2. ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS FROM SEA-GOING
SHIPS
(24065)
14933/02 ADD 1
COM(02) 595
|
Commission Communication: "A European Union strategy to reduce atmospheric emissions from sea going ships".
Draft Directive amending Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur content of marine fuels.
|
| Legal base: | (a) —
(b) Article 175(1) EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Document originated: | 20 November 2002
|
| Deposited in Parliament: | 6 December 2002
|
| Department: | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration: | EM of 15 January 2003
|
| Previous Committee Report: | None
|
| To be discussed in Council: | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment: | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision: | Not cleared; further information awaited
|
Background
2.1 According to the Commission, the Community has already
done a great deal to reduce atmospheric emissions from land-based
sources, in order to address such problems as air pollution, climate
change and ozone depletion. Nevertheless, it says that, despite
the benefits this has produced, some of the problems are becoming
more serious, and it notes that emissions from ships in sea areas
around the Community are now relatively high and offer more scope
for achieving further reductions. It has therefore set out in
this document a Community strategy for reducing such emissions,
together with proposals for specific measures regarding the sulphur
content of marine fuels.
The Commission Communication
2.2 The Communication first notes three separate Directives[4]
which require the Commission to consider measures to reduce air
pollution from the maritime sector, and that the Sixth Environmental
Action Programme set two over-arching objectives — to achieve
levels of air quality which do not give rise to unacceptable impacts
on human health and the environment, and to stabilise atmospheric
concentrations of greenhouse gases. It also notes two more general
factors. First, the EC Treaty establishes the principle of integrating
environmental concerns into sectoral policies with a view to promoting
sustainable development, with transport having been identified
as a priority sector.
2.3 Secondly, given the global nature of the shipping
industry, the Commission and Member States have worked with the
International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to develop Annex VI
of the MARPOL[5] Convention.
The latter sets regulations for preventing air pollution from
ships, including a global sulphur limit of 4.5% for heavy fuel
oil burned by ships, and two designated Sulphur Oxide (SOx) Emission
Control Areas in the Baltic and North Sea, where a limit of 1.5%
applies. However, the Commission notes that, although Emission
Control Areas will significantly reduce acidifying sulphur emissions
in Community waters, other aspects of Annex VI are not sufficiently
stringent. Moreover, it does not enter into force until one year
after it has been ratified by 15 countries representing 50% of
world shipping tonnage, and to date only six countries, representing
26% of world tonnage, have taken this step. The Commission also
notes that, under the Kyoto Protocol, the IMO has taken responsibility
for controlling greenhouse gas emissions from bunker fuels used
by international shipping
2.4 In assessing the situation regarding emissions of
the main air pollutants from ships, the Commission estimates that,
as a proportion of the Community's target for all land-based emissions
in 2010, they will contribute a level equal to 78% of such emissions
of sulphur dioxide, and 68% of nitrogen oxides. It also notes
that Community-wide emissions of carbon dioxide from ships are
higher than land-based emissions in nine individual Member States,
but that emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) are smaller
than other unregulated sectors. Primary emissions of particulates
in port are said to be relatively low, as opposed to the high
overall levels arising from secondary emissions. Halon emissions
in Community seas have not been quantified, but the Commission
says that the overall quantity of halon installed in fire extinguishing
systems on board ships world-wide is known to be significant,
and, in terms of its ozone-depleting potential, to exceed the
amount of halon installed in main land Europe. The Communication
also notes that the impact of these emissions will depend very
much upon where they occur, and on the prevailing meteorological
conditions.
2.5 Another important factor identified by the Commission
is enlargement, on which it says that ship movements to and from
the candidate countries' ports represent a significant proportion
of all ship movements in Community sea areas, and that there are
serious acidification and marine eutrophication problems in the
Baltic Sea. It also points out that two candidate countries —
Malta and Cyprus — account for 9% of world shipping tonnage,
thus lending importance to their ratification of Annex VI of MARPOL.
2.6 As to the way forward, the Communication avoids prescriptive
targets, but proposes a number of objectives and measures to guide
Community and national policies in the longer term. These include:
— International action through the IMO
2.7 The Commission says that this is the best way to
regulate the environmental performance of ships of all flags,
and of reducing emissions of those flagged outside the Community
which travel in Community waters but do not stop at its ports.[6]
It therefore proposes to continue developing co-ordinated Community
positions at the IMO to press for tougher measures to reduce emissions
of air pollutants, greenhouses gases and ozone- depleting substances,
including a reduction in the present 4.5% global sulphur cap.
It also sees ratification of Annex VI of MARPOL as a central plank
of its strategy, and is recommending that Member States take this
step as soon as possible, prior to the meeting of the IMO's Marine
Environment Protection Committee in March 2003.
