While maintaining the safety of life at sea will always be our paramount priority, the protection of the environment is also of the utmost importance.  The need to play our part in protecting the world in which we all live should be self-evident – this is not just a matter of political correctness or ‘greenwash’.  However, in view of the expectations of the public at large, and the huge financial liabilities those involved in shipping can face if things go wrong, improving shipping’s environmental performance is still a matter of enlightened self-interest, even if seen only from a purely commercial perspective.

As will be explained further on, the Shipping Industry has much to be proud of in terms of its environmental performance.

However, despite such performance and the justifiable claim, that it is the cleanest mode of commercial transport, society will always continue to expect more until the goal of zero accidents – and zero pollution – is achieved.  Above all else, and notwithstanding the considerable improvement to the Industry’s record that we have seen in recent years, shipping must be careful to avoid the trap of complacency.

There are always new lessons to be learned.

Issues Requiring Technical Solutions

What then are the specific areas of Shipping’s environmental performance for which further technical solutions are needed?  I would briefly like to focus on four key issues – oil pollution, ballast water management, atmospheric pollution, and CO2 emissions.

 

Oil Pollution

Until relatively recently, a major concern of society has been the prevention of oil pollution.  While major accidents can sadly still happen, there has undoubtedly been a dramatic reduction in the number of serious spills by shipping.

Reasons for Improvement

To a large extent, of course, these improvements are due to technical and operational improvements, including greatly improved standards of ship construction and maintenance, and the successful enforcement of relevant IMO Conventions.   But it is also important not to underestimate the influence of industry best practices, and adherence to standard procedures developed jointly by the shipping and oil industries, as well as Shipping’s commitment to the concept of ‘continuous improvement’ as embodied in the ISM Code, which applies to environmental performance as much as safety.

Technical Improvements to Reduce Oil Pollution

That said, there is always more that can be done on the technical front.  The recent adoption by IMO of Goal-Based Standards for ship construction, and the parallel introduction by the classification societies of their Common Structural Rules, should do much to help make ship designs even safer and fit for purpose.

However, as well as preventing ships’ oil tanks from being ruptured, technical solutions are also needed to prevent operational pollution, not least, I would suggest, with regard to improving the design of oily water separators which continue to be problematic.

 

Ballast Water Management

Another major challenge confronting ships is how to comply with the IMO Ballast Water Management Convention, which is expected to enter into force in the next two years or so.  The damage caused to local ecosystems by the importation of alien marine species is of course very serious.

The problem, however, is that the IMO Convention, adopted in 2004, was primarily a political response by governments involving the adoption of aspirational and extremely ambitious standards for the removal of unwanted organisms from ballast water before the technology to do so had been properly developed.  Even now, there is a shortage of type-approved equipment that meets the agreed IMO Guidelines.  The problem is further compounded by nations, such as the United States, proposing ‘kill standards’ in their own legislation which are 100 times stricter than that required by the IMO Convention, and for which there will almost certainly be no equipment available soon.  It is not that Shipping has anything against stricter rules, they will embrace them, provided that the technology and hence affordable equipment exists.

 

Atmospheric Pollution

Perhaps the most pressing environmental challenge confronting shipowners – at least in terms of its financial impact – will be meeting the requirements under MARPOL Annex VI for the use of low sulfur fuel, to prevent atmospheric pollution and the attendant risks to human health.

For the majority of ships, this will require a switch – in so-called Emission Control Areas – to the use of distillate fuel, particularly after 2015 when sulfur content of fuel used in ECAs must be reduced to just 0.1%.  The Baltic and the North Sea, and an area within 200 nautical miles of the coasts of the United States and Canada, have already been designated as ECAs, and others are expected to follow.

The primary problem for shipping will be the availability of the new fuels across the globe and whether oil refiners, which have their own technical issues to address, will be able to meet the demand in all areas worldwide.  There will also be other problems to consider such as the effects of low sulfur fuel on the efficient operation of ships’ engines.  Other issues to overcome will be for those ships which need to switch their fuel supply when moving in and out of Emission Control Areas from the open sea where different fuel standards apply.  This is a matter of safety.

CO2 Emissions

Last but not least is perhaps the greatest challenge of our age, the need to reduce CO2 emissions due to the danger of climate change – although the Shipping Industry is already very carbon-efficient in comparison to other transport modes.

The IMO Package of Technical Measures

IMO has already adopted a package of technical measures for reducing shipping’s CO2 emissions.  This includes the development of a system of energy efficiency design indexing for new ships (similar in concept to the ratings applied to cars and electrical appliances) and a template for a Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan for use by all ships.  The SEEMP allows companies and ships to monitor and improve performance with regard to various factors that may contribute to CO2 emissions.  These include – amongst other things – improved voyage planning, speed management, weather routing, and optimizing engine power.

Long Term Challenges

I am confident that IMO will adopt mandatory technical measures to reduce shipping’s CO2 emissions at an important meeting in three weeks’ time.  With respect to the CO2 emitted by ships, per tonne of cargo transported one kilometer, and without wishing to make firm commitments, it is probably not unrealistic to suggest that emissions might be reduced by between 15-20% by 2020.   However, regardless of whatever progress can be made in the immediate future, if politicians decide to adopt ambitious targets for emission reductions for the decades ahead, far more radical technical solutions are likely to be needed.  For the moment we remain dependent on fossil fuels.

It is however worth pausing to reflect on some of the options with regard to alternative fuels.

Alternative Fuels

Renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, may have their place in helping to meet some ancillary requirements, such as lighting onboard ships. However, for the moment at least, they are not practical for providing sufficient power to operate the ships’ main engines (the huge physical size of ships, should not be underestimated).

Fuel cells may be a possibility for new ships in the very long term, although they are currently too limited in range to offer a viable solution.

Nuclear propulsion for merchant ships is technically feasible, although safety, security implications, and support infrastructure costs, would require very serious consideration.

The current assumption, therefore, remains that ships will continue to burn fossil fuels for the foreseeable future and that the most significant means of reducing CO2 emissions will be achieved by further improvements in fuel efficiency.

Technical Advances are Hard to Predict

I have tried to highlight some environmental challenges where technical solutions are urgently needed.  However, it is always important to be optimistic.  There may well be some new technology around the corner that we cannot yet anticipate – how many people, just 20 years ago, would have foreseen the potential of the internet or mobile phones?  There may yet be technical jumps ahead akin to the switch from sail to steam.