The shipping industry has started tackling the impact of its CO2 emissions on the environment, but is there a disconnection between shippers and the supply chain? asks John Aitken
We are all connected in some way, according to the writer and artist Stevyn Colgan who wrote the book Joined Up Thinking. Colgan aimed to prove, among other things, the theory of six degrees of separation, whereby he claimed that we are all closely interconnected.
When it comes to reducing emissions of CO2, his theory is particularly pertinent. Unlike other pollutants that are localised, such as an oil spill disaster or sulphur oxide emissions, what we do in our living room, or in our cars, and the goods and materials being delivered to us in terms of burning fossil fuels has a direct impact on people in the Maldives or the Arctic alike.
In tackling CO2, the shipping industry has begun to focus on itself. International Maritime Organisation (IMO) discussions at the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) 60 meeting in March 2010 will debate on market-based instruments and design indices that affect the ship. Yet, the interaction of "shipping and ships" and the supply chain will not be focused on. As MEPC members take their seats this month, there will no doubt be representation from other key participants in the "shipping supply chain" – namely the ports and charterers – but they do not have a seat at the top table of MEPC discussions. If he were to apply his theory of "joined up thinking" to the shipping supply chain, Colgan might conclude that "shipping process" is looking distinctly separated and disjointed.
The Clean Cargo Working Group and other NGOs and associations have begun to take the message to charterers or shippers that they have a responsibility for the CO2 emitted from the vessels they charter. Coca Cola, Nike, Wal-Mart and other large "consumer-facing" companies have made great strides in understanding their supply chain and implementing strict corporate social responsibility (CSR) programmes around internal emissions targets.
Beyond CSR, large companies have taken a step further in recent months by accepting reduced arrival times for their goods and thereby enabling vessels to reduce speed and take advantage of a slow steaming ratio of approximately 1% less speed for 2.3% less fuel burn/CO2.
In December 2009 we began to see signs that large US-based multinationals were beginning to look at "joined up thinking" for shipping.
The National Industrial Transportation League (NITL), an influential organisation speaking for cargo-owning heavyweights such as IBM, JC Penney, Target and Walgreen expressed no opposition to the prospect of receiving shipments a few days late as a result of containerships sailing more slowly.
Reassuringly, NITL executive VP Peter Gatti told Cargo Systems’ sister publication Lloyd’s List that advanced knowledge of when to expect the shipments was almost always more important than the time taken at sea.
"As long as everyone understands from the beginning that the shipment would arrive two days late, I do not see any problem in our importer members adjusting their supply chains to provide for this," Gatti was reported saying.
There is momentum from the container shipper side then. The next step is to ensure that the thousands of smaller charterers, who ship one or two boxes around the world, have an opportunity to instruct the shipping companies to do the same. In other words, there needs to be a public forum that encourages shipping based on efficiency, not merely price.
The ports too, under the guidance of the World Ports Climate Initiative (WPCI), have begun to develop incentive schemes that encourage shipping companies to reduce arrival times and, in so doing, receive the benefit of a "green lane" access to the port; much like a bus might progress into a city centre in a separate lane from other vehicles. This project, started in the port of Rotterdam, is proving successful. Additionally, in the oil sector, attention is being paid to the issue of ships waiting days to discharge after having completed a voyage a full speed.
The Green Lane initiative and the actions of the NITL shows that ports and charterers are beginning to connect to the shipping community, yet it remains a fact that large sections of the peripheral stakeholders to the shipping industry are oblivious to the problem of shipping emissions and, crucially, unaware of the potential benefits of "joined up thinking" between ports, charterers and shipping companies.
Work continues towards sustainable, practical solutions to reducing shipping emissions. Shipping Emissions Abatement and Trading’s (SEAaT) work, along with the UK Chamber of Shipping, to introduce an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) for ships continues apace in conjunction with, and outside, the regulatory framework.
For SEAaT and supporters of ETS for shipping, emission targets remain undefined, policy instruments for shipping are undecided, and it is still unclear who might be responsible for implementing any emissions agreement. Happily though, there appears to be widespread support for the IMO to oversee any future regulation. Other legislative bodies, particularly the European Commission, will not tolerate inaction.
It means the IMO is now analysing and trying to interpret its best course of action, although the delegates forming IMO MEPC member states will have little, if any, political mandate. Nevertheless, the next MEPC meeting in March 2010 has an opportunity to succeed where the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen failed.
SEAaT believes an ETS for shipping is not only good for the environment as it facilitates definitive and sustainable emissions reduction; it provides a fair, viable economic and commercial framework within which to operate. It has the potential to help the ailing shipbuilding industry, as shipowners and operators look to engage the yards to develop and perhaps retrofit technologies such as air lubrication, improved hull coatings, sail power of various guises, solar and novel propulsion systems.
As alluded to, the entire shipping supply chain can be improved through innovative concepts such as the adoption of slower steaming, weather routing, and charter party agreements that puts the onus on efficiency and not just speed of delivery. It is clear that ports and charterers too can benefit commercially and environmentally from "joined up thinking" with the shipping industry.
John Aitken has been secretary general of Shipping Emissions Abatement and Trading (SEAaT) – a cross-industry group encouraging and facilitating the efficient reduction of harmful emissions to air from shipping – since December 2007.
He began his career in 1971 with Shell as a marine engineer and has since held various positions at the company, moving into the field of health safety and the environment in 1996.
Aitken is a Chartered Member of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and an Associate Member of the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment.
