NIEUWS  NOUVELLES  NEWS

 

Proposed IMO revenue generation mechanisms risk creating ‘haves and have-nots’, says NGO


Written by Tom Barlow-Brown


In an interview with Bunkerspot at the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting, James Gamble, Senior Director of Pacific Environment’s Arctic Program, stated that the committee will need to make sure that any new measures do not alienate those less well-off.

A key debate at the MEPC revolves around the choice between a flat carbon levy and a more complex carbon trading system. Gamble supports the former, citing concerns about inequality in the shipping sector’s transition to low-carbon operations. ‘The problem with [the carbon trading system], from our perspective, is that it has a possibility of creating a group who can move more quickly. They're going to be selling these residual units or buying them from countries that can't. So, you set up this situation where there are haves and have nots,’ he said, advocating for a simpler, fairer solution.

Gamble also noted that the comprehensive impact assessment has caused significant friction among stakeholders, with some parties strongly opposing the findings. ‘I think what we're seeing is one of those situations where we have a report that doesn't say exactly what some had hoped it would say. So, there are disagreements with it on a fundamental level,’ he explained. This rift has the potential to slow progress, risking the derailment of critical negotiations on reducing shipping emissions.Looking ahead, Gamble expressed cautious optimism about progress on a global fuel standard but remains doubtful that substantial decisions will be made this week on the revenue mechanism or carbon intensity indicator (CII). He also pointed to other pressing issues on the agenda, including reducing black carbon emissions in the Arctic, regulating exhaust gas cleaning systems, and addressing underwater noise from vessels.Gamble said that switching to cleaner fuels is the simplest solution to dealing with black carbon emissions in the Arctic. ‘We might get to a recommendation about cleaner fuels to solve this problem. It's the simplest way to go forward,’ he said. ‘Even fuel manufacturers are saying, look, if you want to reduce black carbon emissions in the Arctic, switch to cleaner fuels, you know, you don't need engine modifications, you don't need, more complicated measures.’However, he also underscored the need to prioritise efficiency measures to meet the 2030 emissions reduction targets, as the uptake of clean fuels is expected to remain limited by that time. ‘Virtually everything we're going to do to get to the 2030 goal is all about efficiency. We're not going to have a large uptake of clean fuels by 2030. So, we need to aim for a 5 - 15% uptake,’ he stated. These measures, he added, will also be crucial for the longer-term goals of 2040 and 2050.

 

 

 

  LMB-BML 2007 Webmaster & designer: Cmdt. André Jehaes - email andre.jehaes@lmb-bml.be