This article presents a model to estimate the energy use and fuel consumption of cruise ships that sail Norwegian waters. Automatic identification system (AIS) data and technical information about cruise ships provided input to the model, including service speed, total power, and number of engines. The model was tested against real-world data obtained from a small cruise vessel and both a medium and large cruise ship. It is sensitive to speed and the corresponding engine load profile of the ship. A crucial determinate for total fuel consumption is also associated with hotel functions, which can make a large contribution to the overall energy use of cruise ships. Real-world data fits the model best when ship speed is 70–75% of service speed. With decreased or increased speed, the model tends to diverge from real-world observations. The model gives a proxy for calculation of fuel consumption associated with cruise ships that sail to Norwegian waters and can be used to estimate greenhouse gas emissions and to evaluate energy reduction strategies for cruise ships.

Since the report “Our Common Future” launched sustainable development as a primary goal for society in 1987, both scientific and political discussions about the term’s definition and how to achieve sustainable development have ensued. The manifold negative environmental impacts of transportation are an important contributor to the so-far non-sustainable development in financially rich areas of the world. Thus, achieving sustainable mobility is crucial to achieving the wider challenge of sustainable development. In this article, we limit our sustainability focus to that of energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. We discuss whether rebound effects can reveal why sustainable mobility has not been reached. Rebound effects refer to behavioral or other systemic responses after the implementation of new technologies or other measures to reduce energy consumption. Three main strategies exist for achieving sustainable mobility: efficiency, substitution, and volume reduction. (1) The efficiency strategy is based on the idea that environmental problems caused by transport can be improved by developing new and more efficient technologies to replace old, inefficient, and polluting materials and methods; (2) The second strategy—substitution—argues for a change to less polluting means of transport; (3) The volume reduction strategy argue that efficiency and substitution are not sufficient, we must fundamentally change behavior and consumption patterns; people must travel less, and freight volumes must decrease. We found rebound effects associated with all three of the main strategies that will lead to offsetting expected savings in energy use and GHG emissions in the transport sector.

The Paris agreement on climate took effect on 4 November 2016. The agreement plans on holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. This paper compares an ecological modernisation (EM) development path with a degrowth development path, using urban and land-use planning impact on housing and transportation as cases. The two positions (EM and degrowth) agree on the need for a fundamental reduction in climate gases but disagree on which strategies should be pursued. EM transitions do not challenge the values associated with the capitalistic market economy and believe that policies, such as the right-price signals, should nudge producers and consumers in an environmentally benign direction. Conversely, degrowth rejects the EM belief in green growth, and holds that it will not be possible to decouple the economy from environmental loads to the necessary extent if the economy keeps growing. We conclude that we need a fundamental transformational change in society, i.e., a steering away from the growth ideology, and pursue policies that introduce maximum housing standards and limit mobility to succeed with the goals of the Paris agreement.

Transport makes up 20 percent of the World’s energy use; in OECD countries this has exceeded 30 percent. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that the global energy consumption will increase by 2.1 percent annually, a growth rate that is higher than for any other sector. The high energy consumption means that transportation accounts for nearly 30 percent of CO₂ emission in OECD countries and is also one of the main sources of regional and local air pollution. In this article, we analyze energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from passenger car transport using an energy chain analysis. The energy chain analysis consists of three parts: the net direct energy use, the energy required for vehicle propulsion; the gross direct chain, which includes the net direct energy consumption plus the energy required to produce it; and, finally, the indirect energy chain, which includes the energy consumption for production, maintenance and operation of infrastructure plus manufacturing of the vehicle itself. In addition to energy consumption, we also analyze emissions of greenhouse gases measured by CO₂-equivalents. We look at the trade-offs between energy use and greenhouse gas emissions to see whether some drivetrains and fuels perform favourable on both indicators. Except for the case of electric cars, where hydropower is the only energy source in the Norwegian context, no single car scores favourably on both energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.