407

1 INTRODUCTION

The modern economy relies on the provision of stable

and disruption-resistant energy supplies, which form

the foundation of national security, industrial

development, and the quality of life of societies.

Despite the growing importance of renewable energy

sources, liquid fuels continue to occupy a central

position in the energy mix of Poland and Europe. Their

role is particularly significant in the context of

transportation, electricity generation, and as feedstock

in many branches of industry [5, 10, 19]. Energy

security is understood as a state’s ability to ensure

uninterrupted energy supplies at acceptable costs,

while simultaneously meeting environmental

protection requirements [43]. In recent years-especially

after the energy crisis triggered by Russia’s aggression

against Ukraine in 2022-this issue has become one of

the top priorities of both European Union and Polish

policy [25]. Poland, owing to its strategic location at the

intersection of maritime and land transport routes,

plays a unique role in maintaining continuity of

supplies not only for its own economy but also for

neighboring countries. The European Green Deal and

EU climate policies set ambitious targets for reducing

greenhouse gas emissions and increasing the share of

renewable energy sources. This transformation also

encompasses the liquid fuel sector, which in the

coming decades will undergo profound changes [21].

However, despite the rising importance of

electromobility, hydrogen, and biofuels, diesel fuel

remains a key energy carrier for heavy road transport,

Energy Security and the Green Transition: A Case Study

of a Diesel Fuel Transshipment Terminal

in the Southern Baltic

A. Wawrzyńska & R. Karczewski

Gdynia Maritime University, Gdynia, Poland

ABSTRACT: The article addresses the issues of energy security and the transition toward a low-emission economy

in the context of port infrastructure development along the Polish Baltic coast. The central focus of the study is

the design concept for a diesel fuel transshipment terminal in a small port on the southern Baltic coast, presented

as an application-oriented case study. The first part of the article outlines the significance of liquid fuel pipeline

transport and the related safety and environmental protection requirements. This is followed by a review of

selected terminals operating on the Polish coast, highlighting technical and organizational solutions that may

serve as reference points for new investments. The core of the paper is the terminal design, which includes a

location analysis, geological and hydrographic conditions, and the structural solutions for the transshipment

platform, loading arms, fender systems, and ship-handling support equipment. The discussion emphasizes the

importance of the investment for Poland’s energy policy as well as the potential for flexible adaptation of the

infrastructure to alternative fuels (biofuels, methanol) in line with the Green Deal perspective. The study

combines transport, engineering, and economic perspectives, and the results may serve as a starting point for

further design analyses and investment documentation related to the development of fuel terminal infrastructure

in Poland.

http://www.transnav.eu

the International Journal

on Marine Navigation

and Safety of Sea Transportation

Volume 20

Number 2

June 2026

DOI: 10.12716/1001.20.02.15

408

shipping, and rail. In 2022, approximately 57% of

liquid fuels imported to Poland consisted of diesel,

while gasoline and LPG together accounted for less

than 25% [2], [14]. Projections from the International

Energy Agency (IEA) indicate that in Central and

Eastern Europe, diesel fuel will continue to play a

strategic role at least until the mid-2030s, particularly

in the logistics and maritime transport sectors [15], [40].

The choice of diesel fuel as the focal point of this study

therefore stems from its importance to the Polish

economy, as well as the fact that it constitutes the

primary fuel handled in national storage facilities and

terminals. At the same time, it should be emphasized

that under the assumptions of the Green Deal,

transshipment infrastructure currently being designed

must remain flexible and capable of accommodating

alternative fuels in the future (e.g., methanol, biofuels,

or synthetic fuels), in line with IMO guidelines on

reducing shipping emissions [5], [14], [42], [43], [44].

Thus, the green transition in the liquid fuel sector

entails not only the gradual phase-out of conventional

fuels, but also the design and operation of

infrastructure in a way that ensures its adaptability.

Ports and terminals that are built today with diesel in

mind must be prepared to handle more sustainable

energy carriers over the next 20–30 years [5], [41].

Against this backdrop, the academic literature has

increasingly engaged with the dual challenge of

maintaining energy security while accelerating the

maritime green transition. The following review

situates the present study within that growing body of

work. The role of ports in the evolving energy

landscape has attracted growing scholarly attention in

recent years. Sornn-Friese [52] conceptualized ports as

energy transition hubs, examining how they can

facilitate the shift from fossil fuels to renewable carriers

while managing associated technological and

governance challenges. Poulsen et al. [53]

demonstrated that ports play a dual role in

environmental upgrading — both enabling and

constraining the greening of maritime transport

depending on institutional context. In the specific case

of Poland, Szulc et al. [54] analyzed the fuel supply

chain using demand forecasting models and concluded

that storage and transshipment infrastructure is critical

for maintaining supply continuity, particularly after

the disruptions triggered by the 2022 energy crisis.

Chmielewska-Gill et al. [55] examined Poland’s energy

transition dynamics and found that while the share of

renewables has nearly doubled since 2021, diesel

remains indispensable for the transport and logistics

sectors in the medium term. At a broader regional

level, the Baltic Sea has been increasingly recognized as

a strategic energy corridor connecting LNG terminals,

offshore wind farms, and oil transshipment facilities

across multiple national systems [56]. Despite this

growing body of work, the existing literature focuses

predominantly on large-scale hub terminals such as

Naftoport or the ŚwinoujŜcie LNG facility. The

potential of small and medium-sized ports as

complementary nodes in the fuel distribution network

— capable of enhancing system resilience through

supply route diversification — remains largely

unexplored. This gap is particularly significant given

that smaller ports often offer favorable conditions for

piloting infrastructure solutions compatible with the

requirements of the green transition. The present study

addresses this gap directly.

Seaports constitute a critical link in this process.

They serve as hubs for the import of liquid fuels, their

storage and redistribution, as well as the initial

deployment of infrastructure for alternative fuels. The

development of fuel terminals-both large strategic

hubs such as Naftoport in Gdańsk and smaller

transshipment stations-plays a dual role: on the one

hand, it guarantees the country’s energy security, and

on the other, it supports climate transition goals [20,

23]. This study focuses on the analysis of pipeline

transport technologies for liquid fuels and the

characteristics of selected fuel terminals along the

Polish coast, with particular attention to their role in

ensuring energy security and adapting to the

requirements of the European Green Deal. The central

element of the work is a case study: the design concept

of a diesel fuel transshipment terminal in one of the

small ports of the southern Baltic. This case represents

a practical application of engineering and logistics

knowledge in the design of infrastructure facilities that

combine operational reliability with the challenges of

the energy transition.

In order to structure the analysis and ensure

scientific rigor, this study is guided by a set of clearly

defined research questions that reflect both the

engineering and strategic dimensions of fuel terminal

development in the context of contemporary energy

challenges. The first question examines how small-

scale fuel terminals can contribute to enhancing

national and regional energy security in the Baltic Sea

region. In particular, it addresses the role of such

facilities in diversifying supply routes, reducing

dependency on large centralized hubs, and increasing

the resilience of the fuel distribution system in

response to geopolitical, operational, and

environmental disruptions. The second research

question focuses on the adaptability of infrastructure

originally designed for conventional fuels, such as

diesel, to alternative energy carriers in line with the

objectives of the European Green Deal. This aspect of

the study explores the extent to which existing and

newly designed terminal infrastructure can be

modified or expanded to accommodate fuels such as

biofuels, methanol, or synthetic fuels, without

requiring fundamental structural changes. It also

considers technological, safety, and environmental

constraints associated with such a transition, as well as

the importance of modular and future-proof design

solutions. The third research question concerns the

identification of optimal technical and spatial

conditions for the development of a fuel transshipment

terminal in a small port of the southern Baltic. This

includes the evaluation of bathymetric, geological, and

navigational factors, as well as environmental

limitations and regulatory requirements. The question

further encompasses the selection of appropriate

engineering solutions, such as offshore versus quay-

based configurations, and the integration of the

terminal with existing transport and storage

infrastructure. Together, these research questions form

a coherent analytical framework that underpins both

the comparative analysis of existing fuel terminals and

the development of the proposed case study. They

ensure that the study not only describes technical

solutions but also systematically evaluates their

relevance in the broader context of energy security and

the ongoing transformation of the fuel sector.

409

The paper is interdisciplinary in nature-merging

transport, engineering, and economic perspectives-and

aims to identify solutions that both strengthen the

resilience of the energy system and prepare port

infrastructure for upcoming changes in the fuel sector.

The results of the analysis may serve as a foundation

for further research, design projects, and investments

aligned with Poland’s long-term energy security

strategy and the European green transition.

The main contribution of this paper lies in the

integrated analysis of fuel terminal infrastructure in

the context of both energy security and the ongoing

green transition. The study combines technical, spatial,

and operational aspects within a single framework,

providing a comprehensive perspective on the role of

maritime infrastructure in the evolving energy system.

In contrast to existing studies, which predominantly

focus on large-scale terminals, this paper highlights the

significance of small ports as complementary elements

of the fuel supply network, contributing to increased

system flexibility and resilience. Furthermore, the

proposed concept of a fuel transshipment terminal

demonstrates how infrastructure designed for

conventional fuels, such as diesel, can be developed in

a way that allows for future adaptation to alternative

energy carriers. This approach reflects current

regulatory and technological trends and supports the

long-term objectives of sustainable maritime transport

and energy policy.

