An international body that regulates worldwide shipping has agreed to stop the use of a highly polluting fuel in the Arctic.

But the International Maritime Organization will wait to implement a ban on heavy fuel oil until its impact on northern communities is complete, a caveat inserted at Canada's request.

The organization will "develop a ban on (heavy fuel oil) for use and carriage as fuel by ships in Arctic waters, on an appropriate time scale," said a spokesman for the United Nations-sponsored group from London, where meetings were taking place.

The organization also passed a proposal to force the shipping industry to cut its emissions in half by the middle of the century.

Heavy fuel oil, called by some the dirtiest fuel on the planet, presents major spill concerns.

"On land, it is considered hazardous waste," said Kendra Ulrich of Stand.Earth, who was in London to observe the meetings.

Heavy fuel oil is also a major source of black carbon, which is considered a significant driver behind climate change because it darkens snow and ice and causes it to melt faster.

But because the soot doesn't remain long in the environment, getting rid of it can result in quick improvements.

Heavy fuel oil is already banned in the Antarctic.

The ban will now go to a separate committee which will develop concrete proposals to implement the ban. It will also consider how to ensure the ban doesn't increase the cost of shipping to remote Arctic communities, in response to concerns from Canada.

"They are moving forward with a ban," said Ulrich. "It's really just a question of when."

Reducing emissions

Her group is pressing the organization to move quickly, but Ulrich said the earliest a ban could be in place would be 2021.

"We're looking at a huge stride forward, but these international bodies move slowly."

The organization, with Canada's support, also supported a proposal to require ships in international waters to reduce emissions to 50 per cent below what they were in 2008 by mid-century.

Only the United States and Saudi Arabia voted against the idea.

"Canada welcomes the agreement reached on an initial strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from international maritime shipping," said Transport Canada spokeswoman Delphine Denis.

"Canada will work with international partners to turn attention to developing concrete measures to ensure the initial greenhouse gas strategy begins to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from international maritime shipping as soon as possible."</s>LONDON (Reuters) - The United Nations shipping agency reached an agreement on Friday to cut carbon emissions, following years of slow progress.

FILE PHOTO: Shipping containers are being loaded onto Xin Da Yang Zhou ship from Shanghai, China at Pier J at the Port of Long Beach in Long Beach, California, U.S., April 4, 2018. REUTERS/Bob Riha Jr.

The compromise plan, which will cut emissions by at least 50 percent by 2050 compared with 2008 levels, fell short of more ambitious targets.

Kitack Lim, Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), said the adoption of the strategy “would allow future IMO work on climate change to be rooted in a solid basis”.

The IMO said it would also be pursuing efforts toward phasing out CO2 emissions entirely.

Delegates said opposition from some countries - including the United States, Saudi Arabia and Panama - had limited what could be achieved at the IMO session this week in London.

“The IMO should and could have gone a lot further,” said Bill Hemmings, shipping director with green campaigners Transport & Environment.

“This decision puts shipping on a promising track.”

Greenpeace International political adviser Veronica Frank said the plan was “far from perfect but the direction is now clear - a phase-out of carbon emissions”.

“This decarbonisation must start now and targets improved along the way, because without concrete, urgent measures to cut emissions from shipping now, the Paris ambition to limit warming to 1.5 degrees will become swiftly out of reach,” Frank said.

Shipping association BIMCO in contrast described it as a “landmark achievement”.

Kathi Stanzel, managing director of tanker association INTERTANKO, added: “It is the culmination of international efforts to develop both ambitious and concrete plans to respond to the challenge of our century.”

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

HIGHER TARGETS

European Union countries along with the Marshall Islands, the world’s second-biggest ship registry, had supported a goal of cutting emissions by 70 to 100 percent by 2050, compared with 2008 levels.

Europe’s transport commissioner Violeta Bulc and climate commissioner Miguel Arias Canete said in a joint statement while the EU had “sought a higher level of ambition, this is a good starting point that will allow for further review and improvements over time”.

British-based research group InfluenceMap said an emissions cut of 70 percent would have been “much closer to what is needed if shipping is to be in line with the goals of the Paris agreement”.

Shipping accounts for 2.2 percent of world CO2 emissions, according to the 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 IMO has adopted mandatory rules for new vessels to boost fuel efficiency as a means of cutting CO2 from ship engines.

