ECSA holds lively debate on green profile of shipping
On 4 December, ECSA organised a panel debate on how the EU shipping industry can deal with the new environmental challenges. Gallery matte-2The event resulted in discussions that were as fruitful as they were lively, ECSA said in its press release.
The panel consisted of representatives from the side of the shipping industry, the European Commission, the European Parliament and an NGO. The debate was moderated by John Richardson (FIPRA International).
Despite differing points of view, all participants agreed on the importance of shipping as the lifeblood of global trade and its environmental efficiency when compared to the quantity of cargo or the number of passengers it transports.
Emanuele Grimaldi (Grimaldi Group) pointed out that "the shipping industry has to be green, fuel costs leave no other choice". He continued by stating that the SECA norms come too early, considering the scarcity of alternative fuels, the lack of appropriate infrastructure and the volatility of alternative fuel prices. He alluded to the fact that this conundrum might lead to a paradox: the regulation of sulphur emissions could lead to a perversive modal backshift from sea to road, inexorably leading to an increase of CO2 emissions.
He was followed by Satu Hassi (Green MEP, Finland) who mentioned the fact that environmental regulation has driven innovation and has ultimately contributed to the reduction of emissions from the land-based industry. She advocated that the same approach be applied to shipping.
Antoine Kedzierski (NGO Transport&Environment) supported a more holistic approach to shipping. Although conceding that shipping is green, he added that it could do more to improve its green credentials. In that respect he made reference to low hanging fruits in terms of improving efficiency at minimal cost, a result of the alleged lack of initiative displayed by shipping in the last decades. He also made the case that sulphur and nitrogen emissions from shipping are rising fast and will continue to do so unless they are curbed by regulation.
Jacob Sterling (Maersk) questioned the more conservative approach of the industry whereby every attempt to regulate has been met but resistance and opposition. He urged the industry to rethink its approach and to turn to innovation instead of resorting to confrontation. "There are certain issues we need to clean up before we can fully consider ourselves truly green as an industry" he said, adding that "environmental demands are here to stay."
Christofer Fjellner (EPP MEP, Sweden) echoed the remarks of Mr. Sterling. "Shipping is green but it hasn't done enough so far, and it suffers from it now." he said, and continued by pointing out that the reason behind this is the fact that, hitherto, being green has not been perceived as an asset. He also remarked that "the shipping industry should educate consumers that sustainability comes at a cost".
In describing the steps taken by the EU to alleviate the burden of upcoming emission restrictions, Torsten Klimke (DG MOVE) pointed out that the Commission has increasingly made funds available to shipowners through EU co-funding programs such as Marco Polo and TEN-T. He stated however that this additional funding has not always been used by the industry. Regarding the deadline of the new SECAs rules, Mr. Klimke was of the opinion that changing it would be unfair to those early movers who have already invested with a view to complying with the new norms.