2 PIPELINE TRANSPORT OF LIQUID FUELS –

OVERVIEW OF TECHNOLOGY AND SAFETY

REQUIREMENTS

Pipeline transport plays a fundamental role in the

energy supply system, ensuring the continuous

delivery of liquid fuels from seaports and

transshipment terminals to storage facilities and end

users. It is recognized as one of the safest and most

cost-effective forms of transport, with its reliability

constituting a key element of national energy security

[10, 12]. In addition to their role in the traditional

distribution system for crude oil and refined products,

fuel pipelines are gaining increasing importance in the

context of the green transition. Through modernization

and the introduction of new materials, they can be

adapted for the transport of alternative fuels [12, 20].

This chapter presents the key aspects of pipeline

transport technology: the properties of fuels and their

impact on logistics, infrastructure, and monitoring

systems, as well as issues related to storage and

environmental protection.

2.1 Fuel Properties and Logistics Processes

The process of transporting, transshipping, and storing

liquid fuels is closely linked to their physicochemical

properties. Understanding these properties is essential

to ensure safe, efficient, and reliable logistics. This

subsection characterizes selected liquid fuels,

including crude oil fractions (gasoline, diesel fuel, fuel

oils), liquefied natural gas (LNG), and liquefied

petroleum gas (LPG), with an emphasis on the

properties that directly affect logistics processes.

Through the refining of crude oil, a variety of fractions

with distinct characteristics are obtained. As a result of

these processes, the following are produced [19]:

− Gasoline – a light fraction distilling in the

temperature range of approximately 30°C to 215°C.

It is characterized by high volatility and low

viscosity, which facilitates pumping but creates a

risk of intense evaporation and hydrocarbon

emissions. It requires sealed tanks and vapor-

recovery systems [19, 12].

− Diesel fuel (ON) – a heavier fraction, distilling

between 180–380°C, with higher density and

viscosity than gasoline. It has a lower tendency to

evaporate but requires careful consideration of low-

temperature parameters (CFPP) during transport

and storage [19, 12].

− Kerosene/Jet fuel – a middle distillate, used for

example as aviation fuel, with a boiling range of

150–300°C [12].

− Light and medium fuel oils – characterized by

moderate viscosity and flash point, often requiring

heating in colder climates [12].

− Heavy fuel oil (No. 6, Bunker C) – a fuel with very

high density (0.98–1.07 kg/l) and viscosity. Its

transport and storage require heating, and the

removal of potential spills is particularly difficult

[12].

− LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) – composed of 93–

98% methane, stored at around –167°C. Its transport

requires cryogenic technologies and materials

resistant to extreme conditions [19, 12].

− LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas) – a mixture of

propane and butane, liquefied under a pressure of

2.2–4 atm at ambient temperature. It requires

specialized pressurized tanks and explosion-proof

safeguards [19, 12].

− Methanol and MTBE – fuels with toxic and volatile

properties that require special precautions during

transport and storage [12].

Table 1. Key Fuel Properties and Logistical Requirements

Fuel

Boiling

Range

Density

[kg/l]

Key Logistical

Parameter

Safety

Requirements

Gasoline

30–

215°C

~0.74

Volatility and

evaporation

Sealed tanks, VRU

systems

Diesel

180–

380°C

~0.84

CFPP, viscosity

Temperature

control, heated

tanks

Heavy

fuel oil

>380°C

0.98–1.07

High viscosity,

need for heating

Heating

installations

LNG

–167°C

<0.5

Cryogenic

transport

Insulation, BOG

systems

LPG

–42 to

+6°C

~0.55

Liquefaction

pressure

Pressurized tanks

Methanol

65°C

~0.79

Toxicity,

flammability

Specialized safety

measures

From the perspective of the green transition, the

diversification of fuel properties represents both a

challenge and an opportunity. On the one hand, it

compels the development of technologies aimed at

reducing emissions; on the other, it provides the

foundation for adapting existing infrastructure to new

energy carriers such as LNG or biofuels [12, 20].

The potential adaptation of fuel terminal

infrastructure to alternative energy carriers has been

the subject of increasing scholarly attention. A

comprehensive review by Al-Enazi et al. [60]

demonstrated that while LNG, methanol, ammonia,

410

biofuels, and hydrogen each offer distinct pathways

toward maritime decarbonization, their feasibility

depends critically on production methods, storage

requirements, and — most importantly for the present

study — the availability of compatible port

infrastructure. Law et al. [61] compared these fuels

across technical, economic, and environmental

dimensions, concluding that methanol and biofuels are

particularly suitable for near-term adoption due to

their compatibility with existing liquid-fuel logistics,

storage systems, and transfer equipment. This finding

is further supported by Karountzos et al. [62], whose

analysis of technological bottlenecks across the well-to-

wake value chain confirmed that drop-in biofuels offer

the fastest deployment pathway, as they require only

minimal modifications to existing bunkering and

pipeline infrastructure. These conclusions directly

support the design philosophy adopted in the present

study, where the terminal concept for Darłowo

incorporates structural and spatial reserves —

including additional pipeline routes, multi-media

compatible MLA loading arms, and VRU/VRS systems

— enabling future conversion from diesel to methanol

or biofuels without fundamental infrastructure

changes.

2.2 Pipeline Infrastructure and Control and Measurement

Systems

Modern pipeline systems are an indispensable element

of industrial and municipal infrastructure, enabling the

safe, efficient, and continuous transport of various

media, including hydrocarbons. In the context of

seaports, pipelines serve as a vital link between

transshipment facilities, storage bases, and

transmission systems [12].

Flexible pipe layers are presented below (Fig. 1).

They consist of the following structural elements, each

with specific engineering functions: Layer 1: Carcass. A

spirally wound interlocking metallic strip that

prevents the collapse of the inner liner under external

hydrostatic pressure. It also provides mechanical

protection against pigging tools used during pipeline

inspection and against abrasive particles transported

with the medium. This layer is critical for pipelines

operating at great water depths. Layer 2: Inner liner.

An extruded polymer layer (often HDPE or PA11) that

ensures fluid integrity by confining the transported

medium. It provides the first barrier of chemical

resistance, protecting structural layers from corrosion.

Layer 3: Pressure armor. Composed of helically wound

C-shaped metallic wires or strips, this layer resists

radial loads and internal pressure. It gives the pipe

hoop strength comparable to that of rigid steel pipes,

while maintaining flexibility. Layer 4: Tensile armor.

Formed by pairs of counter-wound flat metallic wires,

the tensile armor ensures axial load resistance,

enabling the pipeline to withstand installation stresses,

dynamic motions, and operational tension loads from

currents and vessel movement. Layer 5: Outer sheath.

An extruded polymer cover that protects the structural

elements from seawater, external corrosion, and

mechanical damage (e.g., impacts or abrasion). It also

prevents ingress of seawater into the load-bearing

layers, thus extending pipeline service life.

Figure 1. Flexible pipe layers Source:

http://www.nov.com/fps_landing/images/02_dynamic-

flexible-risers_pipe.jpg

Subsea pipelines represent a distinct category,

primarily due to the installation process, which

requires specialized design and construction methods.

Techniques such as S-lay, J-lay, Reel-lay, and pull/tow

methods are commonly used. Depending on local

conditions, pipelines are laid directly on the seabed or

in trenches, with stability ensured by a concrete weight

coating [46–48]. In coastal zones, trenchless

technologies such as Horizontal Directional Drilling

(HDD), microtunneling, or Direct Pipe are increasingly

applied, minimizing environmental disturbance [13,

14].

Pipeline networks are equipped with advanced

monitoring, management, and control systems. A key

role is played by SCADA systems, which enable

remote operation and real-time supervision of flow

parameters [8]. Along the pipelines, pressure sensors,

flow meters, temperature transmitters, and block and

control valves are strategically distributed. Another

important element includes pig launcher and receiver

stations, which facilitate cleaning, inspection, and

monitoring of pipeline integrity [8]. Control and

measurement instrumentation directly influences

energy security-allowing for rapid response to failures

while also supporting the reduction of losses and

hydrocarbon emissions into the atmosphere.

2.3 Storage and Environmental Aspects

Fuel depots employ various types of storage tanks-

aboveground, underground, with fixed or floating

roofs. The choice of solution depends on the type of

fuel, its physicochemical properties, and safety

requirements [10, 20]:

− Fixed-roof tanks (cone roof, dome roof) are used for

fuels with low volatility.

− Floating-roof tanks (external and internal floating

roofs) reduce hydrocarbon vapor emissions, which

is important for environmental protection and

compliance with EU regulations [20].

From the perspective of the Green Deal, the key

technologies are those minimizing evaporation and

vapor recovery units (VRU). The Seveso III Directive

and PN-EN standards (e.g., PN-EN 14015 for steel

tanks) define detailed requirements for the design,

operation, and environmental safeguards of such

facilities [8]. Fuel storage is a critical point in the

logistics chain-not only from a technical but also an

environmental perspective. Potential tank or

installation failures can lead to soil and water

411

contamination, threatening both ecosystems and local

communities. For this reason, modern port terminals

integrate retention systems, leak monitoring, and fire

protection into the full operational cycle.

Pipeline transport of liquid fuels is one of the pillars

of Poland’s and Europe’s energy security. Its efficiency,

reliability, and ability to adapt to alternative fuels make

it not only a stabilizing element of supply systems but

also a tool supporting the goals of the European Green

Deal. The physicochemical properties of fuels

determine logistical and structural requirements, while

modern pipeline infrastructure and control-

measurement systems minimize risks associated with

failures and emissions. Fuel storage, conducted in

compliance with EU regulations and PN-EN

standards, serves as a crucial link combining technical

safety with environmental protection. The

development and modernization of pipeline

infrastructure not only strengthen the resilience of the

energy system to disruptions but also prepare it for a

gradual transition to low- and zero-emission fuels.