— Community regulation of emission standards
2.8 The Commission says that, although international
law imposes some limits on the jurisdiction of a state to regulate
international shipping in its coastal waters, particularly as
regards such matters as construction, design, equipment, and manning,
regulation by the Community is the best way to reduce emissions
from ships in its ports, territorial waters (up to 12 miles from
shore) and exclusive economic zones. Consequently, in addition
to its proposals on sulphur levels in marine fuels (discussed
below), it says that it will bring forward within the next few
months a proposal to amend Directive 1997/68/EC on emissions standards
for non-road engines so as to include those intended for use on
board vessels operating on inland waterways; that, if the IMO
has not proposed tighter nitrogen oxide standards for all marine
propulsion engines by the end of 2006, it will bring forward a
proposal to reduce such emissions for seagoing vessels; that it
aims to remove by 2010 an exemption in Regulation (EC) No. 2037/2000
which currently permits the use of halon on board existing ships
operating in Community waters; and that it will look again at
the possibility of requiring an abatement of VOCs from ship-loading.
2.9 The Commission also identifies a number of areas
where it says economic instruments provide an incentive for industry
to go beyond any regulatory requirements. It says that it will
propose early in 2003 the development of a Community system of
differentiated charges for all forms of transport, including maritime
transport, to take account of marginal social costs, including
the external costs of air pollution and climate change. This will
be developed on the basis of environmental performance, including
atmospheric emissions. It will also consider the possibility of
developing emissions trading regimes.
2.10 In addition, the Commission outlines a number of
possible voluntary measures, including a code of practice by the
international bunker industry to make significant quantities of
1.5% sulphur marine heavy fuel oil available in states bordering
SOx Emission Control Areas; the consideration by port authorities
of voluntary speed reductions, and the use of land-based electricity
or clean on-board power when in port; and the promotion of procedures
to reduce emissions of VOCs. The Commission says it will itself
launch a new Clear Marine Award Scheme to give positive publicity
to those who demonstrate best practice in low-emission shipping,
and that it will continue to fund research into low-emission ship
technologies and into the practicalities of emissions trading
in this area.
The draft Directive
2.11 The existing Directive, 1999/32/EC, sets sulphur
limits of 0.2% for certain fuels used within Community territory,
including marine gas oils and diesel oils used by ships in inland
waterways and territorial waters. It also sets sulphur limits
for inland heavy oil fuels and gas oils, but not for marine heavy
fuel oils. As a result, the Commission says that these oils now
contain a high amount of sulphur relative to other fuels, amounting
on average to some 2.75% (27,000 parts per million[7])
worldwide, and that ships are now one of the biggest sources of
sulphur dioxide emissions in the Community.
2.12 The draft Directive would:
- introduce a 1.5% sulphur limit for marine fuels used by all
seagoing vessels in the North Sea, English Channel and Baltic
Sea in line with Annex VI of MARPOL;
- introduce such a limit for marine fuels used by passenger
vessels on regular services to and from any Community port, in
order to improve air quality and help to create sufficient demand
to ensure a Community-wide supply of low-quality sulphur fuel;
- ban the sale of marine diesel oils having over 1.5% sulphur;
- amend existing provisions for marine gas oils used by seagoing
and inland vessels, so as (a) to require all marine fuels used
by ships at berth in all Community ports to contain 0.2% sulphur
or less, and (b) to ban the sale of marine gas oils having more
than 0.2% sulphur (0.1% by 2008).
2.13 It also proposes consequential amendments to the
inland heavy fuel provisions in Directive 1999/32/EC to reflect
changes relating to large combustion plants arising from Directive
2001/80/EC, and that a Regulatory Committee should be created
to agree future technical amendments which do not require political
co-decision.
The Government's view
2.14 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 15 January 2003,
the Minister of State (Rural Affairs and Urban Quality of Life)
at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr
Alun Michael) indicates that the Government is seeking views from
interested parties, but that it is not possible at this stage
either to quantify the financial implications of the proposal
or to draw up a Regulatory Impact Assessment. He also says that
it is too early to say what priority the Presidency will give
this proposal, when negotiations will start, or how long they
will take.
Conclusion
2.15 Although we appreciate that these proposals have
been published only relatively recently, the Minister's Explanatory
Memorandum says little about their implications or the UK's attitude
to them. We will therefore await with interest the initial Regulatory
Impact Assessment which he has promised to provide in the spring.
In the meantime, we are not clearing the document.
4
Directive 2001/81 on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric
pollutants; Directive 1999/32 relating to the sulphur content
of certain liquid fuels; and Directive 1994/63 on the control
of emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Back
5
A 1997 Protocol to amend the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973. Back
6
The Commission says that a study suggests that transit traffic
represents around 50% of ship movements in Community waters, and
is responsible for 50% of emissions. Back
7
The Commission contrasts this figure with limits of 2,000 ppm
for heating oil, and a forthcoming limit of 10 ppm for automotive
petrol and diesel. Back
|