A final IMO plan is not expected until 2023.

According to the text produced by the IMO working group submitted to member states, the initial strategy would not be legally binding for member states.

The text separately pointed to possible medium-term measures to address emissions that could include low-carbon and zero-carbon fuels, improved energy efficiency for new and existing ships and possible market-based mechanisms to encourage the shift to lower-carbon fuels.

It also said its final strategy should be subject to a review in 2028.

Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine said the country’s delegation had “fought hard” for the outcome.

“While it may not be enough to give my country the certainty it wanted, it makes it clear that international shipping will now urgently reduce emissions and play its part in giving my country a pathway to survival,” Heine said.</s>Environmental groups and northern Indigenous communities are applauding a move by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to work towards banning the use of the highly polluting heavy fuel oil from Arctic shipping and are calling on member states to adopt and implement the ban by 2021.

Members states of the UN specialized agency agreed to plans to develop a ban on heavy fuel oil (HFO), also known as bunker oil, from Arctic shipping, along with an assessment of the impacts of such a ban, during the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC72) meeting, which concluded Friday in London.

The global maritime regulator also agreed to climate targets for the sector, as part of its first comprehensive greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) reduction strategy and to tackle the growing problem of plastics in the ocean.

The meeting directed the sub-committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR) to develop a ban on heavy fuel oil use and carriage for use by ships in the Arctic, “on the basis of an assessment of the impacts” and “on an appropriate timescale.”

Already banned in the Antarctic

The use of HFOs is already banned in the Antarctic. Several environmental and Indigenous groups have been campaigning for a similar ban in the Arctic.

“Thanks to inspired and motivated action taken by a number of IMO member states to move towards a ban on heavy fuel oil, Arctic communities and ecosystems will be protected from the threat of oil spills, and the impact of black carbon emissions,” said Sian Prior, lead advisor to the Clean Arctic Alliance, a coalition of 18 non-governmental organisations working to end HFO use as marine fuel in Arctic waters.

“A ban is the simplest and most effective way to mitigate the risks of HFO – and now we’re calling on the IMO to ensure that this ban will be in place by 2021.”

Alaskan Verner Wilson, senior oceans campaigner for Friends of the Earth U.S., said the ban would help protect Arctic communities and their traditional way of life.

“For thousands of years we have relied on our pristine waters and wildlife – and now the IMO has taken this important step to help protect our people and environment,” said Verner, a member of Curyung Tribal Council, with Yupik family roots in the Bering Strait region between Russia and the U.S.

Andrew Dumbrille, a World Wildlife Fund Canada specialist in sustainable shipping, said it is now not a question of ‘if’ but rather ‘when’ a ban on HFO should be put in place.

“With the Arctic facing growing risks from oil spills and black carbon emissions from ships, the marine sector needs to quickly transition away from polluting fuels like HFO,” Dumbrille said.

“WWF calls on member states to make every effort to adopt and rapidly implement a ban by 2021, without burdening communities with the costs.”

The proposal to ban HFO as shipping fuel from Arctic waters — which would be mandatory for all ships operating under the International Convention for Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) — was co-sponsored by Finland, Germany, Iceland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and United States.

While agreeing that “the threat of an accidental oil spill in Arctic waters remains the most significant threat from ships to the Arctic marine environment,” Canada, on the other hand, had urged the IMO to consider “economic and other impacts to Arctic communities associated with the restriction or phase-out of heavy fuel in Arctic waters.”
• Inuit activist blasts Canada’s foot-dragging on dirty fuels ban in the Arctic

It appears the IMO plan is a compromise between the Finnish and Canadian proposals, Dumbrille said.

The combined Finish-Canadian proposal was supported by Australia, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Ireland, Japan, the League of Arab States, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, and the U.K.

“What everybody wants is a ban that doesn’t pass on the costs to Arctic communities,” Dumbrille said in a phone interview from London.

Support from Denmark is particularly notable as it is the sixth Arctic nation to support the ban, said Dumbrille.

Kåre Press-Kristensen, senior advisor in the Danish Ecological Council, the next step will be to engage Greenland further in planning and preparing for the ban.

Russia is not completely on board

However, Russia, the largest Arctic power, is yet agree to the ban.

“Russia has basically said the ban is a measure of last resort,” Dumbrille said. “They’ve put forward a number of other potential mitigation measures like routing around sensitive areas, but still using and carrying HFO.”

