Memorandum submitted by Sea and Water
INTRODUCTION TO
SEA & WATER
1. Sea & Water was set up in 2003 to
provide a representative voice for the inland waterways, short
sea and coastal shipping industry, and to promote water freight
as a viable alternative to the movement of freight on the UK's
roads. We provide information to members and supporters, communicate
the case for modal shift to other stakeholders, highlight the
benefits of water freight to the environment, economy and society,
and address the barriers that prevent the greater take up of water.
2. Sea & Water is funded by a grant
from the Department for Transport, by research monies from the
European Union, and by annual subscriptions and sponsorship from
our supporters, who are mainly drawn from the water freight industry
in the UK.
WHY WATER
FREIGHT?
3. Amongst the benefits of inland waterways
and short sea shipping is that by comparison to road transport
it is considerably less carbon intensive. Domestic water transport
emits 80 less carbon dioxide per tonne kilometre than road, and
also 35 less nitrogen oxide. Water also relieves congestion: a
single 300 tonne barge takes up to 15 lorries of the road.
4. Investment in increased capacity for
water freight transportation is an efficient way of cutting carbon
emissions. The latest data from the Tyndall Centre for Climate
Change research shows that:
— 25% of carbon emissions are from
Road Freight (13MtC) in terms of energy per freight tonne-km.
— 2% of carbon emissions are from domestic
shipping (1MtC).
In terms of carbon per freight tonne-km in 2004:
— Road freight was responsible for
about 0.08 tonnes of carbon per 1,000 freight tonne-km.
— Water freight was responsible for
about 0.02 tonnes of carbon.
As these figures demonstrate, road transportation
has four times higher carbon intensity for moving the same number
for freight tonne-km in comparison to that of water freight.
5. These environmental benefits are of course
recognized by Government—as is demonstrated by its support
for Sea & Water. But we believe that departments other than
the DfT could take more account of the benefits of water freight
when formulating policy.
6. Our evidence focuses upon four policy
areas, relating to the challenge of climate change, that are outlined
in the in the 2007 Pre-Budget Report and Comprehensive Spending
Review. These are: (1) the technology policy, formulated in an
effort to implement Stern Report guidelines; (2) the creation
and promotion of more efficient home and office products, both
domestically and throughout the EU; (3) the adoption of a more
sustainable waste strategy; and (4) the continuation of the Defra
Climate Change Agreements (CCAs).
TECHNOLOGY POLICY
7. In order to implement the proposals contained
in the Stern review, Government is, according to the Pre-Budget
Report, currently developing a new low-carbon energy technology
strategy, which is to be published in 2008. As part of this, Government
has said that it will fund innovation "across the full chain
from initial research and development to demonstration, deployment
and diffusion [of increasingly environmentally friendly technology],
in order to maximise the cost-effective potential for cutting
emissions in the UK and internationally".
8. We believe that amongst the technologies
that should be funded on this basis is water freight. Already
water freight is the most environmentally friendly and sustainable
way of moving goods domestically: with additional innovation its
efficiency will further improve. This is precisely the investment
called for by Stern, who has emphasised the need to tackle climate
change gas emissions from transport.
9. We urge the Government not to overlook
what may be seen as an `old' technology, such as water freight,
given the contribution it can make to meeting the challenge of
climate change.
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY
HOME AND
OFFICE PRODUCTS
10. The Pre-Budget Report notes that improving
the energy efficiency of products used in homes and offices provides
one of the most cost-effective ways to meet the Government's climate
change and energy goals. It says that the Government will advocate
that the EU "improves product information and compliance
to help consumers make better choices and drive fair competition".
11. We strongly argue that what is needed
is recognition of carbon emissions that are produced throughout
the "life-cycles" of home and office products. That
includes the cost of transporting them from the point of manufacture
to the point of consumption—and policies should be developed
to promote water freight as an environmentally friendly alternative
to other modes.
12. However, neither the proposed EU "Eco-label",
nor the environmental food labelling project being pursued by
Defra, currently include the promotion of transporting goods on
water. This lacuna appears to extend to the Pre-Budget Report.
Given the very strong environmental case for doing so, these programs
must be augmented to include the promotion of water freight transportation.
13. Government is also seeking "voluntary
action by retailers, manufacturers and service providers to phase
out the least efficient products and to raise their own standards".
We believe that voluntary action by retailers, manufacturers and
service providers should be sought such that, when feasible, they
transport their goods by an environmentally sustainable mode—water.
BEHAVIOURAL CHANGE:
THE CLIMATE
CHANGE LEVY
14. The Pre-Budget Report also indicates
that the Government intends to continue its support of the Climate
Change Agreement (CCA) scheme until 2017. Under CCA it provides
financial incentives to companies in energy intensive sectors
that agree to improve energy efficiency and/or reduce emissions.
15. At present, such companies are not rewarded
for transporting their goods on water, rather than relying on
the road network. Again, we believe that such sustainable modal
shift ought to be encouraged and rewarded. According to Defra,
the incorporation of such water freight transportation considerations
under CCAs is being considered. We hope that this rapidly becomes
a reality.
WASTE STRATEGY
16. As part of the effort to protect the
UK's environment, the Pre-Budget Report also draws attention to
the proposal for a more sustainable waste strategy. It highlights
the challenges of "dealing with waste, especially from households,
in a way that reduces environmental impact", and the need
for a "significant investment in more sustainable waste management
solutions".
17. However, the majority of waste in the
UK is transported to landfill or to recycling facilities by lorry,
which is the most polluting mode of freight transportation. For
example, according to a Report by the Mayor of London (2003),
approximately 2.7 million tonnes of waste were transported out
of London in 2001-02. Of this:
— 27% was transported by rail.
— 27% was transported by barge on the
Thames.
— The remainder (46%) was moved by
road.
It is worth noting that London is exceptional
in the degree to which it uses the Thames: most other cities would
make even greater use of road transport.
18. We believe that any effort to make waste
management more environmentally friendly and sustainable cannot
overlook its transport. We therefore believe that Government must
ensure that less carbon intensive transport modes for waste, such
as water freight, are encouraged. Government could, for example,
provide further support for investment in infrastructure to make
water freight transportation a more viable and attractive option.
IN SUMMARY
19. We hope that the Environmental Audit
Committee will endorse the comments and recommendations we have
made in this evidence. We believe that if the Government better
incorporated freight transportation into the policy initiatives
we have identified above, the Pre-Budget Report would go further
towards achieving the "more secure, fair and environmentally
sustainable world" that is called for in the Report itself.
20. Finally, we are delighted to be able
to submit evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee. Should
it be helpful to the Committee we would be very happy to expand
on our comments either in writing or in oral evidence.
26 November 2007
| 
