Interferry Challenged on E.U. Air Emissions

Interferry’s 40th annual conference in Copenhagen earlier this month stirred debate over the industry’s approach to air emissions.

Michael Cramer, German chair of the European Parliament’s transport and tourism committee, delivered a stinging opening address demanding that the ferry and shipping sectors become more environmentally sustainable. He said, “most vessels are like hazardous waste incinerators because they burn heavy fuel oil which should be processed as highly toxic waste but is usually exhaled without sufficient filtering.” He alleged that, according to recent studies, this caused 50,000 premature deaths per year in Europe at an annual cost to society of 58 billion euros.     

Cramer conceded that the carbon footprint of a ton of goods carried by ship was lower than any other transport mode. He also acknowledged that some shipowners had already acted to reduce emissions, but called for the industry to explore further technological and operational measures.

Cramer illustrated his concerns over shipping’s “decisive role” in air pollution with a string of statistics. He said that 70 percent of global maritime emissions came within 400km of coastlines, with vessels operating at E.U. ports accounting for up to 30 percent of worldwide CO2 shipping emissions.  

Global shipping produced more than one billion tons of CO2 per year. This amounted to three percent of world greenhouse gas emissions and was expected to reach six percent by 2020 unless an ambitious framework was set at the highest level. “The IMO proves that significant steps are possible,” said Cramer. “At the same time, the larger the forum is, the more difficult it gets to establish common standards.”  

Expressing sincere regret that Europe did not emulate the U.S. and Canada in establishing Emissions Control Areas legislation for the whole continent, he stressed: “Every next step we take has to be decided if not on a global then at least on a common European level…the sooner the better.” 

He suggested that Europe could show the world what was possible, pointing out that a European Commission-inspired monitoring, reporting and verification system for CO2 emissions was set to come into force in 2018 for all ships over 5,000gt calling at EU ports - with an anticipated two percent per voyage emissions reduction.                    

Future improvements in environmental performance would depend on strong control mechanisms and a fundamental change of outlook on mobility – which Cramer summarized as moving from oil-based fuels to zero-emission renewables such as solar and wind power, allied with better route planning, distribution and capacity utilization. He said existing technologies could lower CO2 emissions by 75 percent while simply reducing speed by 10 percent could cut energy use by some 19 percent.

Remarking that “complaining is part of your trade,” Cramer argued that the industry’s regulatory worries had not been confirmed. In fact, as shown by the need to adapt to the sulfur rules, they had inspired “something in the shipping sector we have missed for many years – the spirit of innovation.” He said the E.U. was providing record financial support for smarter transport projects - 26 billion euros up to 2020 – including “a lot of money” for shipping.

He concluded: “I see great potential in the shipping sector to contribute to changed mobility, especially in the ferry sector. We will do our best to encourage you further by supporting your innovative ideas on getting shipping more sustainable and promoting further integration to other transport modes.”

Interferry regulatory affairs director Johan Roos told delegates: “I think Mr Cramer and his E.U. colleagues have their hearts in the right places, but where we differ is how to get there.  If fuel prices hadn’t dropped it would be a different picture right now. We have seen the E.U.’s political will to push on with its plans, and we have to be ready for that.”

In a later statement he added: “We are working closely with E.U. officials to agree realistic solutions to our shared long-term aims on emissions. However, realism can be forgotten when our proposals go before the politicians. Their unpredictability is truly frightening because all too often decisions ignore the vast real-world cost implications for our industry.  Companies could definitely go out of business and, ironically, a key element of the transport infrastructure would be dangerously weakened to the detriment of green goals.” 

Regulations: Let’s Talk

The battleground over environmental regulations in northern Europe was mapped out in a panel debate representing owners and authorities.

Patrick Verhoven, secretary general of the European Community Shipowners’ Associations, complained that operators had invested in scrubber equipment in good faith only to find that another E.U. department was questioning whether it was allowed. He criticized the “eternal dilemma” about the E.U. wanting to add another level to international regulations with “little appreciation of what is going on at the IMO.”  

He went on: “We need to explain much better the good work being done there and take away the distrust among members of the European Parliament.” Politicians had forgotten that shortsea shipping was meant to be an alternative to road transport – it was a mode that could help in the sustainability story but there was definitely not a level playing field. 

DFDS sustainability director Poul Woodall asked: “Is it fair that we are saving 300,000 tons of sulfur emissions in Europe but it’s costing 30 million tons of CO2 instead? And how many non-invasive species are we going to kill under the ballast water convention?”

Leanne Page, an environmental policy specialist at the U.K. Maritime and Coastguard Agency and lead advisor on ballast water management, said: “It doesn’t have to be confrontational, we have to have cooperation. The bar was set high ten years ago and the challenges were testing, but the equipment is now available and we are in a much more positive place.” Asked whether economic impact was taken into account on such issues, she countered: “You have to broaden your understanding of this, it’s not just about yourselves.  Shipping companies’ idea of a benefit is different to our assessment of the value to society as a whole, such as the reduced burden on health services.”

Emphasizing the health benefits of reduced emissions, Danish Maritime Authority deputy head Christian Breinholt urged shipping not to forget there were good reasons for such regulations. “It’s a gain for society but a pain for owners,” he confessed. “Don’t fight against it. You put all your efforts into avoiding regulations. Don’t waste the first five years – get in early in the regulatory cycle and help shape it with a positive attitude.”

Len Roueche – Interferry, Canada, John Steen-Mikkelsen – Danske Færger, Denmark, Michael Cramer – Chair: Committee on Transport and Tourism, European Parliament, Germany

Poul Woodall – DFDS, Denmark, Patrick Verhoeven – ECSA, Belgium, Christian Breinholt – Danish Maritime Authority, Denmark, Leanne Page – MCA, U.K.