The MEPC will meet again in October to further discuss the ban and the impact assessment reports, Dumbrille said.

Following that, the PPR sub-committee will meet in February 2019 to develop a definition of HFO and prepare a set of guidelines on mitigation measures to reduce risks of use and carriage of HFO as fuel by ships in Arctic waters.

Heavy fuel oil is the cheapest and the dirtiest marine fuel, accounting for 80 per cent of all fuels used in maritime shipping, according to a report by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT).

Heavy fuel oil – a thick viscous residual fuel that produces high amounts of soot, particulate matter and black carbon – was also the most consumed marine fuel in the Arctic in 2015, the report said.

Although only 42 per cent of ships in the Arctic waters covered by the IMO’s Polar Code operated on HFO in 2015, these ships accounted for 76 per cent of fuel carried and 56 per cent of fuel transported in this region, the ICCT report said.

In addition to its toxicity, HFO is extremely viscous and breaks down more slowly in the marine environment than other fuels, particularly in colder regions like the Arctic, according to IMO documents.

“Studies show that while 90 per cent of HFO remains after 20 days in the ocean, marine diesel can take as few as three days to break down,” the documents said.

HFO’s persistence makes it more likely that any spill will eventually reach and pollute the shoreline, the report said.</s>An international body that regulates worldwide shipping has agreed to ban the use of a highly polluting fuel in the Arctic.

After meetings in London, the International Maritime Organization has agreed it will eventually phase out the use of heavy fuel oil.

The fuel presents major spill concerns and is the source of black carbon, or soot, that speeds up the melt of Arctic sea ice.

The UN-sponsored body will now assess possible impacts on Arctic communities and come up with a way to implement a ban.

Kendra Ulrich, who has been monitoring the talks for the environmental group Stand.Earth, says that could happen within three years.

She called the agreement a major victory which has been years in the making.</s>OTTAWA — The Canadian government is on board with an international proposal passed this week to force the shipping industry to cut its emissions in half by the middle of the century.

The International Marine Organization is also directing its policy-makers to craft a document to ban heavy fuel oil — known as the dirtiest fuel source on the planet — from being used in the Arctic, while taking into account the impacts of such a ban on Arctic communities.

Although Canada has been publicly quiet about its position in the debate over shipping emissions that went on this week in London, the government ultimately supported the proposal to require ships in international waters to reduce emissions to 50 per cent below what they were in 2008 by mid-century.

Only the United States and Saudi Arabia voted against the idea.</s>OTTAWA – The Canadian government is on board with an international proposal passed this week to force the shipping industry to cut its emissions in half by the middle of the century.

The International Marine Organization is also directing its policy-makers to craft a document to ban heavy fuel oil — known as the dirtiest fuel source on the planet — from being used in the Arctic, while taking into account the impacts of such a ban on Arctic communities.

Although Canada has been publicly quiet about its position in the debate over shipping emissions that went on this week in London, the government ultimately supported the proposal to require ships in international waters to reduce emissions to 50 per cent below what they were in 2008 by mid-century.

Only the United States and Saudi Arabia voted against the idea.

Canada pushed for a phase-down rather than an outright ban on heavy fuel oil while the impact on the Arctic is addressed, as the fuel is less than half the cost of other options and replacing it could raise already high prices for food and supplies in the North

International shipping emissions are not assigned to individual countries and were omitted from the Paris climate change agreement, as the marine organization pledged to deal with the matter on its own.</s>OTTAWA — An international body that regulates worldwide shipping has agreed to stop the use of a highly polluting fuel in the Arctic.

But the International Maritime Organization will wait to implement a ban on heavy fuel oil until its impact on northern communities is complete, a caveat inserted at Canada's request.

The organization will "develop a ban on (heavy fuel oil) for use and carriage as fuel by ships in Arctic waters, on an appropriate time scale," said a spokesman for the United Nations-sponsored group from London, where meetings were taking place.

The organization also passed a proposal to force the shipping industry to cut its emissions in half by the middle of the century.</s>Members of the UN International Maritime Organisation on April 13 struck a deal to halve carbon dioxide emissions from shipping by 2050 in a deal that will force the industry to redesign fleets.

"The initial strategy envisages for the first time a reduction in total GHG (Greenhouse Gas) emissions by at least 50% by 2050 compared to 2008," the IMO said in a statement.

