EU Ship EmissionsTime to Act

Bill HemmingsTransport and Environment

www.transportenvironment.org

“Ships fast becoming the biggest source of air pollution in EU” DG ENV website

• Largest EU transport mode; 77% of freight volume

• 30% man-made global NOx from shipping

• 2020 EU shipping > EU land-based SOx/NOx TSAP 2005

• Average Ship fuel world’s dirtiest (S, heavy metals)

• 50,000+ premature deaths annually in EU J Brandt et al. www.CEEH.dk 2011

= 12% (€61bn) of total health costs of Europe air pollution in 2020

• CO2 + 90% since 1990; 6% of global 2020; trebled by 2050

• 12-18% 2°C carbon budget by 2050 - IMO 2009

90% of Shipping NOx/SOx in North Sea and Baltic Sea originates within 90km of coast

In parts of Northern Europe ship emissions account for

>90% exceedance eutrophication critical loads

CEEC,2002a

Sources: Entec UK (2002), EMEP (1997)

Sulphur deposition from international shipping (per cent)

2000 2020

CLE

Source: IIASA (2007)

SO2 projectionsland v shipping

(without revised Annex VI)

85% reduction 1980-2008 in EU27 land-based SO2 emissions IIASA 2004&2010

Higher surface Ozone concentration from shipping

Source:Globalisation, Transport and the Environment © OECD 2010

NOx projectionsland v shipping

(without revised Annex VI)

40% reduction 1980-2008 EU27 land-based NOx emissions IIASA

2010

Annex VI NOx standards are weak

* Standard subject to revision in 2012

The EU and MARPOL Annex VI

• EU unanimous support Annex VI revisions Apr/Oct 2008

• MARPOL; Parties to transpose by entry into force; July 2010

• IMO Code; be ready to implement & enforce thru national legislation

• HU, AT, SK, CZ, Monaco yet to ratify => can’t vote on EEDI

• Annex VI transposed? Yes; DE, DK, FR, NL, PL & SE (-0.1%) …

– Not yet; UK, ES, Estonia, Finland….?

• EU not MARPOL party; thru UNCLOS must adopt laws at least equal to accepted international rules/standards ie MARPOL

Member States in breach of IMO code, EU of UNCLOS

2010 200m coastal ECA

2008 rev ship engines <30 litres regulated for PM/NOx

2006/7 Passenger (not cruise) ships 1.5% outside SECAS

2010 0.1% at berth

EU SO2 – The MARPOL Effect

EU NOx – The MARPOL Effect

Annex VI; what EU should do

• Full transposition into national laws

• Early proposal for ECA in Med, Black Sea, NE Atlantic

- based on detailed emissions analysis

• Distance to shore ECAs eg Med?

• Baltic & N Sea – NOx control areas

• All EU sea areas become full ECAs (SECA, NECA)

• Align cruise and passenger ship standards;– 7 day Alaskan cruise within US ECA; cost $6.60 per pax/per day

• Incorporate Tier II & III NOx standards in Proposal

SECA costs - all ships. Health benefits - only EU!

Source: AEA Technology (Dec 2009)

Scenario 3: Scenario 1 + Mediterranean and Black Seas SECAs

Scenario 1Baltic and North Seas as SECAs

Scenario 1 : North Sea & Baltic Sea 2020

Scenario 3 = 1 + Mediterranean & Black Seas

Abatement costs € 0.9 – 4.6 bn € 2.0 – 12 bn

Health benefits € 10 – 23 bn € 14 – 32 bn

Benefit to cost ratio 2.2 – 26 1.2 - 16

What about PM?

• No PM limit values in Annex VI

• Low S reduces PM but not sufficiently

• Low S does not necessarily reduce BC

• BC both a health and climate problem

• Ship BC big problem for Arctic climate

• Ship BC is growing in EU

BC projectionsEU transport ( kt)

EU ship BC = 40-60+% EU Transport BC by 2030 IIASA 2010

EU; PM & BC Emissions

• EU must press for PM standards in Annex VI+

• Support additional BC action in IMO– eg additional particle standards

– Special measures for Arctic

• Only 0.1% S enables efficient after-treatment for BC– 0.1% global standard next step

• Speed limits in harbours/coastal areas

- reduce SOx/CO2/NOx/BC by ~ 30%

Annex VI and beyond

• EU NOx charge for existing ships– Why wait until 2013+?

• EU must commit to 0.5% S globally from 2020– and work against any delay

– No ECA expansion and NOx inaction prejudicing AQ

• EC feasibility Study of 0.1% globally– Will ensure cleaner/safer distillates– Incremental benefits

– BC (health and climate)

Compliance and Industry

• EMSA; industry studies – extreme cases, exaggerated

• Where is modal shift an issue? 7% of routes?

• Scrubber payback is ~ 0.6-0.9 years

• Enforcement; tamper proof abatement equipment

• Placing on market requirements

• We need availability requirements on suppliers

• Stronger Port state enforcement

EU Ship Emissions

The time to Act

Is Now!