Sulphur emissions The impact of the sulphur regulations is little understood outside the shipping industry, so this year the Chamber has concentrated on bridging this gap with ministers, commissioners, members of parliament and government officials. As a result of this direct approach, and at our request, the House of Commons Transport Select Committee conducted an inquiry into the impacts of the sulphur regulations. The Chamber, as part of Maritime UK, submitted both oral and written evidence to the committee. Subsequent meetings with the Shipping Minister and senior officials have helped raise the profile of our key concerns – firstly, the massive increase in cost of compliant low-sulphur fuel and, secondly, the lack of reliable abatement technologies that could provide a cost effective alternative. It remains to be seen what the government is prepared to do to help the industry find an affordable way forward, particularly for short sea shipping and ferries. The Chamber is also exploring the option
of exemptions on a route or ship-specific basis where clear financial hardship or modal shift could be demonstrated, as has been done by the US government for 12 Great Lakes steamships. This has the benefit that there is precedent and that it would not require the debate on MARPOL Annex VI to be re- opened, and so might find favour with governments as a more acceptable and justifiable compromise. Meanwhile, within Europe, the Transport (TRAN)
and Environment (ENVI) Committees have produced their written opinion of the draft EU Sulphur Directive. Both committees support the additional measures, over and above the requirements of MARPOL Annex VI, drafted in the directive, including what amount to Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA) regulations for all passenger ships operating to and from any EU ports. The committees also, however, support a widening of the SECA regions to include all European waters, without going through the IMO approvals process that requires environmental and health evidence to support the application. The Chamber is actively lobbying the commission, council and parliament to more closely align the directive with the provisions of MARPOL regulations. A Chamber presidential visit to Brussels in
November strongly represented the industry’s position on both sulphur and carbon, primarily to the EU Transport Commissioner, but also to the Environment Director-General and to the UK
12 ENVIRONMENT
THE IMPACT OF THE
SULPHUR REGULATIONS IS LITTLE UNDERSTOOD OUTSIDE THE SHIPPING INDUSTRY, SO THIS YEAR THE CHAMBER HAS CONCENTRATED ON BRIDGING THIS GAP WITH MINISTERS,
COMMISSIONERS, MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
Permanent Representative to the EU. Subsequently, the Chamber met with a senior UK member of the ENVI Committee and with one on the Council Environmental Working Group. Both were supportive, though the view was expressed that an extension of SECAs to include all European waters may be in the best interests of UK shipping. This is not the view of the Chamber as any such extension would not only include all the UK’s western seas to the detriment of those operating there, but also would not be based on any evidential scrutiny as required by the IMO. A vice-presidential visit to Brussels in early December included calls on MEPs on the Environment Committee, who were very alive to the negative consequences of the sulphur regulations when there are no feasible alternatives to paying at least 80 per cent more for low sulphur fuels. The Chamber team also met a senior delegation
from the Foreign Office who provided helpful advice before a meeting with the EU Commissioner for the Environment and his Cabinet, where there was agreement that a consensual fact base is sorely needed if there is to be genuine mutual understanding of the industry’s position. It is expected that the final draft directive will be placed before a plenary session of parliament for final approval in May 2012.
Greenhouse gases The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) launched its study in early November into whether shipping
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40