Energy Efficiency

International Maritime Organisation is the UN body that polices the world’s shipping and you may thinking thats a good thing; however, truth be known, that while the UN postures about climate change and mans contribution to global warming.

Previously I wrote of a surplus of oil reserves being built up by various countries and that many container ships have likewise been parked around the world, waiting for oil prices to rise so they can make more money (of course).

Anyway, it turns out that over 50 oil tankers are anchored off the coast of Britain, refusing to unload their fuel until prices have risen.

But that’s not really the problem, as science writer Fred Pearce (environmental consultant to New Scientist) says; he suggest that the super-ships that keep the West in everything from Christmas gifts to computers, pump out killer chemicals linked to thousands of deaths because of the filthy fuel they use.

The filthy black smoke kicked out by funnels on ferries, cruise liners, container ships, oil tankers and even tugboats, that leaves a brown haze across ports and shipping lanes is toxic pollution. As ships get bigger, the pollution is getting worse and perhaps the biggest shock is that just 16 of the world’s largest ships can produce as much lung-clogging sulphur pollution as all the world’s cars.  

Unlike power stations or cars, ships burn the cheapest, filthiest, high-sulphur fuel, the thick residues left behind in refineries after the lighter liquids have been taken; oil nobody on land is allowed to use. Thanks to decisions taken in London by UN’s International Maritime Organisation (the body that polices world shipping), this pollution continues to kill people as well as marine life, when a simple change in the rules could stop it. There are some 100,000 ships on the seas, taking goods from Asian industrial nations to consumers in Europe, the USA and Australia to name the major addicts.

But the ships work on being cost effective, and ships that bring Christmas presents to Europe are now en route to Yantian in southern China, carrying containers full of our waste paper, plastic and electronics for recycling. This trade-route burns marine heavy fuel, or `bunker fuel’ which leaves behind a trail of lethal chemicals inclduing sulphur and smoke linked to breathing problems, inflammation, cancer and heart disease.

For decades the IMO has rebuffed calls to clean up ship pollution; while it’s long been illegal to belch black, sulphur-laden smoke from power-station chimneys or trucks, shipping has kept its licence to pollute. For 31 years, the IMO has operated a policy agreed by the 169 governments that make up the organisation which allows most ships to burn bunker fuel; waste oil, basically what is left over after all the cleaner fuels have been extracted from crude oil; the same as asphalt, the cheapest and dirtiest fuel in the world which is thick with sulphur.

The IMO rules allow ships to burn fuel containing up to 4.5 per cent sulphur, 4,500 times more than is allowed in car fuel in the EU (European Union); sulphur comes out in tiny particles and it is these that get deep into lungs. The largest ships can each emit as much as 5,000 tons of sulphur in a year, the same as 50million typical cars.  There is an estimated 800 million cars driving around the planet, which means 16 super-ships can emit as much sulphur as the world fleet of cars.

The IMO purports to be cleaning up shipping, by having fuel contain no more than 3.5 per cent sulphur by 2012 and eventually down to 0.5 per cent; problem is the IMO has given shipping lines 12 years to make the switch; and then, it will depend on a final feasibility review in 2018.

We have run out of time, contact your federal member to insist the the Australian government does something to address this low profile polluting. Why should international shipping and aviation be exempt from the Kyoto Protocol rules on cutting carbon emissions ? Airlines have promised to cut emissions by 50 per cent by 2050 and orders are in for more fuel efficinet / better quality fuel air planes.  

The reason shipping has been ‘successful’ in avoiding changing over is they claim they can’t afford it; two thirds of the world’s ships are registered in developing countries such as Panama; carying flags of convenience to evade tougher rules on safety and pay for sailors.