Image copyright Getty Images

The global shipping industry is facing calls to follow the example of the car industry and cut its carbon emissions.

The International Maritime Organisation's environment committee is meeting in London this week to try to agree a global plan for reducing emissions levels.

Without a clean-up there are warnings that shipping could account for almost a fifth of carbon emissions by 2050.

Container ships use fuel that has 3,500 times more sulphur than car diesel.

International shipping carries about 90% of world trade but there has been no regulation of carbon emissions.

This is despite a provision under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that gave responsibility for handling carbon emissions from marine fuels to the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), the United Nations division responsible for global shipping.

It has proposed a 50% cut in emissions by 2050, a move that does not go far enough for certain Pacific island nations that are most threatened by rising sea levels.

Monday's meeting of the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee will hear a proposal that emissions should be cut by as much as 70% to 100% by that time.

Bigger ships

There is opposition to this from Panama, Brazil and other countries that depend on income from shipping, which say their economies could be damaged if action is too hasty.

Shipping was excluded from the Paris Agreement on climate change.

Christiana Figueres, a former UN chief negotiator on climate change and an architect of the Paris Agreement, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that some countries were already taking action.

"One very interesting announcement made last week came from [South] Korea, which is ordering more than 200 new ships for its fleet. These are 30% larger and 30% more efficient," she said.

The largest container ship currently operating carries just over 20,000 containers.

However, Ms Figueres pointed out that not all countries would have access to finance for such a change, and an international finance fund should be set up to help less wealthy nations.</s>The shipping industry has by and large avoided scrutiny around its contribution to climate change – but this must change.

Given that the infrastructure of the shipping industry will be exposed to the vagaries of climate change in the form of sea-level rise and erratic and severe weather events, it is ironic that when it comes to discussing the reduction of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from shipping – and particularly from international shipping – not much has happened.

Shipping accounts for three emission categories: international shipping, domestic shipping and fishing. Of these, fishing accounts for a meagre 2.5%, whereas international shipping accounts for close to 80% of the total emissions from the sector. Shipping is the backbone of world trade. It carries about 80% of the total volume of trade and so it plays a significant role in ensuring global development.

This week, from 9-13 April, the 72nd session of the International Maritime Organization (IMO)’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) will meet in London to discuss the problem of shipping emissions and the way forward. This meeting affords South Africa the opportunity to position itself as a leading voice in the negotiations.

The IMO, which came into existence in 1958, is an arm of the United Nations that is responsible for setting global standards for safety, security and environmental performance for the global shipping industry. Discussions within the IMO on climate change and shipping date as far back as the 1980s, but it was only in 1997 that the Kyoto Protocol directed the IMO with overseeing industry-wide regulation for marine bunker fuels.

Nothing noteworthy in this regard has been achieved since. However, new rounds of discussions at the IMO are looking to deal with shipping industry GHG emissions. It is in this context that the third Inter-Sessional Working Group meeting on reducing GHG emissions (ISWG-GHG 3, 3-6 April, 2018) is important as it is supposed to finalise the draft initial IMO strategy on reducing GHG emissions from ships. This will then feed into the MEPC 72.

Given that the sector does not have an encouraging track record managing its own emissions, if an international agreement is reached, this of itself will be heralded as a major breakthrough by many.

Total shipping emissions for the year 2012 were approximately 938-million tonnes CO (mt CO ) (2.6% of global CO emissions). International shipping accounted for a total of 796 mtCO (2.2% of global CO emissions). It is estimated that by 2050, CO emissions from the sector will grow by 50-250%. With one exception, all scenarios project emissions to be higher in 2050 than in 2012.

These numbers indicate that the sector is not yet accounting for the limits that must be in line with the Paris Agreement target of either 1.50C or 20C. To be compatible with the 20C pathway, the GHG emissions from international shipping need to reach zero by 2070, but to be compatible with a more ambitious 1.50C pathway, the same has to be achieved by 2042.

The shipping industry has resolved to place the curatorship of shipping emissions within the domain of the IMO, although attempts are being made outside of the IMO and under the UNFCCC to include shipping emissions as part of the Talanoa Dialogue – a post-Paris process named after the Fijian traditional practice of consultation and consensus building.

The IMO is expected to make a submission at the Talanoa Dialogue which is designed to take stock of global emissions from all sources at the dialogue later this year. With the exception of the US, all IMO member countries have also ratified the Paris Agreement. Therefore the IMO will need to align its GHG emission reduction strategy with the Paris Agreement.

At the last IMO meeting, only 15 of the 43 African Member States and 11 of the 36 least Developed Countries were present. Far fewer members actively participated in the discussions to govern the future GHG emissions from the sector.

