NUST MISIS, Moscow, Russia:

A. V. Myaskov, Director of the College of Mining, Professor, Doctor of Economic Sciences, myaskov@misis.ru
V. S. Shmelev, Post-Graduate Student

National Transport Company, Krasnogorsk, Russia:

E. V. Sevostyanova, Chief Ecologist

The development of the world economy has led not only to the acceleration of urbanization and globalization, but also to the need to improve pr oduction to meet environmental standards. The main task assigned to companies is to reduce the pollution on the environment while increasing capacity and developing production. Companies must find positive solutions to urban and social problems, control the environmental impact and prevent damage. World ports are also dependent on these trends. When handling coal, the environm ent becomes polluted with coal dust, which ad versely affects health of people in seaport towns and conditions higher social tension. The best solution in this regard is coal handling in enclosed spaces, which is hazardous with spontaneous ignition of coal. On the g round of the advanced international experience reviewed, the coal stevedore companies are to use the best available technologies and modernized engineering solutions. Adherence to this trend enabl es stevedores to comply with the environmental regulations, as well as to enhance their technical and economic potential.

1. Economic and ecological problems of development of Russian coal terminals : analytical report. Moscow, 2018. 81 p.
2. Yi-Chih Yang, Shu-Ling Chen. Determinants of global logistics hub ports: Comparison of the port development policies of Taiwan, Korea, and Japan. Transport Policy. 2016. Vol. 45. pp. 179–189.
3. Varming C. Port of Newcastle, Australia: Innovation at one of the world’s largest coal-export terminals. Civil Engineering. 2013. Vol. 166(4). pp. 178–184.
4. Golokhvast K. S., Chayka V. V., Nikiforov P. A., Blinovskaya Ya. Yu., Filonova E. A., Semenikhin V. A. Influence of the large coal terminal on composition of atmospheric suspensions of the settlement. Byulleten fiziologii i patologii dykhaniya. 2015. No. 56. pp. 73–77.
5. Emelyanova A. G., Lukyanov A. I., Mayorova L. P. Comparative analysis of impact on atmospheric air with graph and conveyor technology stone coal shaft. Uchenye zametki TOGU. 2018. Vol. 9, No. 2. pp. 97–104.
6. Zaostrovskikh E. A. Development patterns of coal ports in Russia’s Far East. Regionalistika. 2020. Vol. 7, No. 1. pp. 30–45.
7. Malkina V. D. Ecology of integrated development of Murmansk transport hub as an Arctic harbor of Russia. Ekologicheskiy vestnik Rossii. 2015. No. 4. pp. 46–47.
8. Starostina I. S., Shevtsov M. N. Vanino commercial sea port and its influence on environment. Dalniy Vostok: problemy razvitiya arkhitekturno-stroitelnogo kompleksa. 2016. No. 1. pp. 340–342.
9. Khalyavko Yu. O. Evolution of Brisbane’s coal terminal performance perception by local population. Ugol. 2018. No. 6(1107). pp. 81–86.
10. Grubliauskas R., Stankus G., Vaišis V., Nainys V. Estimation of vibration in Klaipėda powdery manure discharge terminal. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management. 2006. Vol. 14, No. 2. pp. 95–100.
11. Notteboom T., Rodrigue J.-P. The corporate geography of global container terminal operators. Maritime Policy and Management. 2012. Vol. 39, No. 3. pp. 249–279.
12. Kuo-Chung Shang, Wen-Jui Tseng. A risk analysis of ste vedoring operations in seaport container terminals. Journal of Marine Science and Technology. 2010. Vol. 18, No. 2. pp. 201–210.
13. Gorkina I. D., Filicheva T. P. Biodiversity conservation as a necessary component of the nearshore commercial development (by an example of Peter the Great bay). Territoriya novykh vozmozhnostey. Vestnik Vladivostokskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta ekonomiki i servisa. 2016. Vol. 8, No. 4(35). pp. 160–165.
14. Ivanov G. V., Shevchenko L. A., Mikhaylova N. S. Calculation of dust emission at a coal prep : Guidance. Kemerovo : KuzGTU, 2015.23 p.
15. Matsenko S. V., Kondratev Yu. A. Quality and quantity assessment of sea port reception facilities for the agreement to environment and ecological regulations. Ekspluatatsiya morskogo transporta. 2013. No. 1(71). pp. 69–73.
16. ITS 46–2019. Reduction emissions from storage (corrected as of March 17, 2020). Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/554239254 (accessed: 15.12.2020).
17. Knatz G., Webber B. Environmental assessment in the Prc: Third phase of the Qinhuangdao coal port. Coastal Management. 1991. Vol. 19, Iss. 3. pp. 343–356.
18. Policies & Reports. Port Kembla Coal Terminal, 2021. Available at: https://www.pkct.com.au/aboutpkct/policies-reports (accessed: 19.12.2020).
19. Todd D. Retreat from Specialisation: A Coal Port’s Search for Sustainability. The Journal of Transport History. 2000. Vol. 21, Iss. 2. pp. 168–190.
20. Gosai H. B., Sachaniya B. K., Panseriya H. Z., Dave B. P. Functional and phylogenetic diversity assessment of microbial communities at Gulf of Kachchh, India: An ecological footprint. Ecological Indicators. 2018. Vol. 93. pp. 65–75.

21. Naidoo G., Chirkoot D. The effects of coal dust on photosynthetic performance of the mangrove, Avicennia marina in Richards Bay, South Africa. Environmental Pollution. 2004. Vol. 127, Iss. 3. pp. 359–366.
22. Waldichuk M. Roberts Bank coal port, British Columbia: How did the environmental impact assessment fare? Marine Pollution Bulletin. 1985. Vol. 16, Iss. 5. pp. 179–185.
23. Wang Wei, Wang Chengjin. Spatial evolution of coal transportation of coastal ports in China. Acta Geographica Sinica. 2016. Vol. 71, Iss. 10. pp. 1752–1766.
24. Moskalenko A. D., Plyut T. V. Fire situation on transporting coals. Transportnoe delo Rossii. 2015. No. 6. pp. 145–148.
25. Midoro R., Musso E., Parola F. Maritime liner shipping and the stevedoring industry: market structure and competition strategies. Maritime Policy and Management. 2005. Vol. 32, No. 2. pp. 89–106.
26. Myaskov A. V., Petrov I. V., Zaytsev V. S., Shmelev V. S. System features of environmental monitoring in the formation of territorial projects of the Northern sea route. Monitoring. Nauka i tekhnologii. 2018. No. 5(38). pp. 7–14.