Not extending a ban on heavy oil fuel to the Arctic mars passage of a set of rules that conservation groups are generally satisfied with.
May 15, 2015 - 5:14pm - By Kevin McGwin
Environmental requirements for sailing in polar waters approved by a UN body today are being welcomed by conservation groups as a good initial step to limiting the impact of increased traffic in the Arctic and Antarctic, even as a key environmental demand was left out.
The second part of the Polar Code, adopted today by the International Maritime Organisation, a London-based group that sets maritime rules, include provisions against such things as dumping trash near shore and discharging oil as well as a requirement that oil tanks be separated from the outer hull of the ship.
However, environmental groups had been pushing for a ban on heavy fuel oils, also known as bunker, which they warn are an especially powerful triple threat to the climate, the marine environment and human health.
Kevin Harun, the Arctic programme director for Pacific Environment, a conservation group, congratulated the IMO for passing the rules, but called on the group to begin second phase of rule-setting immediately in order to address the Polar Code’s short-comings.
In addition to heavy fuel oil, he said a lack of spill response and an inability to enforce the regulations were two of the biggest failures of the environmental rules.
The need for governing polar navigation have become increasingly necessary as retreating sea ice creates new opportunities for shipping and other marine-based commercial activity in the Arctic and Antarctic.
In the Arctic, investment is expected to exceed $100 billion within the next decade, reckons Lloyd’s of London, an insurer. Much of that money will go into oil and gas extraction and shipping, both to and from the region, as well as in the form of an alternate shipping lane to Asia, that in some cases offers a savings of up to 40% on sailing distances.
However, that additional traffic is not without a potential environmental or human cost. Should ships be involved in an accident, there is little infrastructure in the area to provide environmental response or conduct search and rescue operations.
Most worrisome of all is the potential that one of those ships cold spill heavy fuel oil, something the Arctic Council has identified biggest threat to marine resources in the region, since it is more difficult to clean and does not evaporate as readily as other types of oil.
Scientists, meanwhile worry that the soot from heavy fuel oil is a key contributor to climate change, since it darkens snow and ice, making it absorb more energy and melt faster. The air pollution it creates also fouls local air quality, making it a potential health hazard for people living in the region, according to a study released earlier this year by the International Council on Clean Transportation, a think tank.
Heavy fuel oil has been banned in the Antarctic since 2010, and environmental groups had hoped the IMO would extend the requirement to the Arctic Ocean.
Arctic coastal states already have rules protecting their territorial waters, but until now international polar waters had been without a comprehensive set of rules, even if many shippers already lived up to similar regulations, either voluntarily or because their insurers required them to do so.
Today’s adoption of the Polar Code’s environmental component comes after the IMO adopted a safety component, dictating rules for things like equipment, training and hull strength, in December.
Also those rules were seen as an insufficient, but necessary, first step by environmental groups and insurers, such as Lloyd’s of London, which last year announced that it would implement its own supplementary rules.
The full Polar Code will apply to new ships constructed built after 2016. Ships built earlier will need to meet as well, but not until a later date.
If consevation groups have their way, the longer they wait the more rules they will have to abide by.