Thus, pipeline transport becomes not only a guarantor

of supply continuity but also a tool supporting the

green transition.

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design and Data Sources

This study adopts a mixed-method research approach

combining conceptual analysis, comparative

evaluation, and engineering design principles to

investigate the role of small-scale fuel terminals in

enhancing energy security and supporting the green

transition. The research is structured as an application-

oriented case study supported by a comparative

analysis of selected fuel terminals located along the

Polish Baltic coast. The methodological framework

integrates theoretical considerations related to energy

security and infrastructure adaptability with practical

engineering solutions, enabling a comprehensive

assessment of both strategic and technical dimensions

of the problem.

The analysis is based on multiple categories of data,

including scientific literature, policy documents

related to the European Green Deal, and technical

standards governing the design and operation of fuel

infrastructure. Additional sources include publicly

available operational and technical data from existing

terminals, such as Naftoport in Gdańsk, the LNG

terminal in Świnoujście, the SPPP facility in Gdynia,

and the planned FSRU installation. Geospatial and

hydrographic data, including bathymetric maps and

navigational publications, were used to support spatial

analysis and site selection. GIS-based tools (ArcGIS

Pro) were applied to evaluate seabed conditions,

distance to deep-water isobaths, and environmental

constraints, ensuring consistency between the

analytical and design components of the study.

3.2 Analytical and Design Approach

The research process combines comparative analysis

with a design-oriented approach. The comparative

component focuses on identifying key functional,

technical, and strategic characteristics of existing fuel

terminals, including their throughput capacity,

handled fuels, infrastructure configuration, and role in

the national energy system. This analysis provides a

reference framework for the development of the case

study and allows for the transfer of best practices to a

smaller-scale investment context. The spatial analysis

supports the selection of the optimal location by

considering bathymetric conditions, geological

characteristics, navigational accessibility, and

environmental limitations, including the presence of

protected areas.

The case study applies an engineering design

methodology based on established industry standards

and best practices in maritime infrastructure

development. The design process includes the

definition of operational assumptions, the

development and comparison of conceptual variants,

and the selection of the optimal solution based on

safety, environmental, and operational criteria. The

proposed terminal concept is evaluated in terms of

technical feasibility, safety and risk mitigation,

environmental performance, adaptability to alternative

fuels, and contribution to energy security. The study is

subject to certain limitations, as it is based on a

conceptual design and does not include detailed

numerical simulations or full economic analysis;

however, it provides a coherent and robust framework

for further, more detailed investigations.

4 FUEL TERMINALS ON THE POLISH BALTIC

COAST - REVIEW AND COMPARATIVE

ANALYSIS

Seaports in Poland serve as key entry points for liquid

fuels and natural gas, ensuring both national and

regional energy security. The fuel terminals located

along the Polish Baltic coast fulfill diverse roles - from

handling strategic crude oil and gas supplies to

providing flexible operations for liquid fuels. Their

development reflects the dual need to diversify import

routes and to adapt infrastructure to the objectives of

the European Green Deal.

4.1 FSRU in the Gulf of Gdańsk

The planned FSRU (Floating Storage and

Regasification Unit) terminal in the Gulf of Gdańsk is

an investment designed to strengthen the resilience of

Poland’s gas system. It will enable the reception of

LNG, its regasification on floating units, and

transmission into the national gas pipeline network.

Key project elements include two mooring dolphins, a

turning basin for large LNG carriers, a 1,300-meter-

long breakwater, and a subsea pipeline connecting the

terminal with Stogi Island. The storage capacity of the

FSRU units (174,000 m³ each) will allow for supply

cycles every few days while maintaining continuity of

transmission into the national grid [5, 25, 38].

The significance of the terminal extends beyond

immediate energy security. As an LNG-based facility -

with LNG considered a transitional fuel - it aligns with

the EU’s strategy of gradually reducing CO₂ emissions

while maintaining supply stability during the

transition period [12].

412

Figure 2. Visualization of the planned FSRU terminal in

Gdańsk, showing the FSRU berths, protective breakwater,

and the proposed turning basin.

https://www.portgdansk.pl/wydarzenia/budowa-terminalu-

lng-typu-fsru-w-porcie-gdansk-nabiera-tempa/ (Access:

16.04.2025)

4.2 Naftoport in Gdańsk

Naftoport is the most important terminal in Poland for

the transshipment of crude oil and petroleum

products. It handles tankers of up to 300,000 DWT,

with an annual throughput capacity of 36–38 million

tons. In 2024, it achieved a record throughput of 38.8

million tons, making it one of the largest terminals of

its kind in the Baltic region [23, 24]. The facility is

equipped with five loading berths with arms capable

of handling up to 10,000 m³/h, as well as ERS and VRS

systems and advanced fire protection infrastructure

[16, 22]. An integral part of Naftoport’s operations are

the PERN storage tanks with a total capacity of 765,000

m³, connected to the Pomeranian pipeline and

refineries in Poland and Germany [34]. Although

Naftoport focuses on conventional fossil fuels, the

implementation of emission-reduction technologies

(e.g., vapor recovery systems) is in line with EU

environmental policy directions.

Figure 3. View of the terminal with visible berths for liquid

fuel transshipment.

Source:https://polskamorska.pl/2021/10/20/naftoport-

jednym-z-najwiekszych-terminali-przeladunkowych-na-

baltyku/ (Access: 13.04.2025r)

4.3 Terminal LNG in Świnoujście

The President Lech Kaczyński LNG Terminal in

Świnoujście is a key investment in the diversification of

natural gas supplies. Commissioned in 2015 with an

initial regasification capacity of 5 bcm/year, the

terminal completed its second expansion stage in

December 2024, with full operational capacity of 8.3

bcm/year from 1 January 2025 [9, 32, 30].

The facility is equipped with two berths, three

cryogenic LNG storage tanks with a total capacity of

500,000 m³, and SCV regasification systems. It handles

LNG carriers of up to 216,000 m³ and additionally

offers new services: LNG bunkering for vessels,

transshipment operations, and gas export by sea [6, 29].

The Świnoujście terminal serves not only a national but

also a regional role – becoming a gas hub of strategic

importance for the entire Baltic Sea basin.

Figure 4. View of the terminal LNG in Świnoujście. Source:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cHHrr9DeBg (Access:

13.04.2025r)

4.4 The Liquid Fuels Transshipment Station (SPPP) in

Gdynia

The Liquid Fuels Transshipment Station (SPPP) in

Gdynia is a facility specialized in handling diesel fuel,

gasoline, and crude oil. In 2023, its annual

transshipment volume exceeded 3.5 million tons,

representing an increase of more than 57% compared

to 2022 [33, 36]. The station services tankers of up to

80,000 DWT, with the potential to expand to 170,000

DWT. It is equipped with MLA loading arms, mooring

and fender dolphins, an ERC system, and pipelines

connecting the terminal with the PERN base in

Dębogórze [11, 17, 18]. Its importance lies in its

flexibility – it handles both imports and exports of

fuels, while planned upgrades may enable the future

transport of alternative fuels.

Figure 5. Liquid Fuels Transshipment Station in Gdynia.

Source:https://www.pern.pl/uslugi/paliwa/rozladunek-

paliw-na-stanowisku-przeladunku-paliw-plynnych-w-

porcie-gdynia/ (Access: 8.06.2025r)

4.5 Comparative Analysis of Terminals and Conclusions

The above case studies demonstrate that each of the

Polish fuel terminals fulfills a distinct yet

complementary role in the country’s energy security

system. Before drawing synthetic conclusions, their

key technical and functional parameters are presented

below.

413

Table 2. Comparison of Fuel Terminals on the Polish Coast

Terminal

Main Medium

Throughput

Vessel

Types

Strategic

Importance

Green

Transition

Dimension

FSRU

Gdańsk

LNG

(regasification)

approx. 6

bcm/year

LNG

carriers

174,000

m³

Diversification

of supply,

stability of gas

system

LNG as a

transitional

fuel, lower

CO₂

emission

Naftoport

Gdańsk

Crude oil and

oil products

36–38

Mt/year

Tankers

up to

300,000

DWT

Pillar of

refinery supply

and transit

VRU, vapor

emission

reduction

LNG

Świnoujście

LNG

8.3

bcm/year

LNG

carriers

up to

216,000

m³

Regional gas

hub

LNG

bunkering,

expansion to

new

markets

SPPP

Gdynia

Diesel,

gasoline

3.5 Mt/year

Tankers

80–

170,000

DWT

Operational

flexibility,

support for

diversification

Potential

adaptation

to methanol

The analysis shows that Polish terminals play

diverse yet complementary roles:

− FSRU in Gdańsk – secures gas supplies and allows

for rapid response to changes in fuel availability.

− Naftoport – remains the primary link in supplying

refineries and in crude oil transit.

− Świnoujście LNG – is evolving into a regional hub,

also offering new LNG-based services.

− SPPP Gdynia – enhances system flexibility,

especially in the handling of diesel fuel.

In the context of the green transition, these facilities

are implementing adaptive measures: introducing

technologies to reduce emissions (VRU, vapor

recovery systems), expanding LNG services as marine

fuel, and creating technical opportunities to handle

alternative fuels. From this comparative analysis, three

key strategic conclusions emerge:

1. Poland’s regional role – with LNG terminals and

Naftoport, Poland is becoming one of the leaders of

energy security in the Baltic Sea region.

2. Investment potential – both Gdynia and the

planned FSRU in Gdańsk could in the future handle

alternative fuels, directly supporting the objectives

of the European Green Deal.

