1 Introduction
1. Ships have
a finite, albeit long, working life, at the end of which they
need to be dismantled. Much of the material they are made from,
such as the steel, can be recycled, but many of the ships that
are reaching the end of their lives now also contain hazardous
materials, such as asbestos, PCBs and waste oils, which need to
be disposed of safely.
2. It is estimated that, world-wide, about 700 large
commercial vessels are scrapped every year.[1]
In addition, a number of naval vessels and smaller coastal transport
and fishing vessels are also scrapped. In this inquiry we focussed
on the disposal of larger vessels capable of international voyages.
The recent decision by the International Maritime Organisation
to phase out all single-hulled tankers by 2015 at the latest will
increase the number of vessels which will need to be dealt with
over the next few years.[2]
3. There has been growing concern about the health
and environmental impacts of ship dismantling: Greenpeace, for
example, has been campaigning against the dismantling of ships
in poor conditions in Asia.[3]
There have also been concerns about ship dismantling in England.
In 2003, the Committee examined the case of a British company,
Able UK Ltd, which had intended to dismantle and recycle redundant
ships from the US auxiliary fleet.[4]
The company had entered into an agreement with the ships' owner,
the United States Maritime Administration (MARAD) and was granted
a trans-frontier shipment permit to import the ships by the Environment
Agency. A number of the ships were brought across the Atlantic
to Able UK's facility in Hartlepool, County Durham.
4. Objections from the public and environmental groups
led to two judicial reviews of the decisions to permit Able UK
to take the ships. The reviews ruled that Able UK did not have
the necessary permits to carry out the work. Able UK must now
conduct further environmental assessments and seek planning permission
before it can go ahead. Both the Environment Agency and Defra
have conduced reviews of the lessons learned from the Hartlepool
situation. It is clear that, although it remains the company's
responsibility to ensure that it has all the relevant permits
to carry out the work, the regulatory structure governing ship
dismantling is highly complex and perhaps little understood.
5. The evidence we heard about Able UK's proposal
to dismantle the US ships suggested that a more detailed examination
of the wider issues of ship dismantling was necessary. So, on
25 March 2004 we announced a new inquiry with the following terms
of reference:
In light of the issues surrounding the dismantling
of US Navy vessels on Teesside, the phasing out of single-hulled
tankers, and the need to dispose of defunct UK naval vessels,
the Committee is undertaking an inquiry into the environmental
impacts of dismantling defunct ships in the United Kingdom, and
the methods of disposal to be used. In particular the Committee
will consider:
- what facilities and expertise are already in
place in England and Wales to dismantle defunct ships safely
- what is the likely demand for such facilities
and what would be the likely economic and environmental impacts
of meeting such a demand
- what is the legal status of importing such vessels
for dismantling (the Committee will particularly seek to clarify
what are the implications for the industry of the Stockholm Convention
on Persistent Organic Pollutants), and
- how defunct United Kingdom vessels are currently
dealt with, and what plans have been made to cope with their disposal.[5]
6. In response
to our call for written evidence, we received 15 memoranda. We
took oral evidence in June and July 2004 from: the Chamber of
Shipping; Friends of the Earth; Greenpeace; Able UK Ltd; the Environment
Agency, and Elliot Morley MP, Minister for Environment and Agri-Environment,
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. We also discussed
the matter informally with European Commission officials during
a Committee visit to Brussels in July 2004. We are most grateful
to all those who submitted evidence or otherwise helped us during
the inquiry.
1 Q9 Back
2
Ev 69 [International Maritime Organisation], para 4. Most have
to be scrapped by 2010 and some-the oldest-by 2005. Back
3
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/campaigns/intro?campaign_id=3990 Back
4
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, US 'Ghost Ships',
Minutes of Evidence and Memoranda, HC 1336 Session 2002-03, Ev
39 Back
5
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, Press Notice 41,
Session 2003-04, 25 March 2004 Back
|