South Africa became a full member of the IMO in 1995 and will be participating as a member state in the April meetings. South Africa's role in climate negotiations has been viewed by the international community as being vital and we are often seen as a deal-maker in these negotiations. In contrast, in this case South Africa is seen to be non-committal in tackling GHGs at the IMO and its position tends to be wavering and often inconsistent with its positions taken at the UNFCCC.

The April meetings provide South Africa an opportunity to rectify this perception by addressing three goals. First, by providing leadership to African countries, South Africa can be the voice for the African interest which is currently under-represented.

Secondly, by making a case for an ambitious and stringent agreement in line with the Paris Agreement, South Africa will also make the case for pursuing climate justice in a sector that is yet to be aligned with the Paris Agreement.

And finally, South Africa can take this opportunity to communicate to the world that the new dispensation remains committed to its international responsibilities and is ready to contribute its fair share to tackle GHG.

By providing a strong voice, South Africa would also help secure a sector that by 2033 is expected to contribute close to 1 million jobs and between R129-billion and R177-billion to its own GDP.

Reaching an international agreement won’t be enough, but that’s the least that the April meeting should achieve. Ideally, however, IMO should be striving to reach an agreement that is compatible with the Paris Agreement’s temperature goal. To keep temperature rise well below 20C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature rise to 1.50C above pre-industrial levels, all GHG emission sources, including shipping, need to be reduced.

The sooner the shipping industry decides to reduce its emissions, the more manageable its decarbonisation would be. Early movers like Sweden have already proposed reducing 30% of their shipping emissions by 2030 (against 2010 levels) and achieving zero carbon dioxide (CO ) emissions by 2050.

Similarly, in Norway, recent advances in transport electrification are paving the way to decarbonise its marine transport by means of electrification. Reports indicate that Norway already has two ferries that are fully powered by electricity. By 2021, 60 such ferries, and by 2023 the country’s entire fleet, will either run on electricity or on hybrid technology. This could be a game changer.

South Africa's delegation has an important leadership role to play at this crucial IMO meeting. It must ensure the processes at the IMO are aligned with its positions at the UNFCCC.

It needs to be bold and reclaim the moral high-ground for its historical diplomacy in climate negotiations by persuading the shipping industry to take on the challenge of reducing its GHGs while at the same time ensuring that the race to reduce shipping global emissions is equitable, fair and just.

The opportunity to make shipping industry accountable for its emissions is now. DM

Saliem Fakir is the Head of Policy and Futures Unit at the World Wide Fund for Nature South Africa</s>Ottawa, ON — The United Nations group which regulates the international shipping industry is being asked to cut emissions from the cargo ships, oil tankers and other vessels that crisscross the world’s oceans, as they threaten to become the single-largest source of planet-warming greenhouse gases.

Canada, however, is being secretive about what it wants to see done ahead of a meeting in the United Kingdom next week that will try to set some emission-cutting targets.

A standoff is expected at the International Marine Organization meeting in London. While several countries, including those in the European Union as well as Japan and China, want significant cuts to shipping emissions, the United States, Saudi Arabia and Brazil want to move more slowly, fearing the economic impacts to the industry.

Emissions from international shipping were excluded from the Paris agreement in 2015 with the IMO promising to handle it. In 2016 the IMO said it would aim to have an interim strategy in 2018 and a final plan in 2023.

The IMO estimates that, if left unchecked, emissions from shipping could grow up to 250 per cent by 2050. Shipping emissions are not assigned to any one country, but on their own, they are bigger than the total emissions from all but the six biggest emitters — China, the United States, India, Russia, Japan and Germany.

A spokesman for Transport Canada says Canada is one of the most ambitious members of the IMO, but would give no specifics about what Canada is pressing for or what it is willing to commit to doing to cut shipping emissions.

“The government of Canada is playing a leadership role in the fight against climate change and has been amongst the most vocal and ambitious member states at the International Maritime Organization,” Pierre Manoni said in an email. “We are working with our international partners to gain consensus and develop an ambitious strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from international maritime shipping.”

Andrew Dumbrille, the sustainable shipping specialist at the World Wildlife Fund Canada, said that’s about the same response he got during a conference call with the government when he asked what they were proposing to do.

“I can’t get anything more concrete than that,” he said.

Dumbrille said Canada has been in favour of discussing short-term measures, such as reducing the speed of ships, which can be done immediately. He said cutting ship speeds can reduce emissions by as much as 30 per cent. But he says commitments on the longer-term side have been invisible, if they exist.

The WWF says the shipping industry has to cut emissions 70 to 100 per cent by 2050. That would largely come through technological improvements including better fuels. Right now the shipping industry relies on the “dirtiest fuel on the planet” said Dumbrille.

Heavy fuel oil, a byproduct of distilling gasoline, is a sludgy, tar-like substance that is half the cost of most alternatives but produces significantly more emissions, including carbon dioxide and black carbon, as well as fine particulate matter and sulphur, all of which contribute not just to global warming but to lung diseases.

