Shipping, which accounts for 90% of world trade, contributes nearly 3% of global emissions, a little more than Germany’s carbon footprint. If left unchecked, this share could increase to 17% by 2050 as global GDP continues to grow.
Reducing emissions from shipping has been a hot topic at the international climate summit in Glasgow, with 14 countries signing a declaration last week to reduce shipping emissions to net zero by 2050.
On Saturday, shipping industry heavyweights and senior government officials gathered to clarify the details of this noble pledge, ahead of key transport talks at COP26. Important differences have emerged over whether market or regulatory rules will be more effective in pushing the industry to net zero.
Shipping and aviation are notoriously difficult industries to decarbonise. They require huge amounts of fuel for international travel, and the question of which country is responsible for the emissions makes doing business a daunting and icy task.
increasing momentum
Total emissions from shipping are expected to increase this year for the first time since the 2008 global financial crisis.
If left unregulated, shipping and aviation will account for nearly 40% of all carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, according to a study published by the European Parliament.
With so much at stake, we’re finally starting to see a shift, with companies (and their customers) putting more emphasis on shipping’s contribution to climate change. In October of this year, nine major companies, including Amazon, Ikea and Unilever, committed to moving their cargoes only on carbon-free fuel ships by 2040.
In addition, three of the world’s largest container shipping companies – Maersk, CMA CGM and MSC – are actively pursuing the use of alternative fuels and aim to reach net zero by 2050 or earlier.
lack of technology
Most ship engines use low-carbon fuel oil, which generates significant air pollution. Therefore, some shipowners are moving to build new ships or convert existing ships to operate with liquefied natural gas (LNG).
While this shows a 25% reduction in CO₂ emissions compared to today’s low-content fuel, LNG still releases methane into the atmosphere, a gas that traps heat about 30 times more powerfully than CO₂.
This points to a major problem that prevents the decarbonization of maritime transport: there are still no zero carbon technologies that can be applied on a large scale to large ocean-going ships.
Ship engine manufacturers are still developing commercially viable technologies that create alternative zero-emission fuels such as hydrogen and ammonia.
A major challenge is the need for large fuel storage on board ships and the refueling of these fuels at the port, especially after long voyages. Battery power using renewable sources can only be used on short trips such as ferries or coastal trips.
Nuclear propulsion was also considered, but there are associated risks and is not supported by the general public.
global disunity
In October, shipping was criticized by United Nations Secretary General Antonio de Guterres, who accused the industry of not doing enough to curb global warming. So is he right?
One of the difficulties in reducing emissions in shipping is that it is difficult to decide which country to allocate emissions to.
Should it be based on where the ship’s fuel is sold, where the ship is registered, or the origins or destinations of the ship’s cargo? Each option would result in radically different emissions and associated cost responsibilities for each country.
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is the UN body that deals with emissions from ships involved in international trade. It is currently coordinating measures to reduce maritime emissions among its 170+ member states. And each state has conflicting interests.
In April 2018, the IMO set a goal of halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 from 2008 levels. This was met with strong criticism from environmental organizations, calling it weak and unambitious.
This target is well below the net zero target for 2050 declared by nations last week at COP26. The declaration was led by Denmark and includes the United States. It should be noted that it was not signed by countries with large maritime transport sectors, such as Japan and Greece.
The IMO has agreed, after collecting more data, to revise its target by 2023. Given the growing public interest in climate change and large companies demanding zero emissions when shipping their products, I think the IMO will likely strengthen its target and get to work for the sake of this. zero net emissions by 2050.
So what should happen now?
At Saturday’s conference, it was clear that the majority of shipowners present were in favor of using the market to solve the emissions problem and suggested the use of a carbon price.
This echoes calls from commercial groups, which account for more than 90% of the world’s merchant fleet. They asked the IMO to prioritize a carbon tax for the industry to encourage shipowners to invest in Alternative fuels.
On the other hand, the representative of Japanese shipowners was in favor of politicians proposing the rules, saying that the shipbuilding industry would respect them.
And shipowners who recently invested in LNG-powered ships were understandably defending their use, saying there are currently no zero-carbon alternative fuels and that they are still a long way off.
But before we can make any real progress towards decarbonising shipping, we must have global unity. It is imperative that more member states adhere to the declaration of net zero by 2050.
The IMO must set international standards for who is responsible for emissions. Countries with large maritime fleets, such as Japan and Greece, must embark to streamline the process. IMO resolutions take years to develop and even longer to be ratified by its member countries.
A well-funded research and development program, which industry has agreed to pay for within a global regulatory framework, must begin immediately under the supervision of the IMO.
The increased interest we see in supply chains and at COP26 is a significant opportunity for the shipping industry to be at the forefront and reduce its emissions as soon as possible.
This article was written by Peter van Duyn, Marine Logistics Specialist at Deakin University’s Center for Supply Chain and Logistics. It is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Article in English