical and accessible solution for the yachting community to integrate a complete model aligned with net-zero and nature-positive goals. Driven by an independent advisory board, the program funds high-impact projects that deliver maximum regenerative value, rigorously assessed on a scientific basis.
A balanced investment strategy
The Ocean Assist program reframes marine conservation as essential to the yachting industry, introducing a balanced investment approach that combines Verified Emission Reductions (VERs) and Regenerative Contribution Units (RCUs). VERs are carbon credits representing one ton of CO₂ offset through verified emission reductions, allowing yachting companies to align with global sustainability targets. RCUs go further, channeling funds into “blue carbon” ecosystems — like seagrasses and coral reefs — that both capture carbon and enhance marine biodiversity, directly addressing the ‘Restore’ segment of the 3-R Model. Together, these units form a dual strategy: VERs address carbon offsets, while RCUs support ocean health, shifting the industry from neutral to regenerative impact.
Ocean Assist Units (purchased through the Ocean Assist programme) each combine one VER and one RCU, allowing companies to calculate their carbon footprint or invest in units to offset specific emissions, thereby actively contributing to marine restoration. Companies can start by calculating their total carbon emissions or the impact of individual products and services to determine how many Ocean Assist Units are needed for full or partial offsetting. Each unit provides a one-ton CO₂ offset through VERs, along with additional regenerative benefits through RCUs, supporting projects like Important Marine Mammal Areas (IMMAs).
After investing, companies can track the impact of their Ocean Assist Units using a transparent system, which offers clear metrics for ESG reporting and compliance with the EU’s Green Claims Directive, CSRD, and EU Taxonomy.
This combined approach empowers the yachting sector to go beyond carbon neutrality and positions it as a leader in regenerative environmental development. As the program’s philosophy perfectly captures:
“True luxury is not just about the journeys we take, but the legacy we leave behind—a thriving ocean, resilient and restored, for generations to come.”
_
Visit the Ocean Assist Page here.
_
*Joachen Zeit is a renowned businessman celebrated for his visionary initiatives as the former CEO of Puma, where he integrated environmental and social responsibility into the company’s core business model. He advocates for “doing more good” rather than just “doing less harm,” inspiring industries to adopt a regenerative approach for addressing global challenges.
© Photo by Breed Media – Jeff Brown
by Awwal Idris | 10 Jul 2024 | Insights
Highlights
- Superyacht construction heavily relies on non-renewable resources and materials
- Steel and aluminium production are CO2 and energy-intensive
- Production process of these materials affect soil, water and air quality
- Opportunities for reducing impact include sourcing from suppliers that adopt breakthrough technologies to save resources and emissions, adopting energy systems powered by zero carbon electricity, and shifting to high grade recycled aluminium and steel
Introduction
The leisure boating industry is a cornerstone of the blue economy, generating €28 billion in revenue annually and supporting around 234,000 jobs[1]. With 36 million individuals owning or chartering leisure boats including superyachts in Europe alone [2], the industry’s thriving growth is paralleled by a growing responsibility to reduce its environmental impact.
While much of the focus is on the environmental impact during a yacht’s operational life, it’s essential to consider the entire lifecycle, including construction and end-of-life phases. This is why Water Revolution Foundation adopts a holistic approach that encompasses the entire lifecycle of yachts and its onboard components, to help understand and manage environmental risks or identify opportunities associated with environmental impact reduction within the superyacht industry.
Focusing on the construction phase, superyachts require large volumes of non-renewable materials like steel, aluminium, composites and synthetics, each with a substantial environmental footprint from production to end-of-life. Despite the yachting industry’s efforts to integrate eco-friendlier materials, the sheer size and complexity of superyachts make this transition challenging.
Steel and aluminium, in particular, have considerable environmental impacts due to their hazardous emissions and high energy consumption during production and construction. Given their dominance in the build phase of large yachts, this article explores the environmental implications of using these materials and identifies opportunities for reducing their impacts.
Steel
The iron and steel industry has revolutionized transportation and infrastructure, enabling the development of railways, bridges, roads and automobiles. Steel, a crucial material in yacht construction, is primarily produced from iron ore extracted from earth’s crust. Iron, despite being an abundant resource, is non-renewable and requires extraction, concentration, and processing to create usable steel.