3. Risks and challenges – competition from German or

Finnish terminals, volatility in fossil fuel demand,

and high costs of transformation may shape the

long-term role of Polish facilities.

In summary, the development of terminals on the

Polish coast simultaneously strengthens energy

security and prepares the system for climate transition,

making them a key element of both national and

regional energy infrastructure.

5 CASE STUDY – CONCEPT OF A DIESEL FUEL

TRANSSHIPMENT TERMINAL IN A SMALL

PORT OF THE SOUTHERN BALTIC

This chapter presents a detailed case study of the

design concept for a diesel fuel transshipment terminal

in one of the small seaports of the southern Baltic. The

aim is to translate the lessons learned from the analysis

of large fuel terminals (Naftoport, LNG terminal in

Świnoujście, FSRU in the Gulf of Gdańsk, and SPPP in

Gdynia) into the conditions of a smaller-scale

investment that is nevertheless crucial for supply

diversification and regional energy security [22].

The choice of diesel fuel (ON) as the reference cargo

is based on several premises. First, diesel remains the

dominant transport fuel in Poland and across the Baltic

region, while its logistical requirements are relatively

straightforward compared to, for example, LNG.

Second, infrastructure designed for diesel can be more

easily adapted in the future to handle alternative fuels

[19]. This technological flexibility situates the terminal

within the framework of the European Green Deal and

EU strategies aiming at the progressive transformation

of the fuel sector toward low- and zero-emission

carriers [5]. The planned terminal is intended to serve

a dual role:

− To strengthen the resilience of Poland’s energy

system by creating an additional entry point for

liquid fuel imports.

− To function as a pilot implementation of modern

transshipment and safety technologies in a regional

port setting, with the potential for replication in

other locations.

In the initial phase of the project, several potential

locations for the transshipment berth along the Polish

Baltic coast were analyzed: Władysławowo, Ustka,

Łeba, and Darłowo. Approaches to the ports and the

configuration of isobaths were evaluated using the

latest edition of the Baltic Sea Sailing Directions –

Polish Coast issued by the Hydrographic Office of the

Polish Navy [4]. The main evaluation criterion was the

bathymetry of the seabed, determining the possibility

of safely handling vessels of a given draft. A minimum

depth of 12.5 m was adopted as the reference threshold,

sufficient to accommodate a Handysize tanker (M/T

OTTOMANA, draft 9.96 m) with an adequate under-

keel clearance [21].

The analysis, based on the Bathymetric Map of the

Southern Baltic (scale 1:200,000), revealed significant

differences among the ports. In Łeba, the required

depth occurs only 1.7–2.0 km from the shoreline, while

in Władysławowo the seabed profile is highly

irregular, with numerous shoals hindering the

maintenance of safe depths. Ustka offered somewhat

more favorable conditions, though the 12.5 m isobath

is reached at a distance of about 1.5 km from the shore.

The most advantageous conditions were identified in

Darłowo, where on the southwestern side the 12.5 m

depth is available just 1 km from the coast (compared

to approx. 1.75 km on the northeastern side). The

proximity of deep water to the shoreline in Darłowo,

relative to other evaluated sites, proved decisive in

selecting this port as the most favorable location for the

construction of the transshipment berth (Fig. 6, 7).

While the bathymetric analysis already points to

Darłowo as the preferred site, the robustness of this

conclusion is further demonstrated through a

structured multi-criteria comparison of all four

candidate ports. The evaluation criteria and results are

presented in Table X below.

In order to ensure methodological transparency and

enable reproducibility of the site selection process, the

four candidate ports were systematically evaluated

against six criteria derived from the technical,

environmental, and strategic requirements identified

in the preceding sections. Multi-criteria evaluation

methods, including the Analytic Hierarchy Process

414

(AHP), have been widely applied in port and terminal

location studies [57, 58, 59]. While a full AHP

application with expert panel surveys was beyond the

scope of this conceptual study, the structured

comparison presented in Table X follows the same

evaluative logic and ensures that the selection decision

is grounded in explicit criteria rather than narrative

judgment alone. The six evaluation criteria are defined

as follows: (C1) bathymetric accessibility, measured as

the distance from the shoreline to the 12.5 m isobath;

(C2) seabed regularity and geological suitability for

pile-supported structures; (C3) existing port

infrastructure, including breakwaters, fairways, and

navigational aids; (C4) environmental constraints,

particularly proximity to Natura 2000 areas; (C5)

hinterland connectivity via road and rail networks and

potential for pipeline routing; and (C6) synergy with

planned offshore wind energy infrastructure in the

context of the European Green Deal.

Table 3. Qualitative multi-criteria comparison of candidate

port locations for the diesel fuel transshipment terminal.

Evaluation scale: VU — Very unfavorable, U — Unfavorable,

M — Moderate, F — Favorable, VF — Very favorable.

Port

C1 Bathymetry

C2 Geology

C3 Infrastructure

C4 Environment

C5 Hinterland

C6 Offshore synergy

Overall

Władysławowo

Low

Ustka

Medium

Łeba

Low

Darłowo

High

The comparison confirms that Darłowo achieves the

most favorable overall assessment, driven primarily by

three factors. First, its bathymetric accessibility is

decisively superior: the 12.5 m isobath is located

approximately 1 km from the southwestern shoreline,

compared to 1.5 km in Ustka, 1.7–2.0 km in Łeba, and

an irregular, shoal-obstructed profile in

Władysławowo. Second, the presence of a sheltering

breakwater and an approach channel with depths of 8–

10 m provides a ready-made infrastructural basis that

significantly reduces investment costs and

implementation time. Third, Darłowo's location within

the zone of planned offshore wind farm investments

creates a potential for logistical synergy, including

shared HDD corridors and service infrastructure,

directly supporting the objectives of the European

Green Deal. The principal disadvantage of Darłowo —

the proximity of Natura 2000 areas (C4, rated as

Unfavorable) — is a constraint that necessitates the

application of environmentally sensitive construction

methods, particularly HDD technology for the

shoreline crossing, but does not disqualify the location.

Władysławowo is effectively excluded by its highly

irregular seabed, which makes it extremely difficult to

maintain safe depths for tanker operations. Łeba,

despite regular seabed conditions, suffers from the

greatest distance to the required depth and limited port

infrastructure. Ustka represents a viable but less

competitive alternative, lacking the distinctive

bathymetric and synergistic advantages of Darłowo. A

sensitivity check was performed by hypothetically

upgrading Darłowo's environmental score from

Unfavorable to Moderate (reflecting successful HDD

implementation). Under this assumption, Darłowo's

dominance over other candidates is further reinforced,

confirming the robustness of the selection.

Figure 6. Bathymetric map in the vicinity of the Port of

Darłowo – own elaboration in ArcGIS Pro 3.

Figure 7. Bathymetric map of the Baltic seabed in the

Darłowo area – own elaboration based on: Bathymetric Map

of the Southern Baltic at 1:200,000 scale, Polish Geological

Institute – National Research Institute, Warsaw 2023

https://geolog.pgi.gov.pl/#name=53nv8rai9r (Access

10.06.2025 r).

5.1 Site Assessment and Environmental Constraints

The case study concerns the location of the planned

diesel fuel transshipment terminal in the Port of

Darłowo, which, among the small ports of the southern

Baltic, is distinguished by favorable navigational and

technical conditions. Despite its dominant fishing and

tourism functions, the port also has hydraulic

infrastructure enabling the development of cargo-

handling activities. A key advantage of Darłowo is its

position at the intersection of local distribution routes

and the proximity of hinterland connections, which

makes it a convenient site for handling fuel transport

of regional importance.

The port’s hydrographic conditions include an

approach channel with depths in the range of 8–10 m,

allowing the handling of vessels of up to 20–50,000

DWT. The geological substratum is composed mainly

of sandy and sandy–silty deposits, which make it

possible to found pile-supported structures and

mooring–fender dolphins, although local

reinforcements may be required. Geological conditions

in the southern Baltic region are diverse, comprising

predominantly medium- and fine-grained sands as

well as glacial tills, as confirmed by the geological–

engineering subdivision of the Baltic seabed developed

415

by Coufal and Kaszubowski [3]. The port is equipped

with a sheltering breakwater, which protects the

harbor basin against wave action, significantly

increasing the safety of vessel maneuvering and cargo-

handling operations.

Environmental conditions represent a key

constraint – Darłowo is located in close proximity to

Natura 2000 areas, which requires minimizing

investment-related interference. In addition, the basin

is seasonally exposed to ice phenomena, which must be

considered in the design of structural and

technological solutions. An advantage of the location,

however, is its position within the zone of planned

offshore wind energy investments, which creates the

potential for synergy between the fuel terminal and the

supporting energy infrastructure.

Figure 8. Geological map of the seabed of the southern Baltic

Sea. Source:: https://www.pgi.gov.pl/docman-tree-

all/oddzial-geologii-morza/opracowania-oddzialu-geologii-

morza/mapa-geologiczna-dna-baltyku-arcgis/1223-mapa-

osadow-powierzchniowych/file.html (Access: 5.06.2025)

Table 3. Key Locational and Environmental Conditions –

Port Darłowo

Criterion

Local Parameters

Design Implications

Fairway depth

8–10 m

Service for tankers of 20–50,000

DWT

Geological

substratum

Sands, silts

Potential need for local

reinforcement of dolphin

foundations

Sheltering

breakwater

Existing, protects

the basin

Enables safe maneuvers and

transshipment operations

Ice conditions

Present, seasonal

Requirement to protect steel

elements and loading arms

Protected

areas

Natura 2000 in

the vicinity

Need to minimize environmental

impact and apply HDD technology

Dominant

winds

Necessity of maneuvering support

(tugs, LDS system)

Energy

context

Proximity to

offshore wind

zones

Synergy with Green Deal

infrastructure and potential for

future terminal adaptation

5.2 Design Assumptions and Conceptual Variants

The project assumes the construction of a terminal with

a transshipment capacity of 1.0–1.5 million tons of

diesel fuel per year. The terminal will handle medium-

range (MR) tankers, whose dimensions are consistent

with the existing port depths.