It’s estimated heavy fuel oil contributes to thousands of deaths from air pollution each year.

Several countries are trying to ban the use of heavy fuel in the Arctic and reduce its use everywhere, but Canada last year asked to slow that process while it looks at economic impacts on Arctic communities.</s>Countries are meeting in an attempt to agree cuts to greenhouse gases from the global shipping industry, amid pressure on the sector to help tackle climate change.

Shipping, like aviation, is not directly included in the Paris Agreement, the international deal on global warming which was secured in the French capital in 2015 and commits countries to avoiding “dangerous” climate change.

At a meeting in London of members of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), countries are debating the action the sector should take on the issue.

The global shipping industry accounts for around 2% to 3% of international climate emissions but if countries take the action pledged under the Paris Agreement, shipping’s share will rise to as much as a fifth by 2050.

The industry has proposed that IMO members agree to cap emissions at 2008 levels, while some countries do not want any curbs, suggesting it would harm global trade.

But some Pacific island nations, such as the Marshall Islands which is threatened by rising sea levels but is also a major flag state, want emissions from shipping to fall to zero, to help keep alive the Paris Agreement pledge to pursue efforts to limit temperature rises to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

A recent study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) found maximum deployment of current known technologies, including alternative fuels, efficiency and even use of electric or wind-assisted ships, could almost completely decarbonise the sector by 2035.

The UK is pushing for zero emission shipping “as soon as possible”, with EU member states calling for a 70%-100% cut in greenhouse gases by 2050 compared to 2008 levels.

Ministers have said they want the IMO meeting to secure an “ambitious” deal that ensures international shipping does not get left behind as other sectors take action.

And they said the Government was supporting the industry in the development of green technologies and fuels, which would provide opportunities for growth for UK maritime companies.

Shipping minister Nusrat Ghani said: “The eyes of the world are upon us in what is a crucial week for the future of the shipping industry and our planet.

“Shipping has always been at the forefront of technological change, and needs a clear signal to invest in a zero emissions future.

“I urge all IMO member states to support the UK in its call for an ambitious and credible strategy that will open new opportunities in green technologies and fuels and ensure shipping plays its full part in global efforts to reduce greenhouse gases.”</s>LONDON — The United Nations maritime agency is holding a weeklong meeting aimed at curbing emissions from ships.

Environmental activists say that while shipping contributes only 2-3 of global greenhouses gases, the industry's efforts are essential to combating climate change.

Proposals at the International Maritime Organization meeting that began Monday in London include keeping emissions below 2008 levels, but some shipping nations oppose such a cap.

European Union members and other countries want a 70 to 100 reduction in greenhouse emissions by 2050. They cite a study which found that alternative fuels, wind-assisted ships and electric engines could replace shipping fuels without endangering global trade.

Proposals to cut sulfur oxide emissions and to extend to the Arctic a ban on heavy fuel oil that already covers the Antarctic also will be considered.</s>Minister of Industry, Torbjørn Røe Isaksen of Høyre (H) fears for the future of Norwegian shipping if the industry is under the EU’s climate quota system instead of a global climate agreement.

Shipping, which is not regulated by the climate agreements, accounts for a significant part of the world’s climate-changing emissions, an estimated 17%, wrote ‘ABC Nyheter’ news.

Prior to a forthcoming meeting in London of the international shipping organisation IMO, the battle is about introducing global climate goals and how ambitious these should be. Several actors want zero carbon emissions by 2035, while EU countries propose 70-100% cuts by 2050.

“Norway intends to set a target of 50% cuts in climate emissions from ships by 2050,

 compared to 2008,” said the Minister for Industry, Communications and Communications.

Norway is thus adopting a more cautious line, something Røe Isaksen thinks is best given the large Norwegian maritime industry and the competitive situation.

“This is an extremely international industry. If you have strict rules somewhere and not elsewhere, they’ll move,” he said.

If it is not possible to reach a global climate agreement for ships, the EU have announced that they will unilaterally pay European shipping by involving shipowners in the climate quota system.

‘’We will then, as a huge shipping nation, suffer a competitive disadvantage,’’ said Røe Isaksen, who with a moderate level of ambition, hopes it will be easier to get a global climate deal.</s>FILE PHOTO: FILE PHOTO: A cargo ship is silhouetted as the sun sets along the coast of Manila bay in Metro Manila Thomson Reuters By Jonathan Saul and Nina Chestney

LONDON (Reuters) - The United Nations' shipping agency is under pressure this week to agree on a plan to cut carbon emissions from the sector, following years of slow progress, but the strategy could fall well short of what is required to limit global warming.