Due to its mechanical strength and corrosion resistance when alloyed with certain elements, shipyards use steel for various parts of a yacht, such as the hull and superstructure. However, the activities involved with steel processing generate considerable environmental risks, including emissions and the deposition of pollutants and toxic waste.
Steel manufacturing consumes large quantities of water for processing and cooling purposes, releasing contaminated wastewater containing an array of contaminants, particularly trace metals such as Mn, Zn, Br, Sr, Cu, Pb, etc[3]. Particles from the blast furnace also release trace element of heavy metals via atmospheric process and particle emissions[4]. Aside that, the extraction and processing stages of steel production releases CO, SOx, NOx and Particulate Matter (PM2).
Although improvements have been made to reduce trace metals from waste products using physicochemical and biological treatment techniques[3], the technology’s efficiency is limited, allowing volatile trace metals to enter the environment. These trace particles can affect the quality of soil used by residents for recreational or agricultural purposes[5] and pose public health risks. In fact, many studies have corroborated heavy metal contamination in soils near steelmaking sites in agricultural lands; see example [6] [7].
According to the World Steel Association, the steel industry consumes 5.9% of global energy and emits 7-9% of global CO2 emissions, doubling the carbon output of the entire African continent (4% global emissions). The EU alone is responsible for 4.7% of the total emissions, amounting to 182 million tons of CO2 [8].
Aluminium
After steel, aluminium is the second most highly produced metal. In yacht manufacturing, aluminium is widely utilised for its lightweight properties, especially in hull construction. This allows for lighter vessels that enhance fuel efficiency, speed, and increased range of navigation in shallow waters. Aluminium also boasts natural corrosion resistance, reducing the need for extensive anti-corrosion measures and maintenance costs over the vessel’s lifespan. These advantages establish aluminium as a critical material in yacht construction.
However, like steel, aluminium production is highly CO2 and energy-intensive, albeit to a slightly lesser extent. The aluminium industry produces 0.42-0.5 Gt of CO2 equivalent emissions per year, translating to 2.5% of global CO2 emissions[10]. The industry also accounts for 1% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions [11].
The production of aluminium involves various processes and materials, including bauxite and alumina extraction, along with the production of chemicals like calcined lime, cathode carbon, aluminium fluoride, pitch, and petrol coke. These activities collectively contribute to several adverse environmental impacts.
One major concern is acidification potential (AP), which measures the acidifying effects of nitrogen oxide (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and ammonia (NH3) on the environment. These emissions originate from various stages of aluminium production, including electrolysis, refining, casting, and mining. Acidification harms aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, affecting marine species, plant growth, and human food supplies.
Emissions from aluminium production also contribute to eutrophication, leading to excessive levels of nitrogen and phosphorous in water bodies. These nutrients promote rapid growth of aquatic plants, particularly algae, which depletes oxygen levels, harms aquatic species, and diminishes water quality.
Another significant impact is water scarcity, as large amounts of freshwater are consumed for the mining, refining, smelting, and cooling processes in primary aluminium production. The energy-intensive refining processes further deplete fossil energy resources.
Opportunities for Improvement
The environmental impact of steel and aluminium presents significant sustainability challenges across various industries, superyachting included. Yacht manufacturing’s resource-intensive nature, coupled with the non-renewable origins of these materials, underscores the urgency to improve its practices.
The superyacht industry can significantly reduce impacts by using steel produced with advanced technologies like Electric Arc Furnaces (EAF) and Induction Furnaces (IF). EAF technology melts recycled scrap steel using electrical energy, which can come from renewable sources, thus lowering CO2 emissions from energy use and the need for new steel production from raw materials. Utilising green hydrogen and renewable energy sources in EAF process have proven to emit less than 600kg of CO2eq per ton of crude steel [12] [13]. This process is highly efficient and flexible, making it ideal for sustainable steel production. Similarly, IF technology is also extremely energy-efficient as it does not rely on fossil fuel and produces fewer emissions. It uses electromagnetic induction to heat and melt clean scrap steel, resulting in high-quality steel with minimal impurities. By sourcing steel made with these breakthrough technologies and energy systems powered by zero carbon electricity, shipyards can cut down their environmental footprint. Central to this would be integrating sustainability criteria in the selection process. Shipyards should prioritise suppliers who demonstrate a commitment to environmentally friendlier production methods.