Two conceptual variants were considered:

− Variant I – offshore terminal: a transshipment berth

in the form of mooring and fender dolphins

connected by a jetty, with a subsea pipeline leading

to the onshore base.

− Variant II – terminal at the existing quay: adaptation

of the existing quay infrastructure, equipped with

marine loading arms and safety systems.

Table 3. Comparison of Conceptual Variants of the Terminal

Criterion Variant I – Offshore Variant II – At the Quay

Investment cost

Higher

Lower (adaptation of

existing infrastructure)

Safety

High (separation

from the port)

Dependent on proximity to

other facilities

Environmental

impact

Greater (underwater

works)

Lower (adaptation of

existing quays)

Flexibility

Higher (modularity

of dolphins)

Limited by available port

space

Implementation

time

Longer

Shorter

The comparative analysis indicates that although

the offshore variant involves higher investment costs

and a longer implementation time, it simultaneously

offers greater operational flexibility and a higher level

of safety due to its separation from port infrastructure.

The quay-based variant would be more cost-effective;

however, the limited maneuvering space and

proximity of port facilities could generate operational

risks. Therefore, with reference to the conditions in

Darłowo, the recommended solution is the offshore

variant, which makes better use of the availability of

deep water at a distance of approximately 1 km from

the shore and enables the terminal’s development in a

modular format.

Figure 9. Conceptual design scheme – own elaboration in

ArcGIS Pro 3.2.

5.3 Construction of the Transshipment Terminal

The Darłowo terminal design is based on the offshore

concept, located approximately 1 km from the shore

and connected to the onshore base by subsea pipelines,

partially installed using HDD (Horizontal Directional

Drilling). This solution minimizes interference with

coastal zones, ensures high operational resilience, and

reduces environmental impact on marine areas and

Natura 2000 sites [14], [22]. The terminal forms an

integrated hydrotechnical and technological system,

which includes:

− a loading platform founded on steel piles,

− mooring and fender dolphins equipped with cone

fenders and quick-release hooks,

416

− DN 600 pipelines running to the onshore base, with

the shore-crossing section installed using HDD

technology,

− a caisson breakwater, protecting the maneuvering

basin against waves from the NW sector,

− safety and environmental protection systems (ERS,

VRU, firefighting, LDS, pneumatic barriers).

These solutions are consistent with the European

Green Deal strategy, ensuring both energy security and

the future adaptability of the terminal for handling

biofuels and methanol [5], [14], [20], [22], [21], [41].

Detailed construction aspects are presented in Figures

10, 11, and 12, as well as in the subsequent sections of

this study.

Figure 10. Structural scheme of the transshipment terminal –

top view, own elaboration

Figure 11. Structural details of the transshipment terminal

own, elaboration

Figure 12. Structural layout of the transshipment terminal –

cross-section of the berth, own elaboration

The key element ensuring safe vessel maneuvers is

also the navigational marking of the berth. In

accordance with the guidelines of IALA

Recommendation O-139 [7], the design provides for the

installation of sector lights and auxiliary lights,

including a white light emitting Morse signal “U”

every 15 seconds (nominal range 10 NM),

supplemented by red lateral lights. This solution

clearly indicates the position and boundaries of the

berth, supporting navigation under limited visibility

conditions. The marking will be integrated with the

structure of the sheltering breakwater and the

platform, in line with best practices applied to

maritime hydraulic structures.

5.3.1 Terminal construction

Loading Platform

The central element of the investment is a loading

platform measuring 41 × 22 m, founded on tubular steel

piles. The platform will be equipped with MLA 260

loading arms with diameters of 12’’ and 16’’, offering a

maximum throughput of 2500–3000 m³/h. These arms

are fitted with ERC (Emergency Release Coupling),

HQCDC (Hydraulic Quick Connect/Disconnect

Couplings), and piggy-back vapor recovery lines,

enabling simultaneous product and vapor transfer [17],

[18], [28].

Mooring and Fender Dolphins

The berth is designed with two mooring/fender

dolphins, fitted with bollards rated at 1500 kN and

SCN1600 F2.6 cone fenders. The dolphins are

connected to the platform by service walkways,

ensuring safe access for inspection and operations. The

berthing energy of the reference vessel was determined

using the standard kinetic energy formula: E = 0.5 · M ·

V² · Cm · Ce · Cs · Cc, where M is the displacement of

the vessel [t], V is the approach velocity perpendicular

to the berth [m/s], Cm is the hydrodynamic added

mass coefficient, Ce is the eccentricity coefficient, Cs is

the softness coefficient, and Cc is the berth

configuration coefficient. For the reference vessel

Handysize tanker M/T Ottomana (DWT 27,300 t, draft

9.96 m, displacement approximately 43,000 t, approach

velocity V = 0.18 m/s under exposed berth conditions,

Cm = 1.80, Ce = 0.50, Cs = 1.0, Cc = 1.0), the calculation

yields a design berthing energy of 672.81 kNm. This

value is safely absorbed by the selected SPC 1200 G1.5

fenders with a rated energy absorption of 706 kNm

[45], [27].

Subsea Pipelines and HDD

Product transfer is provided by two independent DN

600 subsea pipelines, ensuring redundancy and

operational flexibility. The adequacy of the DN 600

diameter for the projected throughput was verified by

calculating flow velocities under three operating

scenarios using the continuity equation. The flow

velocity in the subsea pipelines was calculated using

the continuity equation v = Q / A, where Q is the

volumetric flow rate and A = π·d²/4 is the cross-

sectional area of the DN 600 pipeline (d = 0.600 m, A =

0.2827 m²). Under normal dual-pipeline operation,

with a design throughput of 2,500 m³/h distributed

equally between two lines, the per-pipeline flow rate

yields v = (1,250/3,600) / 0.2827 ≈ 1.23 m/s. Under

single-pipeline operation at full capacity (2,500 m³/h),

v ≈ 2.46 m/s, and under emergency maximum

throughput of 3,000 m³/h through a single line, v =

(3,000/3,600) / 0.2827 ≈ 2.95 m/s. All values fall within

the recommended range of 0.5–3.0 m/s for liquid fuel

pipelines [47], confirming the adequacy of the DN 600

diameter for the projected terminal capacity. A special

feature of the design is the shore crossing executed

using HDD technology (see Section 5.4 for technical

417

details and environmental performance evidence).

HDD technology is also applied in offshore wind

energy projects for cable landfalls, strengthening the

synergy of the terminal project with the green

transition [14], [41].

Table 4. Main Structural Elements of the Transshipment

Terminal

Element

Parameters / Characteristics

Design Notes

Loading platform

Steel piles, MLA 12” and

16”

Possibility of future

adaptation

Loading arms

2500–3000 m³/h, ERC,

HQCDC, vapor recovery

line

Spill minimization

Mooring/fender

dolphins

2 units, 1500 kN bollards,

SPC 1200 G1.5 fenders

Handling MR

tankers

Subsea pipelines

DN 600, redundancy, HDD

at shoreline

Environmental

protection

Sheltering

breakwater

Reinforced concrete

caissons + rock armor

NW basin

protection

Structural reserve

Space for additional arms

and pipelines

Adaptation for

biofuels

Sheltering Breakwater

To ensure safe maneuvering conditions, a caisson

breakwater has been designed, composed of

prefabricated reinforced concrete boxes filled with

stone. The breakwater protects the basin from NW

wave exposure, enabling transshipment operations in

a wider spectrum of metocean conditions. This

solution is analogous to those applied in the Port of

Gdańsk (Northern Port) and provides long-term

durability and protection of the maneuvering basin [1],

[22], [31], [39].

5.3.2 Technological Equipment and Safety Systems

The safe and reliable operation of the terminal

requires not only the construction of transshipment

and mooring facilities but also the implementation of

advanced safety, firefighting, and environmental

protection systems.

Mooring and Fendering Equipment

Quick-release hooks with capstans rated at 700 kN

were applied, in compliance with the Regulation of the

Minister of Infrastructure (2025) and ATEX

requirements. The arrangement of dolphins and

fenders ensures safe mooring of MR- and Handysize-

class vessels.

Safety Systems

The terminal is equipped with:

− floating and pneumatic oil spill booms,

− fixed water–foam firefighting installations (four

remotely controlled monitors),

− vapor recovery units (VRU/VRS) – both onshore

and platform variants,

− LDS (Laser Docking System) supporting ship

maneuvers,

− full CCTV monitoring, leak detection sensors, and a

SCADA system integrating the operation of

technological installations [16, 33, 36, 37, 49].

Fire Protection System

The design includes a foam storage tank (50 m³),

deluge systems for cooling structural elements and

evacuation, and redundant fire pumps supplied with

seawater. All structural materials and coatings are

resistant to marine corrosion.

Green Transition and Adaptability

The terminal’s design accounts for a gradual shift to

handling biofuels, methanol, and e-fuels by means of:

− structural and spatial reserve for additional

pipelines,

− MLA loading arms compatible with various media,

− VRU/VRS systems reducing VOC emissions,

− application of HDD technology minimizing

impacts on protected areas [21], [41].

