Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

Marine

Take Pollution Fight To Region’s Ports

Jun 18th, 2008
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Leader – 18th June 2008

Many people worry about air pollution from motor vehicles, with good reason. Yet, marine vessels are also significant, although lesser known, sources of toxic emissions into the air. The boom in international trade with China has made ports in Hong Kong and the Pearl River Delta the busiest in the world. Increased activities by ships, trucks, trains, cargo cranes and harbour craft in the region mean they can no longer be ignored as pollution sources. This is especially troubling given their proximity to highly populated city centres. The think-tank Civic Exchange has provided a valuable public service by providing a study on this growing problem, along with practical recommendations that authorities would do well to take seriously.

Hong Kong and the delta region have lagged behind the best practices in North America and Europe, the study finds. However, many local operators are taking initiatives, on their own, to make their operations more energy-efficient and friendlier to the environment. The Hong Kong government and Beijing have also ratified a key annex to the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships. In Hong Kong’s case, it came into effect at the start of this month.

Still, much work needs to be done. New rules and regulations – such as emission standards – need to be brought in line with the annex provisions and local needs. For this to happen, the Hong Kong government and authorities in Guangdong must take the initiative. Many port operators, according to the report, complain that some of their smaller rivals are enjoying a free ride from their anti-pollution programmes without having to take part in them. Only regulations can create a level playing field where everyone is bound by the same rules. Most of these rules and standards are not difficult to formulate or enforce. Civic Exchange recommends use of low-sulfur fuels, reducing vessel speed limits in delta waters, and educating port staff. But they need cross-border standards and co-operation to work. Clearly, our ports will only become busier as the mainland’s economic growth continues. For the sake of public health, we have a duty to make our ports clean and green.

Hong Kong Plans Low-Sulphur Incentives

Jun 16th, 2008
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Keith Wallis, Hong Kong – Monday 16 June 2008

Ships could be asked to reduce speeds to 12 knots.

VESSEL operators could be given incentives to switch to low-sulphur fuels within 64 km of Hong Kong and Shenzhen ports and to reduce ship speeds to just 12 knots, as part of a package of initiatives to reduce maritime pollution.

The plans are among a raft of proposals set to be unveiled tomorrow in a report by Hong Kong public policy think tank Civic Exchange.

The 45-page study, Green Harbours: Hong Kong and Shenzhen — reducing marine and port related emissions, recommends 12 key measures to be implemented by both the private and public sectors.

The document is important because it was prepared with help from the Hong Kong Shipowners’ Association, the Marine Department, terminal companies including Hutchison Ports and other local organisations. As a result, many of the proposals could be speedily launched.

Chief among these are the implementation of what Civic Exchange said are “fast and easy wins, such as requiring vessels to slow down to reduce fuel consumption”.

Vessel operators would be given incentives to switch to a low-sulphur fuel within 64 km of Hong Kong and Shenzhen ports. Under the proposal, port operators would pay shipping companies the difference between the price of bunker fuel and the low-sulphur distillate fuel for vessels that make the fuel switch at least 32 km from the ports.

To qualify for the incentives, ships must also participate in the ports’ voluntary vessel-speed reduction programme, limiting speeds to 12 knots. In addition, ships must burn low-sulphur fuel in their auxiliary engine while at berth.

The report also calls for “the creation of a regional cross-industry body to manage port and marine related environmental issues” and says the Hong Kong government “is well-placed to convene this group”.

The report also calls for “a comprehensive green ports strategy and related policy measures” to be developed. This should include the use of “regulatory processes under international treaties such as emissions control areas to engage Hong Kong, the Pearl River delta and Beijing”.

Officials are urged to “consider imposing fees on high-sulphur fuels and lowering taxes and duties on ultra low sulphur diesel” while improving fuel distribution to decrease the actual cost of ultra-low-sulphur diesel for local craft.

The report also calls for a government-led detailed inventory of maritime-related pollutants, including greenhouse gases, to provide a strong technical foundation for both policy decisions and on-going research and monitoring in southern China. It says research should be carried out on the health effects of marine and port related emissions to determine subsequent policy measures to reduce the impact of maritime related pollution.

Civic Exchange praises several companies, including China Navigation, the privately-owned Swire shipping company, Shekou Container Terminal, and Yantian International Container Terminal for their environmental iniatives, including switching to low-sulphur diesel and electric-power port equipment.

But the group said: “There is a willingness among them to do better but they will need government regulation to create a level playing field so that laggards do not benefit from non-action. Thus, marine and port-related emissions in fact represent a low-hanging fruit for the authorities, which they must harvest sooner rather than later.”

Vanishing Sea Fisheries Threaten Food Security

Apr 28th, 2008
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Agence France-Presse in Hanoi – Updated on Apr 12, 2008

The food security of millions of people is at risk because overfishing, climate change and pollution are inflicting massive damage on the world’s oceans, marine scientists have warned.