Major shipping nations such as Saudi Arabia and the United States had objected to earlier drafts in two weeks of discussion at the 173-member organization based in London.

Some countries such as the Marshall Islands, which are at risk of rising seas but are also a major flag state, had wanted a stronger commitment and the EU wanted a 70% to 100% cut.

But the agreement was widely hailed by stakeholders.

"This is a ground-breaking agreement -- a Paris agreement for shipping -- that sets a very high level of ambition for the future reduction of carbon dioxide emissions," the International Chamber for Shipping's secretary general Peter Hinchliffe said.

"We are confident this will give the shipping industry the clear signal it needs to get on with the job of developing zero carbon dioxide fuels so that the entire sector will be in a position to decarbonize completely," he said.

"Today the IMO has made history. While it may not be enough to give my country the certainty it wanted, it makes it clear that international shipping will now urgently reduce emissions and play its part in giving my country a pathway to survival," she said..

Maersk, the world's largest container shipping company, tweeted: "We were pushing for stronger targets but still a great step that IMO seeks to halve the shipping sector's greenhouse gases by 2050".

Shipping and aviation are two sectors that were not covered by the United Nations climate agreement, a deal struck in Paris in 2015 to cap global warming at "well under" 2.0 degrees Celsius by the end of this century.

The aviation sector reached an emissions plan two years ago but shipping has taken longer because its reliance on long-distance ships that run on bunker fuel makes it harder to cut carbon.

Shipping accounts for around 2% of global carbon emissions and that share could rise to around 15% if left unchecked, according to the World Bank.

The Climate Action Network said the deal was "a welcome first step".

Some environmental groups have warned that a 50% cut may not be enough to keep global warming below 2.0 degrees Celsius.

Britain's Shipping Minister Nusrat Ghani said the deal was a "watershed moment".

"We will work with fellow member states to ensure the shipping industry makes the transition to zero emissions ships as quickly as possible," she said.</s>London — Most of the world’s countries have agreed to a mandatory deal that, for the first time, will limit emissions from the global shipping industry.

After a week of negotiations at a London meeting of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), a UN body, envoys from 173 countries agreed to cut emissions by at least 50% by 2050 from 2008 levels. Saudi Arabia, the US and Russia all objected.

The accord is a significant step in the fight against global warming. Shipping, the only industry not included in the 2015 Paris climate agreement, would rank as the sixth-largest greenhouse gas emitter if it were a country, according to the World Bank. If left unchecked, that share could account for 15% of global carbon emissions by 2050, a five-fold increase from today.

"It is likely this target will tighten further, but even with the lowest level of ambition, the shipping industry will require rapid technological changes," said Tristan Smith, a reader at University College London’s Energy Institute.

Vessels typically burn heavy fuel oil, one of the cheapest but also among the dirtiest fossil fuels. The industry wasn’t included in the Paris agreement because each country presented an individual plan to reduce their own emissions, while the seas were left out.

Friday’s agreement commits to pursuing emission cuts that will be consistent with the Paris deal goals.

Reducing the industry’s emissions has been a hotly contested issue. One of the most vociferous proponents of emission controls have been the Pacific island nations, where rising sea levels are already swallowing up land, and the rate is expected to increase in the coming decades.

Other countries have resisted targets. Oil-producing nations including Saudi Arabia have expressed concern about the impact of the measures on their fuel supply business, while Brazil and Argentina have said controls could penalise countries that are far from the world’s main consumer hubs.

This isn’t the first time the IMO has tried to be cleaner.

Six years ago, the organisation adopted design requirements to make new vessels more energy efficient. More than 70% of container ships built between 2013 and 2017 exceed the standard, which sets limits on carbon emissions per ship, according to analysis from Transport & Environment, a Belgian NGO.

"Making new ships emit less carbon dioxide is the most obvious way to de-carbonise the sector because ships have long lifetimes, usually around 25 to 30 years," said Faig Abbasov, a shipping officer at Transport & Environment. "If you don’t build new ships more efficiently, those ships will still be sailing around in the middle of the century."</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 two per cent to three per cent 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 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

A recent study by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation 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 per cent 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.
The International Maritime Organisation announces agreements to reduce shipping emissions by 50% of 2008 levels by 2050, and to ban heavy fuel oil from the Arctic.