5.4 Connection to Onshore Infrastructure

A key element of the planned diesel fuel transshipment

terminal in the Port of Darłowo is its integration with

the onshore base, where storage, quality control, and

further distribution of the fuel will take place. The

connection between the offshore facility and the

onshore infrastructure will be realized via a subsea

pipeline approximately 1 km in length and 16” in

diameter, with the shoreline crossing executed using

HDD (Horizontal Directional Drilling) technology [12,

17].

The use of HDD is of critical importance for the

success of the project. This method, widely applied in

the construction of fuel and gas pipelines as well as

power export cables (e.g., for offshore wind farms),

allows for trenchless passage beneath the shoreline. Its

advantages include [12, 14]:

− minimizing interference with the coastal

environment, including the protection of Natura

2000 areas and valuable habitats,

− reducing erosion and shoreline destabilization,

which is particularly significant in areas exposed to

strong hydrodynamic forces,

− mitigating collision risks with existing

infrastructure (cables, pipelines, marine structures),

− enabling installations at greater burial depths,

thereby protecting pipelines from mechanical

damage and wave action.

The application of HDD for marine pipeline shore

crossings has been extensively documented in the

offshore engineering literature. Da Silva et al. [63]

presented detailed design procedures for HDD shore

approach installations in compliance with the DNV-

OS-F101 standard, emphasizing the critical importance

of geotechnical investigation, drill path optimization,

and pullback force analysis for ensuring long-term

pipeline integrity. Howitt et al. [64] provided empirical

evidence from a gas pipeline project in Western

Australia, demonstrating that HDD installations can

achieve less than 0.5% loss of sensitive benthic habitats

— including corals, seagrass, and macroalgae — even

within a Marine Conservation Reserve, provided that

drilling fluid discharge rates are properly controlled

and monitored. These findings are directly relevant to

the Darłowo project, where the proximity of Natura

2000 areas imposes strict environmental constraints on

the shoreline crossing. The selection of HDD as the

primary installation method for the DN 600 subsea

pipelines is therefore grounded not only in its proven

technical advantages but also in its documented

capacity to minimize seabed disturbance in

ecologically sensitive coastal zones.

Beyond the shoreline crossing itself, the full value of

the HDD installation is realised only when the subsea

pipeline is integrated with a well-designed onshore

base capable of receiving, storing, and redistributing

418

the transferred product. The onshore base will serve as

the strategic backbone of the terminal. It will be

equipped with double-walled storage tanks of 20,000–

50,000 m³ each, designed in accordance with Seveso III

requirements and PN-EN 14015 and PN-EN 12285

standards [10, 20]. These tanks will ensure high levels

of protection against leaks and product losses.

The onshore base will also include [8]:

− a SCADA system for remote control and monitoring

of storage and pumping operations,

− flowmeters and quality analyzers enabling

continuous control of diesel parameters,

− blending and additive installations to meet EU

renewable fuel requirements,

− fire protection systems, including foam hydrants,

water mist systems, and firewater tanks,

− retention and separation systems for petroleum

products, preventing contamination of soil and

groundwater in case of failure.

From the perspective of energy security, the

onshore base fulfills a dual role – serving as both a

buffer storage facility and a hub for managing logistical

flows. This enables not only the satisfaction of local

demand but also redistribution of fuel on a national

and regional scale. The detailed parameters of the

onshore connection are presented in Table 5.

In line with the principles of the European Green

Deal, the infrastructure will be designed in a modular

and flexible manner to allow future adaptation. The

combination of HDD, modern storage tanks, and

advanced monitoring systems positions the Darłowo

base as a pilot example of merging conventional fuel

infrastructure with the requirements of the energy

transition [13, 14].

Table 5. Parameters of the Connection to Onshore

Infrastructure

Element

Parameter / Description

Subsea pipeline

Approx. 1 km in length, 16” diameter, steel with

anti-corrosion coating

Installation

method

HDD – Horizontal Directional Drilling

(minimizing environmental impact) [13, 14]

Burial depth

Several meters below the seabed, providing

protection against wave action and anchors

Storage tanks

Double-walled, 20,000–50,000 m³, compliant with

PN-EN 14015 and PN-EN 12285 [20]

Monitoring

systems

SCADA, flowmeters, leak detectors, and fuel

quality analyzers [8]

Environmental

safety

Oil separators, emergency retention, compliance

with Seveso III [20]

Green transition

Adaptability to biofuels, methanol, and e-fuels

The case study demonstrates that the construction

of a diesel fuel transshipment terminal in a small

seaport on the southern Baltic is both feasible and

justified. The location in a regional port, capable of

handling medium-range tankers, enables

diversification of supply sources and enhances the

resilience of the national energy system. The applied

technical solutions - including loading arms with ERC

and HQCDC systems, mooring and fender dolphins

supported by an LDS system, oil spill booms, a

sheltering breakwater, and a subsea pipeline installed

using HDD technology - are examples of transferring

proven technologies from large-scale terminals to

smaller-scale investments. As a result, the terminal

combines operational safety and reliability with

flexibility.

The project also fits into the framework of the

European Green Deal: the infrastructure has been

designed in a modular manner and in line with EU

requirements, allowing for future adaptation to

alternative fuels. Thus, a terminal in a small port can

serve not only as a regional logistics hub but also as a

pilot facility for the implementation of new

technologies in the fuel sector.

6 DISCUSSION

The findings of this study highlight the novelty of

integrating energy security, infrastructure design, and

green transition requirements within a small-port

context. The purpose of the discussion is to integrate

the technological findings (Chapter 2), the overview of

terminals (Chapter 3), and the case study for the Port

of Darłowo (Chapter 4) into a coherent picture of

investment decisions that simultaneously strengthen

energy security and support the green transition. The

analysis shows that a diesel terminal in a small port can

serve as the missing “resilience link” in the fuel system:

diversifying supply routes, shortening distribution

distances in the region, and creating a platform for the

gradual adaptation of infrastructure to alternative fuels

[5], [16], [20], [21], [22], [23], [41]. This finding aligns

with the broader understanding of port infrastructure

as a cornerstone of energy resilience. As demonstrated

by the IMF [65], Poland’s ability to weather the 2022

energy crisis was significantly enhanced by its

diversified import infrastructure, including the

ŚwinoujŜcie LNG terminal and Naftoport. However,

the current system remains concentrated in a limited

number of large hubs, creating potential single points

of failure. The concept of distributed, smaller-scale

terminals — as proposed in this study — addresses this

vulnerability by adding redundancy to the national

supply network. This approach is consistent with the

framework proposed by Sornn-Friese [52], who argued

that ports must evolve from passive transfer points into

active nodes capable of supporting multiple energy

carriers and adapting to changing market and

regulatory conditions. The Darłowo terminal concept

represents a practical implementation of this

framework at the regional scale.

6.1 Significance of the Concept for Poland’s Energy

Security

Firstly, the diversification of entry points is essential.

Poland’s maritime energy system is currently based on

large hubs (Naftoport, LNG Świnoujście, and the

planned FSRU) [5], [23], [29], [30]. Adding a diesel

transshipment facility in Darłowo increases the

number of independent “gateways” to the system,

thereby reducing operational and geopolitical risks

(failures, storm surges, congestion of basins or

fairways) [22], [23], [24], [25], [43]. In crisis situations,

the dispersion of transshipment capacity is a

prerequisite for maintaining the continuity of fuel

supply to transport and critical sectors.

Secondly, shortening the supply chain for regional

consumers. Smaller ports can assume the role of

“short-range nodes”, reducing the need for long-

distance trucking of fuels from major hubs. This

alleviates pressure on road infrastructure, shortens

419

response times, and stabilizes fuel availability in the

region (the effect of a “local buffer”) [16], [17], [18], [32],

[34], [35].

Thirdly, the safety and automation technologies

applied in the case study (LDS, mooring line tension

monitoring, ERS/ERC systems, HQCDC, VRS/VRU,

fixed foam firefighting systems, SCADA) directly

transfer best practices from large terminals, thus

limiting accident and environmental risks at the scale

of a regional port [8], [16], [17], [18], [22].

Finally, consistency with the national fuel portfolio.

The growing role of gas (LNG/FSRU) does not

eliminate the importance of diesel fuel in the near term,

particularly for heavy transport and logistics [15], [40],

[25], [50]. Maintaining and strengthening diesel

infrastructure therefore remains a rational decision

from the perspective of energy security, while

simultaneously preparing for future conversion [21],

[41].

6.2 Possibilities for Adapting Infrastructure to

Alternative Fuels

The Darłowo terminal concept has been designed in a

such way: the geometry and load capacity of the

platform, the provision of space for additional loading

arms and product lines, as well as pigging and vapor

recovery systems, enable the expansion of the range of

handled media [17], [18], [20]. The key conclusions are

as follows:

− Biocomponents and biofuels (FAME/HVO). From

an installation perspective, they require strict

medium hygiene control (susceptibility to

oxidation, water content), material compatibility of

seals, and thermal management. They can be

implemented within the framework of the existing

class of fittings and tanks, provided that quality

assurance and inspection regimes are strengthened

[8], [12], [20], [41].

− Methanol. As indicated in Chapter 2, methanol is a

viable medium for transfer and storage (toxic,

water-soluble, lower flash point). It requires

dedicated HSE procedures, vapor detection, and in

some cases material adjustments (seals, coatings).

Nevertheless, it is compatible with the philosophy

of MLA loading arms, ERC/HQCDC systems, and

double-walled “full containment”/IFR tanks,

provided this is considered at the design stage [8],

[12], [20], [41].