The shipping sector, along with aviation, avoided specific emissions cut targets in a global climate pact agreed at the end of 2015, which aims to limit a global average rise in temperature to "well below" 2 degrees Celsius from 2020.

Shipping accounts for 2.2 percent of world CO2 emissions, according to the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the U.N. agency responsible for regulating pollution from ships.

This is around the amount emitted by Germany, according to the latest EU data available, and is predicted to grow significantly if left unchecked.

The European Commission estimates that air and marine transportation could contribute as much as a third of all emissions by 2050.

The IMO is meeting in London this week to develop a initial strategy to cut emissions. A final plan is not expected until 2023.

The strategy should include a global emissions reduction goal for the sector which is in line with temperature limits agreed under the global climate deal and a list of short-, mid- and long-term measures to ensure this goal is met.

A spokesman for the European Commission said EU countries, along with the Marshall Islands, support a goal of cutting emissions by 70 to 100 percent by 2050, compared with 2008 levels.

Norway has proposed a 50 percent cut by 2050, while another proposal backed by Japan - which is also chairing this week's talks - and other countries aims for a 50 percent cut by 2060.

These targets would not be ambitious enough to keep global temperature rise to "well below" 2 degrees C, some environmental groups and countries argue.

Countries such as Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Panama are also opposed to the EU's proposal of a loftier target, sources say.

A report by the OECD's transport think tank International Transport Forum last week said the maritime sector could be de-carbonised fully by as early as 2035.

The 70-100 percent reduction proposal from some European countries is unlikely to achieve broad support, said the chairman of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), which represents more than 80 percent of the world's merchant fleet.

"While ICS does not fully agree with them in every respect, alternative proposals made by China and Japan merit serious consideration and could form the basis of a possible compromise," said ICS chairman Esben Poulsson.

The Marshall Islands, the second largest flag registry in the world, is one of the countries most vulnerable to climate change. Its environment minister David Paul said on Monday there was "simply no credible reason to hesitate any longer".

The IMO has adopted mandatory rules for new vessels to boost fuel efficiency as a means of cutting CO2 from ship engines.

There have been discussions for years on wider CO2 cuts but progress has been slow, prompting calls for potential unilateral measures to be taken at regional or national level.

IMO Secretary-General Kitack Lim said last week "postponing the adoption of the initial strategy, to a future session..., should not be an option".

IMO members have set themselves a deadline to adopt the initial strategy at this week's meeting, but they could still postpone it to a later meeting if no decision is reached.

"This week is really crucial for the credibility of IMO," said member of the European Parliament Bas Eickhout.

"If this week they fail again, countries will have to take their own actions," he added.</s>Albertans who have grown increasingly concerned about the barriers facing Canada’s energy industry have even more reason to despair.

It’s well known that Canada’s regulatory environment is among the most robust in the world, ensuring the highest regard for the environment, including limiting greenhouse gas emissions. In recent years, Alberta has imposed a carbon tax and capped oilsands emissions in the naive hope of securing so-called social license for pipeline development. Everyone knows how that has turned out.

An ocean away, the United Nations body that regulates the international shipping industry is meeting in London this week to see if it can agree on a strategy to reduce emissions from the cargo ships, oil tankers and other vessels that traverse the planet’s oceans. This is serious work, because such emissions were excluded from the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015.

This means that when Eastern Canada buys its fuel from countries such as Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, Nigeria and Angola, the oil isn’t just produced using less rigorous environmental standards than those in Canada. It also means the oil tankers that transport foreign oil to our shores aren’t subjected to controls on their greenhouse gas emissions.

The UN’s International Maritime Organization says such vessels risk becoming the single-largest source of planet-warming greenhouse gases. And yet Eastern Canadians welcome the tankers with open arms, while vehemently opposing Canadian pipelines.

If action isn’t taken, the organization says emissions from shipping could grow by up to 250 per cent by 2050. International shipping emissions are not assigned to any one country, according to The Canadian Press, but on their own, they are higher than the total emissions from all but the six biggest national emitters — China, the United States, India, Russia, Japan and Germany.

The UN group said in 2016 it would aim to have an interim plan in place this year, but the target for a final strategy isn’t until 2023 — that’s another five years of unfettered pollution, at best.

It’s an indignity that Albertans and their economy have been placed in a straitjacket for no apparent purpose by Premier Rachel Notley and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

The federal government even changed the rules recently to require future pipeline projects to calculate the upstream and downstream environmental emissions — which is pollution produced during extraction and when the fuel is burned in vehicles.

No such burden is placed on Eastern Canadian car makers or plane manufacturers, of course. Or on ships that deliver foreign oil to Eastern ports. Alberta is being unfairly treated.
The International Maritime Organisation commences meetings in London aimed at reducing emissions in the shipping industry, which are presently unregulated. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol made the IMO responsible for controlling ship emissions.