shipping emissions

The cruise industry is just as shameless as the rest of the shipping industry.

The US EPA concludes one cruise ship can emit the same amount of SO2 as 13 million cars and as much soot as 1 million cars [1]. But, despite this, the cruise industry is delaying introduction of new health regulations, trotting out scare tactics such as maritime jobs will be lost, astronomical fare increases etc. The cruise industry even sued US EPA so it could keep burning dirty fuel [2] – and it won as far as I can ascertain.

You might also be interested that there have been no reported Australian studies on health impacts from shipping emissions. In 2012 the Australian Maritime College announced a preliminary study was to start [3] – but it seems to have been spiked as there has been no further reference to it on its website or in the media. The power of the faceless corporations.

Alarmingly, at least in Australia, cruise or container ships are not yet required to switch to cleaner fuel or shore power when in port. Most ports are right in the middle of our cities, so the data I’ve already provided means millions of Austrians are being exposed to this toxic filth every day. Port Phillip Bay has at least six ships per day, all sailing past my place and arriving in the port right under the Westgate bridge, belching fumes over the city as they mostly keep engines running to provide power. See attached image of bulk carrier, the ridiculously named High Courage in the Port of Melbourne.

When the cruise terminal recently moved from Barangaroo in Darling Harbour Sydney to White Bay right on the doorstep of Balmain, residents there soon started complaining of headaches, children in the nearby school falling ill, dirty washing etc [4]. Whilst there has been some indication that cruise liners would switch to shore power whilst tied up at Balmain, I’m yet to hear that it has actually happened. The shipping industry is very canny at avoiding its responsibilities.

However, regarding GHG emissions - a 2008 study of Fremantle and Brisbane ports found Brisbane Port [5] had total GHG emissions of 180,000 tonnes CO2 p.a. Equivalent to emissions from 40,000 cars.

Given the growth of the shipping sector that’s likely to be even higher now. No mention of the other pollutants.

NOTES

[1.] http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cruise-ship-lines-alaska-officials-question-new-air-pollution-limits/2012/07/22/gJQAc4Jy2W_story.html

[2.] http://www.cruiselawnews.com/tags/emissions

[3.] http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/inner-west/57m-white-bay-cruise-ship-terminal-a-serious-error-says-nsw-upper-house-report/news-story/c0b70348510131aa4137d1ca79dbfa39

[4.] https://www.amc.edu.au/files/Research_report_web_1.pdf

[5.] ‘Emissions from ships’ ABC RN Science Show 29 August 2009 http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/emissions-from-ships/3062994

If you think aviation emissions are bad, the even bigger problem is the unregulated shipping industry.

In terms of GHG emissions, shipping is already responsible for1:

· 5% of global CO2 emissions

· double global aviation emissions

· double Britain’s total emissions.

And it is growing fast. Under business as usual scenarios GHG emissions from shipping will rise 72% in next 15 years1 which is obviously incompatible with the internationally agreed 2°C goal that worldwide emissions be at least halved from 1990 levels by 20502.

If global shipping was a country:

· It would be the sixth largest producer of GHG emissions

• Only the US, China, Russia, India and Japan emit more CO2 than the world’s shipping fleet3

All the current port expansion projects are underpinning the business as usual scenario. Port of Melbourne for example, is planning to quadruple its container throughput by mid century – which means Victorians would have to more than triple our current container consumption per person, from 0.4 per annum to 1.4 container per person per annum.

1. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/mar/03/travelsenvironmentalimpact.transportintheuk

2. http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/shipping/index_en.htm

3. http://oceana.org/reports/shipping-solutions-technological-and-operational-methods-available-reduce-co2

Shipping is often touted as being the most efficient mode of transport – which it may be in terms of unit cost- but it has a deadly legacy for our environment, climate and our health. The 90,000+ cargo ships worldwide are responsible for:

• 9% of global sulphur oxide pollution

• 30% of global nitrogen oxide pollution

In the air, SO2 and NOx convert into fine sulphate and nitrate aerosol particles, and once in the lungs, these particles are small enough to enter the blood

• Accounting for ~ 50,000 premature deaths p.a. in EUROPE, at an annual cost of €58 billion4

• These particles can cause emphysema, congestive heart failure, birth defects and premature deaths

Other research5 suggests the particulate pollution causes:

· 60,000 deaths p.a. worldwide

• Costs $330 billion p.a. treating lung and heart diseases

4. http://www.transportenvironment.org/what-we-do/shipping/air-pollution-ships

5. Health risks of shipping pollution have been underestimated https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/apr/09/shipping-pollution

The shipping industry, with its flags of convenience, impenetrable registration and ownership, its transfer of thousands of marine and terrestrial pests (Fire ants in Queensland arrived by ship) and diseases such as cholera in ballast water, are a blight on the planet. And the industry avoids being held responsible for the mess.

The Prestige tanker disaster in Spain in 2002, spilled 84 million litres of oil on thousands of kms of coast of Spain, France and Portugal. It caused $12 billion in economic loss and clean up costs.

Finally, in 2013 the Spanish High court concluded it was impossible to establish criminal responsibility and the Captain & Chief Engineer were found not guilty of crimes against the environment.

Every year there are multiple such disasters around the world. The shipping industry is the James Hardie and tobacco industry of the sea.