According to the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), it is claimed that 90% of all steel in the world is transported by ship. Geographical location and transportation logistics are critical factors contributing over 50% of total carbon emissions in construction projects [15]. Shipyards should thus look into sourcing from local steel producers or ensure that producers farther use alternative fuels when transporting their steel to shipyards.
To address the environmental impact of aluminium production, shipyards have several opportunities. They can take advantage of circular economy principles to ensure that aluminium materials are recycled and reused efficiently. However, upgrading recycling methods for aluminium that would allow recycled ingots to be used for high-purity wrought materials would be vital to decreasing emissions and promote a sophisticated resource-recycling industry. This may require shipyards to establish partnerships with recycling facilities and research institutes on such methods. This would also require that yacht designers and builders work together to encourage design and build for recycling, where yachts are designed with easier disassembly and recyclability in mind. Designing products that use fewer alloys or coatings can simplify the recycling process and increase the yield of high-quality recycled aluminium. The industry should also promote the economic and environmental advantage of using recycled aluminium over primary aluminium. Furthermore, when sourcing for primary aluminium, shipyards should procure from suppliers that have transitioned to low-emission power sources such as green hydrogen in their production and adopted breakthrough technology that significantly reduces the environmental footprint. As an example, the use of innovative methods like application of pure argon gas with AI control system in the melt processing of aluminium greatly reduces harmful substances like chorine and fluorine, leading to decreased pollution and perfluoro carbons [16] .
Shipyards can also leverage certifications and standard compliance grounded in the Life Cycle Approach (LCA) as mechanisms to ensure the most sustainably produced materials are used. It is crucial that shipyards integrate in their material selection process environmentally-friendlier production methods, so that suppliers who are committed to these sustainable practices are prioritised.
While steel and aluminium offer durability and performance advantages, their production processes contribute to pollution, resource depletion, and greenhouse gas emissions. Implementing measures to increase the use of recycled materials and adopt energy-efficient technologies are thus essential steps to reducing the industry’s environmental footprint.
References
by Dilan Sarac | 23 May 2024 | Insights
They say last but not least… We know you will enjoy this conclusion to our 5-part series guiding you through Environmental Indicators relevant to a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology (find Part One to Four of our Series starting here).
The Ecopoint represents the total potential environmental load of a product or solution: it is a cumulative, more holistic value that includes the impacts on human health, the ecosystem and resource diversity. The single numerical score of Ecopoint represents the overall impact of a product or solution, and is an aggregated result of the 10 previous indicators discussed until now. This score can be interpreted as a measure of sustainability performance, where lower scores indicate lower environmental impact.
Therefore, the Ecopoint allows us to group the nine environmental indicators in three different categories of damage: (1) Human Health, (2) Ecosystem quality and (3) Resources. This way, obtaining a single score representing the total environmental impacts during the product’s life cycle is possible.
Human Health and Ecosystem Impact
The Ecopoint index factors in the impact on human health and ecosystems, how a product’s life cycle may affect human well-being including health risks related to exposure to pollutants, and how it may impact ecosystems, including biodiversity and habitat disruption.
Resource Diversity
This takes into account the diversity and availability of natural resources, as well as the potential depletion of non-renewable resources and the consequences for future generations.
Four important factors are combined to assess a product’s environmental impact using the Ecopoint measure:
- Characterization Factors (CA): These are like scores that show how harmful a substance or emission can be for the environment.
- Damage Assessment Factors (DA): They include different types of harm, like global warming or air pollution.
- Normalization Factor (NO): This gives you a way to compare the impact to an average or reference value.
- Weighing Factor (WE): This helps decide how much importance to give to each type of harm.
The Ecopoint index is essentially a form of multi-criteria assessment that allows decision-makers to weigh different environmental and sustainability factors. It acknowledges that environmental issues are interconnected, and a single value can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the trade-offs and impacts associated with a product.