− Hydrogen-based and e-fuels. Although their large-

scale handling at liquid terminals is not yet

standard, regulatory and market trends (Fit for 55,

FuelEU Maritime) point to the need to maintain

spatial and interface reserves (e.g., connections,

foundation slabs, technological ducts, power and

control systems) for future expansion [21], [41], [42].

From a logistics perspective, the HDD project in the

shoreline zone strengthens environmental compliance

(Natura 2000, erosion mitigation) and lowers the cost

of future conversions, since the submarine route is

geometrically and corrosion-protected, while onshore

connections can be reconfigured (bypass, block valves,

pigging stations) [13], [14], [20], [43], [52].

6.3 Role of Small Ports in the Green Transition

Small ports, such as Darłowo, are natural

implementation testbeds for technologies that are

difficult to introduce in large-scale hub environments

(due to berth occupancy windows or operational

conflicts). In practice, this means:

− the possibility of testing diesel–biofuel blends and

related quality control processes without affecting

critical volumes handled by Naftoport [23], [32],

[34];

− the introduction of eco-friendly operational

practices: HDD (minimizing shoreline disturbance),

VRU/VRS (reducing vapor emissions), pneumatic

and floating booms (protection of marine waters),

and SCADA-based monitoring (failure prevention)

[8], [14], [16], [22];

− coexistence with offshore wind projects (experience

with HDD and cable protection, shared service

logistics), which supports the objectives of the

European Green Deal at the regional level [21], [41].

From a social and spatial perspective, the following

aspects are fundamental: a transparent pathway for

environmental decision-making (including Seveso III

and environmental impact assessments), a clear regime

of fire and rescue drills, and genuine mechanisms of

local community participation. These elements

enhance social acceptance and shorten the investment

cycle without compromising on quality [20], [22]. The

feasibility of adapting conventional fuel infrastructure

to alternative carriers has been corroborated by recent

peer-reviewed studies. Al-Enazi et al. [60] confirmed

that methanol and biofuels require only moderate

modifications to existing storage, transfer, and

bunkering systems compared to more disruptive

alternatives such as ammonia or hydrogen. Karountzos

et al. [62] identified drop-in biofuels as the pathway

with the lowest infrastructure adaptation barrier across

the entire well-to-wake value chain. The modular

design of the Darłowo terminal — with spatial reserves

for additional pipelines and loading arms, multi-media

compatible MLA fittings, and a reconfigurable onshore

base — is specifically intended to exploit this

compatibility. This ensures that the infrastructure

retains its operational and economic value beyond the

anticipated decline in conventional diesel demand,

supporting a gradual, phased transition rather than

requiring costly wholesale replacement.

7 CONCLUSIONS

The conducted study demonstrates that the concept of

a diesel fuel transshipment terminal in a small seaport

of the southern Baltic is both technically feasible and

strategically justified. By combining hydrotechnical

engineering solutions, subsea pipeline technologies

(including HDD), advanced control systems, and

modern safety measures, the proposed concept

provides a coherent and operationally viable model of

fuel infrastructure adapted to contemporary energy

challenges. The results directly address the research

questions formulated in the introduction. Firstly, the

study confirms that small-scale fuel terminals can

significantly enhance energy security by diversifying

supply routes, reducing dependence on large

centralized hubs, and increasing system resilience in

the face of disruptions. Secondly, the analysis

420

demonstrates that infrastructure designed for

conventional fuels, such as diesel, can be effectively

adapted to alternative energy carriers through the

application of flexible design solutions. Thirdly, the

case study identifies key technical and spatial

conditions for terminal development in the southern

Baltic, highlighting the importance of bathymetry,

environmental constraints, and integration with

existing transport networks.

From a broader perspective, the study contributes

to the ongoing discussion on the role of maritime

infrastructure in the energy transition. It shows that

small ports, often overlooked in strategic planning, can

function as important complementary nodes within

the energy system, supporting both operational

flexibility and regional supply stability. The proposed

terminal concept represents a scalable and transferable

solution that can be implemented in similar coastal

environments, extending the applicability of the

findings beyond the specific case of Darłowo. These

scientific contributions carry direct practical relevance

for those responsible for designing and financing fuel

infrastructure in the Baltic region. The practical

implications of the study are particularly relevant for

decision-makers, port authorities, and infrastructure

planners. The results indicate that investments in

smaller-scale fuel terminals can serve as cost-effective

and flexible instruments for strengthening energy

security while maintaining compatibility with long-

term decarbonization policies. At the same time, the

integration of technologies such as HDD, VRU/VRS

systems, and SCADA-based monitoring demonstrates

how environmental protection and operational safety

can be addressed within a unified design framework.

The study is subject to several limitations that

simultaneously define directions for further research.

First, the terminal concept is based on a conceptual

design and does not include detailed numerical

simulations of wave conditions, sediment transport, or

vessel maneuvering at the Darłowo site. Second, the

multi-criteria site comparison, while systematic and

transparent, relies on qualitative expert assessment

rather than a fully formalized method with calibrated

weights; future studies should apply AHP or similar

techniques with a structured expert panel to enhance

robustness. Third, the analysis does not include a full

economic evaluation, such as a cost-benefit analysis or

life-cycle cost assessment, which would be essential for

investment decision-making. Fourth, the bathymetric

and geological data used in the study are derived from

published maps at 1:200,000 scale rather than from site-

specific surveys, which limits the precision of depth

and substratum characterization. Notwithstanding

these limitations, the study provides a coherent and

empirically grounded framework for further design

development. Future research should prioritize

detailed metocean modeling, quantitative risk

assessment (e.g., HAZID/HAZOP), and comparative

life-cycle evaluations of alternative fuel scenarios to

support the transition from conceptual design to

investment documentation. In particular, future

studies should include simulation-based approaches

and comparative assessments of alternative fuel

scenarios, which would provide a more

comprehensive basis for investment decision-making

and policy development.

REFERENCES

[1] Basiński T., Pruszak Z., Tarnowska M., Zeidler R.:

Ochrona brzegów morskich. Wydawnictwo Instytutu

Budownictwa Wodnego Polskiej Akademii Nauk,

Gdańsk 1993.

[2] Chłopińska E., Ława M.: ANALIZA WPŁYWU

SPOŁECZNEGO TERMINALU LNG W ŚWINOUJŚCIU.

AUTOBUSY, 12/2017.

[3] Coufal R., Kaszubowski L.J., (2010). Wstępny podział

geologiczno – inżynierski dna polskiej części Morza

Bałtyckiego, Wydział Budownictwa i Architektury

Uniwersytet Technologiczny w Szczecinie.

[4] Dudo P. (red.): Uzupełnienie nr 1 - 2024 LOCJA

BAŁTYKU WYBRZEŻE POLSKIE WYDANIE

JEDENASTE. Biuro Hydrograficzne Marynarki

Wojennej, Gdynia 2024.

[5] Raport o oddziaływaniu na środowisko przedsięwzięcia

pn.: „Realizacja terminala FSRU wraz z gazociągiem

podmorskim w obrębie akwenu Portu w Gdańsku” TOM

I. Streszczenie. Gdańsk, 4 października 2023 r.

Ekokonsult https://www.gaz-

system.pl/dam/jcr:5e7b9dea-7e9b-4d4c-a759-

92bbed766b4c/fsru-raport-o-oddzialywaniu-na-

srodowisko-tom-i-streszczenie.pdf (Data dostępu:

16.04.2025r).

[6] Prezentacja Terminal FSRU - Najważniejsze aspekty

przeprowadzonej oceny oddziaływania na środowisko.

Ekokonsult https://www.gaz-

system.pl/dam/jcr:8382ca19-898c-4f53-a917-

476a799b3d53/terminal-fsru-najwazniejsze-aspekty-

oddzialywania-na-srodowisko-2.pdf (Data dostępu:

16.04.2025r).

[7] IALA: Recommendation O-139 on The Marking of Man-

Made Offshore Structures. Edition 2, Grudzień 2013.

[8] European Parliament & Council. (2012). Directive

2012/18/EU on the control of major-accident hazards

involving dangerous substances (Seveso III Directive).

Official Journal of the European Union, L 197/1.

[9] Mazurkiewicz B., Wiśniewski F.: „Morskie Budowle

Hydrotechniczne - Zalecenia do projektowania,

wykonywania i utrzymania”. Wydanie VI

znowelizowane, uzupełnione i rozszerzone. Fundacja

Promocji Przemysłu Okrętowego i Gospodarki Morskiej,

Gdańsk, 2019.

[10] Mioduszewski T.: „Analiza nawigacyjna Oprac. Nr

377/2022/AN” Pracownia Projektowa Budownictwa

Hydrotechnicznego AQUAPROJEKT Gdańsk, wrzesień

2022 r. Źródło: https://port-

gdynia.logintrade.net/zapytania_email,196402,2f666e02c

d2a4bcadc41b5270ff2f6f5.html (Data dostępu: 8.06.2025r).

[11] Misorz T., Czerniak M.: Przewozy Morskie.

Wydawnictwo Uniwersytet Morski w Gdyni, Gdynia

2022.

[12] Osikowicz R.: ANALIZA WYBORU TECHNIKI

BUDOWY. Inżynieria Bezwykopowa [86] 2/2022.

[13] Osikowicz R.: PRZEGLĄD RYNKU

MIKROTUNELOWEGO 2020. Inżynieria Bezwykopowa

[78] 2/2020.

[14] Osikowicz R.: Rury dla Technik przeciskowych.