Learn more
Get in touch with us at info@waterrevolutionfoundation.org to find out more about the scientific methodology used within our programmes and how you can get involved.
by Water Revolution Foundation | 27 Mar 2024 | Insights
Authors: Awwal Idris (Environmental Expert, Water Revolution) & Nikos Avlonas (President, Center for Sustainability & Excellence)
It’s increasingly common for buyers to encounter advertisements promoting products as sustainable or eco-friendly. Such claims, often referred to as “green claims,” are being noticed in the yachting industry as well. With numerous producers, manufacturers, and suppliers eager to gain a marketing edge by labeling their products as green or sustainable, the new Green Claims Directive will influence how companies, also in the superyacht and maritime sectors, can communicate about the environmental credentials of their products or services. This new directive seeks to eliminate the deceptive practice known as greenwashing.
Addressing greenwashing with the Green Claims Directive
Greenwashing is a trend where companies deceive consumers with exaggerated or misleading environmental claims to influence their purchasing decisions. To address this issue, the European Union has introduced the Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices (Directive 2005/29/EC). This legal framework aims to safeguard consumers from deceptive green marketing tactics, and would also impact the superyacht industry in a number of ways.
Many EU member states have already integrated the provisions of the Green Claims Directive into their national laws and regulatory frameworks related to consumer protection and advertising standards. However, the extent to which these laws are enforced and the effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms can differ between countries.
How it could impact the superyacht industry
Clarity in Advertising: The directive would require that any environmental claims made by superyacht manufacturers or sellers be clear, accurate, and substantiated. This means that vague or exaggerated claims about a yacht’s environmental friendliness would be prohibited, reducing the potential for greenwashing.
Increased Accountability: Superyacht companies would need to provide evidence to support any environmental claims they make about their products. This could include data on emissions, fuel efficiency, use of sustainable materials, or any other eco-friendly features. This increased level of accountability would prevent companies from engaging in greenwashing.
Consumer Protection: The directive aims to protect consumers from being misled by false or exaggerated environmental claims. Superyacht buyers would have more confidence that the environmental benefits touted by manufacturers are genuine, leading to better informed purchasing decisions.
Reputation Management: Superyacht companies found to be engaging in greenwashing could face damage to their reputation and credibility. With increased scrutiny and regulations in place, companies would be incentivized to ensure their environmental claims are accurate to maintain trust among consumers and stakeholders.
Shift towards Genuine Sustainability: The directive could drive a shift towards genuine sustainability efforts within the superyacht industry. Companies may invest more in environmentally friendly technologies, materials, and practices to differentiate themselves in the market without resorting to greenwashing tactics.
Moving forward
Overall, the Green Claims Directive will likely have a positive impact on reducing greenwashing in the superyacht industry by promoting transparency, accountability, and genuine environmental stewardship. Third-party proofing of claimed sustainability credentials will shape the communication practices of the superyacht industry in 2024 and beyond, and all communication experts in Europe may need to attend courses in order to educate themselves on the legal risks of greenwashing.
by Dilan Sarac | 5 Mar 2024 | Insights
When we talk about footprint, do you think carbon? We tell you all about the Water Scarcity Footprint which is also used to assess a yacht’s environmental impact, in Part 4 of our Environmental Indicators series! (find Part One to Three of our Series starting here).
Water stands as one of the planet’s most precious resources, serving as an indispensable element vital for sustaining life. It plays a pivotal role in supporting human existence and maintaining biodiversity, crucial ecosystem functions, upon which we all rely. Therefore, it is imperative to measure water consumption in product manufacturing to identify processes that utilise significant amounts of water and to explore solutions for ensuring its efficient use.
The water scarcity footprint helps assess how particular water use contributes to or exacerbates water scarcity in a given area. We assess this impact by considering the quantity of water consumption and the water stress index (WSI) of the region from where the water is extracted, to determine the impact of freshwater consumption in view of its deprivation potential.
Water Stress Index for yachting
In yacht manufacturing for example, water consumption is significantly high for the extraction and production of materials. The amount of water consumed when producing yacht-building material is more than double than during the operating phase of the yacht. Further, hull construction requires water in various stages such as composite-moulding process, curing resins, and more. While these stages do not use large volumes of water individually, they become high over the course of yacht production. The water stress index can thus be an important metric in quantifying how much water is consumed and identifying hotspots where efforts to minimise water use can be implemented.