Inżynieria Bezwykopowa [29] 2/2013.

[15] Piątek Z.: Automatyzacja przeładunku paliw płynnych.

Z wizytą w gdańskim Naftoporcie. Automatyka

Podzespoły Aplikacje, Nr 02/2019.

[16] Polskie LNG S.A.: Plan współpracy z zainteresowanymi

stronami. Projekt Terminalu LNG w Świnoujściu, Polska,

Luty 2014 r.

[17] Pracownia Projektowa Budownictwa

Hydrotechnicznego AQUAPROJEKT Gdańsk:

PROGRAM FUNKCJONALNO- UŻYTKOWY dla

potrzeb realizacji w formule „Projektuj i buduj” zadania:

Rozbudowa Stanowiska Przeładunku Paliw Płynnych w

Porcie Gdynia Oprac. nr 377/2024/PFU Rew.4. Źródło:

https://port-

421

gdynia.logintrade.net/zapytania_email,196402,2f666e02c

d2a4bcadc41b5270ff2f6f5.html (Data dostępu: 8.06.2025r).

[18] Rozporządzenie Ministra Infrastruktury z dnia 4 marca

2025 r w sprawie warunków technicznych, jakim

powinny odpowiadać morskie budowle hydrotechniczne

i ich usytuowanie.

[19] Załącznik do Uchwały Rady Ministrów w sprawie

ustanowienia programu wieloletniego pod nazwą

„Budowa falochronu osłonowego w Porcie Gdańsk”.

[20] https://geolog.pgi.gov.pl/#name=o7n5l6a86l (Data

dostępu: 3.06.2025r)

[21] European Commission. (2020). Communication from the

Commission – The European Green Deal. COM(2019) 640

final. Brussels.

[22] https://naftoport.pl/charakterystyka-techniczna/ (Data

dostępu: 13.04.2025r)

[23] https://rynekinfrastruktury.pl/wiadomosci/biznes-i-

przemysl/gdanski-naftoport-bije-kolejne-rekordy-w-

przeladunkach-93954.html (Data dostępu: 13.04.2025r)

[24] https://portgdansk.pl/port/terminale-i-nabrzeza/baza-

paliw-plynnych/ (Data dostępu: 13.04.2025r)

[25] https://portgdansk.pl/wydarzenia/budowa-terminalu-

lng-typu-fsru-w-porcie-gdansk-nabiera-tempa/ (Data

dostępu 16.04.2025r)

[26] https://www.atmarine.fi/wp-

content/uploads/2019/03/Kanon-Loading-Equipment-

brochure-en.pdf (Data dostępu 13.06.2025r)

[27] https://www.cross.com.gr/wp-

content/uploads/2021/01/1b.-MLA-260-Presentation.pdf

(Data dostępu 13.06.2025r)

[28] https://www.ecosealthailand.com/uploads/files/Tab%20

7%20MLA.pdf (Data dostępu 13.06.2025r)

[29] https://www.gaz-system.pl/pl/terminal-lng/informacje-

o-terminalu-lng.html (Data dostępu: 16.04.2025r)

[30] https://www.gaz-system.pl/pl/terminal-lng/program-

rozbudowy-terminalu-lng.html (Data dostępu:

16.04.2025r)

[31] https://www.gov.pl/attachment/14784d07-f6b6-41a9-

80ee-0c08fc7ce06a (Data dostępu: 23.06.2025r)

[32] https://www.pern.pl/obiekty/baza-gdansk/ (Data

dostępu: 13.04.2025r)

[33] https://www.pern.pl/uslugi/paliwa/rozladunek-paliw-

na-stanowisku-przeladunku-paliw-plynnych-w-porcie-

gdynia/ (Data dostępu: 8.06.2025r)

[34] https://www.pern.pl/uslugi/ropa/przeladunek/ (Data

dostępu: 13.04.2025r)

[35] https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/features/rules-

of-thumb-flow-parameters/ (Data dostępu 15.06.2025r)

[36] https://www.trojmiasto.pl/biznes/Paliwowy-rekord-w-

Porcie-Gdynia-n195952.html (Data dostępu: 8.06.2025r)

[37] https://ulfix.pl/oferta/zapory-przeciwrozlewowe/ (Data

dostępu 18.06.2025r)

[38] https://www.umgdy.gov.pl/aktualnosc/urzad-morski-

w-gdyni-podpisal-umowe-na-budowe-falochronu-

oslonowego-dla-terminalu-fsru/ (Data dostępu:

16.04.2025r)

[39] https://imig.pl/pliki/artykuly/2020-6/2020-6_286-

304_Malkiewicz.pdf (Data dostępu: 14.06.2025r).

[40] International Energy Agency (IEA). Oil 2023: Analysis

and forecast to 2028. Paris: IEA, 2023.

[41] European Parliament & Council. (2023). Regulation (EU)

2023/1804 on the deployment of alternative fuels

infrastructure (AFIR). Official Journal of the European

Union, L 234/1.

[42] International Energy Agency (IEA). (2021). World

Energy Outlook 2021. Paris: IEA Publications.

[43] United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

(UNECE). (2019). Sustainable Inland Transport

Connectivity Indicators (SITCIN). Geneva: UN

Publications.

[44] DNV, Maritime Forecast to 2050. Energy Transition

Outlook. Høvik, 2023.

[45] International Maritime Organization (IMO). IMO

Strategy on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships.

London: IMO, 2018 (rev. 2023).

[46] DNVGL-ST-F101: Submarine Pipeline Systems. Det

Norske Veritas Germanischer Lloyd, 2017.

[47] Palmer A.C., King J.: Subsea Pipeline Engineering.

PennWell Books, Tulsa, 2008.

[48] Bai Q., Bai Y.: Subsea Pipelines and Risers. Elsevier,

Oxford, 2005.

[49] Ustawa z dnia 10 kwietnia 1997 r. – Prawo energetyczne

(Dz.U. 1997 nr 54 poz. 348, z późn. zm.) Art. 3 pkt 16a:

„Bezpieczeństwo energetyczne – stan gospodarki

umożliwiający pokrycie bieżącego i perspektywicznego

zapotrzebowania odbiorców na paliwa i energię w

sposób technicznie i ekonomicznie uzasadniony, przy

zachowaniu wymagań ochrony środowiska.”

[50] https://wkolomoto.pl/analizy-i-

raporty/analizy/prognozy-popytu-na-paliwa-plynne-w-

polsce-do-2030-

roku/#:~:text=Prognozy%20do%202030%20roku%20suge

ruj%C4%85,polityki%20UE%20i%20dost%C4%99pno%C

5%9Bci%20nowych

[51] https://zielonagospodarka.pl/w-gminie-choczewo-

rozpoczely-sie-prace-zwiazane-z-przewiertami-dla-

projektu-baltica-2-

20580#:~:text=,z%20poszanowaniem%20krajobrazu%20i

%20%C5%9Brodowiska

[52] Sornn-Friese, H. (Ed.) (2024). Ports as Energy Transition

Hubs: An Exploratory Study. CBS Maritime,

Copenhagen. ISBN 978-87-93262-16-4.

[53] Poulsen, R.T., Ponte, S. & Sornn-Friese, H. (2018).

Environmental Upgrading in Global Value Chains: The

Potential and Limitations of Ports in the Greening of

Maritime Transport. Geoforum, 89(2), 83–95.

[54] Szulc, W. et al. (2024). Management of the Fuel Supply

Chain and Energy Security in Poland. Energies, 17(22),

5555.

[55] Chmielewska-Gill, W. et al. (2025). Dynamics of Energy

Transition in the Context of Poland’s Energy Security.

Frontiers in Energy Research, 13, 1701904.

[56] World Economic Forum (2026). Why the Baltic Sea

Moved to the Centre of Europe’s Energy Map. WEF,

January 2026.

[57] Georgoulas, D., Koliousis, I. & Papadimitriou, S. (2023).

An AHP Enabled Port Selection Multi-Source Decision

Support System. Journal of Shipping and Trade, 8(1), 1–

11.

[58] Saka, M. & Cetin, O. (2020). Comparing Two Judgment

Scales of AHP with a Case Study: Reaching a Decision on

a Dry Port Location. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs,

19.

[59] Tadić, S. et al. (2020). Dry Port Terminal Location

Selection by Applying the Hybrid Grey MCDM Model.

Sustainability, 12(17), 6983.

[60] Al-Enazi, A. et al. (2025). Review of the State-of-the-Art

of Alternative Marine Fuels: A Viable Approach to Zero-

Carbon Shipping. Cleaner Energy Systems, Elsevier.

[61] Law, L.C. et al. (2021). A Comparative Review of

Alternative Fuels for the Maritime Sector: Economic,

Technology, and Policy Challenges for Clean Energy

Implementation. World Electric Vehicle Journal, 2(4), 29.

[62] Karountzos, G. et al. (2025). Technological Bottlenecks in

Fuels for Maritime Decarbonization. Journal of Marine

Science and Engineering, 14(6), 570.

[63] da Silva, D.M.L. et al. (2013). Pipeline Shore Approach

Installation by Horizontal Directional Drilling.

Proceedings of the ASME 32nd International Conference

on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE2013),

V04BT04A005.

[64] Howitt, L. et al. (2012). Coastal Shoreline Crossing Using

Horizontal Directional Drilling for Pipeline Installation

Achieves Excellent Environmental and Social Outcomes.

SPE-156643-MS, SPE International Conference on Health,

Safety and Environment.

[65] IMF (2023). Balancing Decarbonization with Energy

Security in Poland. IMF Country Report No. 23/190.