The Water Stress Index takes into account factors like available water resources, population, and industrial demand for water in that area. Of course, water resource exploitation may have a different impact depending on the extraction area.
Water scarcity impact
If the water scarcity impact is high, it indicates that your product or solution is exerting considerable strain on an already water-stressed region. Consequently, it may be prudent to explore more sustainable water sourcing or conservation measures to mitigate one’s heightened environmental damage. Conversely, if the water scarcity impact is low, it suggests that your product or solution exercises a relatively minor impact on water scarcity in that region, which can be a positive indicator of sustainability.
The indicators for WSI reflect the cumulative amount of direct and indirect emissions to help us understand how a product or solution’s water use might impact water shortages.
Learn more
Get in touch with us at info@waterrevolutionfoundation.org to find out more about the scientific methodology used within our programmes and how you can get involved. Stay tuned to hear about the remaining indicator: the EcoPoint!
by Dilan Sarac | 23 Dec 2023 | Insights
Welcome to part three of our series on guiding you through Environmental Indicators relevant to a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology (find Part One of our Series here: Climate Change indicators and Part Two here: impact on human health).
Emissions with direct effect on human and planet health can be released in the atmosphere via acid deposition (Nitrogen Oxides), combustion of fuels containing sulfur (Sulfur Oxides), or release of coarse particles into the air (PM10). All three indicators have an impact locally (on human health) and regionally (resulting in modification of the environment). We know too well the impacts of bad air quality on human health, and these indicators are therefore critical in our measurement of solutions on air pollution.
Let’s take a closer look:
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
NOX are a group of highly reactive gases produced by various natural and anthropogenic (human-caused) sources. They strongly affect the air quality in our immediate surroundings, leading to the formation of ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter (resulting in POP – see Part 2 here), and contributing to acid rain or deposition, ozone depletion, and eutrophication of soil and water (for more on eutrophication of oceans, read our Part 2 here).
We know that the subsequent impacts of acid deposition and eutrophication onour soil and water can be significant, having adverse effects on aquatic ecosystems in rivers and lakes, damage to forests, crops and other vegetation. Furthermore, by contributing to the formation of atmospheric aerosols and particulate matter, NOx emissions can lead to the formation of nitrous oxide (N2O), a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming and affects human respiratory systems. When the environment is affected by NOx, it results in Summer smog, Winter smog, and Acidification in the environment impacted by its release.
Sulphur dioxide (SO2)
Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is a colourless gas with a pungent odour, released into the atmosphere from both natural sources, such as volcanic eruptions, and anthropogenic (human-caused) sources emitted by the combustion of fuels containing sulphur.
Sulphur dioxide is a pollutant that contributes to acid deposition, which, in turn, can lead to potential changes in soil and water quality (eutrophication due to excessive nutrient input, as discussed above). Its effects can be counterbalanced by implementing flue gas desulfurization systems in power plants, and regulations on emissions from transportation sources. Winter smog and acidification are among the results of its presence in our atmosphere.
Particulates (PM10)
Dust from roads, farms, dry riverbeds, construction sites, and mines are types of PM10: particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometres or less. These are coarse (bigger) particles, which can irritate your eyes, nose, and throat. While fine (smaller) particles (PM2.5) are more dangerous and penetrate into the deep parts of your lungs — or even into your blood, it is important to measure the level of PM10 into the surrounding air.
Scientists have defined that a level of PM10 below 12 μg/m3 is considered healthy with little to no risk from exposure. If the level goes to or above 35 μg/m3 during a 24-hour period, the air becomes unhealthy, causing a risk exposure for people with existing breathing issues such as asthma or lung diseases.
With deposits accumulating onto surfaces, including vegetation, soil, and water bodies, PM10 also impacts soil erosion, water quality, aquatic life cycles, and can carry contaminants into ecosystems. It can lead to winter smog.
Learn more
Get in touch with us at info@waterrevolutionfoundation.org to find out more about the scientific methodology used within our programmes and how you can get involved.
Discover the other indicators here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 4.