The two-thirds of the planet covered by seas provided one-fifth of the world’s protein – but 75 per cent of fish stocks were now fully exploited or depleted, a Hanoi conference that ended yesterday was told.

Warming seas were bleaching corals, feeding algal blooms and changing ocean currents that affected the weather, and rising sea levels could in future threaten coastal areas from Bangladesh to New York, experts said.

“People think the ocean is a place apart,” World Ocean Observatory head Peter Neill said. “In fact, it’s the thing that connects us – through trade, transportation, natural systems, weather patterns and everything we depend on for survival.”

Marine ecosystems and food security were key concerns at the Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands, an international meeting of hundreds of experts from governments, environmental groups and universities.

“There is a race to fish, but in wild-capture fisheries right now we can catch no more,” said Steven Murawski, fisheries chief science adviser at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

“We catch 100 million metric tonnes per year, and that’s been very flat globally. Our only hope is if we conserve and rebuild stocks,” he said, adding that sustainable aquaculture could help make up the shortfall.

The plunder was risking long-term sustainability with “too many fishing boats taking too many fish and not allowing the stocks to regenerate”, Conservation International’s Frazer McGilvray said.

“Once the oceans are gone, we’re gone. The oceans sustain the planet.”

The world had already seen the effects of overfishing, experts said. North Atlantic cod fisheries collapsed in the 1990s, and anchovies previously disappeared off Chile, herring off Iceland and sardines off California.

Sixty-four per cent of ocean areas fall outside national jurisdictions, making it difficult to reach international consensus or to stop illegal fishing – a growing concern as hi-tech ships scour the high seas.

“It’s the Wild West. It’s a very small number of boats, but the technology allows them to take enormous amounts of fish,” Mr Neill said.

“They take only the high commercial product and they throw the bycatch overboard. The waste is extraordinary.”

Marine life was also being harmed by climate change, Mr Murawski said. “We’ve seen that fish populations go up and down with variations in the climate,” he said. “Increasingly, we are starting to see long-term change affect the productivity, the distributions, the migrations.”

The trend was speeding up, he said. “Our forecasts are wrong. The melt-off is much faster than has been forecast in the models.”

Meanwhile, land-based pollution put heavy strain on oceans, the UN Environment Programme’s Ellik Adler said.

“Rivers of untreated sewage, factories, refineries, oil industry discharge their effluent into the marine environment, and this causes huge damage,” he said. “Marine pollution has no political borders.”

There were few easy fixes, experts said, but one initiative now being considered was setting up a global network of marine protected areas.

“You’ve got to get agreements between countries,” said consultant Sue Wells, who has worked in coastal East Africa. “Some developed countries have already closed some areas, and most coastal countries are now considering it.”

Satellites could monitor no-catch areas, she said, while inspiration could come from South Pacific fishing communities.

“They have taboo areas, coral reef sanctuaries, where fish would be saved for bad weather periods or major festivals and feast,” she said. “They know if they leave an area and don’t fish there, they’ll have much better stocks.”

It was a view that had been lost in modern times, she said, where the common view was “if I don’t go and fish it, someone else will”.

Harsh Controls For Ships, Planes

Apr 4th, 2008
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Published on Apr 4, 2008

Latest proposal will hit poorer countries hard

Airline and shipping operators, especially those in developing countries, will be hit hard if a European Union proposal on greenhouse gas emissions is adopted, officials warned yesterday.

The EU submitted a proposal yesterday to the ongoing Bangkok round of climate-change negotiations to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.

Delegates from 163 countries have participated in the United Nations-sanctioned conference here with the objective of managing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.

As a result, EU delegates asked for the control of greenhouse gases from the use of maritime and aviation fuels.

According to EU delegates, airlines and shipping lines are important sources of these emissions, which have been growing at a fast rate and neither is covered by the Kyoto Protocol.

“Even though it is just the first draft of a proposal, there is a strong chance it will be approved by member countries,” said Sirithan Pairojborriboon, director of the Greenhouse Gas Management Public Organisation.

“If that’s the case, airline operators [such as Thai Airways International and other Asian carriers] will be affected significantly, as they will be forced to control their emissions or else they will be charged for such emissions.”

Sirithan warned that the burden would be heavy for airline operators in developing countries, as currently they have no obligations on emission controls under the global climate pact.

“These operators could be forced to pay even though the total emissions of their respective countries is not within the level of Annex I countries,” he said, adding that the tourism and logistics industries might also be affected.

Annex I countries have to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by about 5 per cent from the 1990 level. Under the Kyoto Protocol, this target is supposed to be met by 2012.

Currently, Thailand and other developing countries are not on the Annex I list and emission cuts are still voluntary.

According to Sirithan, the EU has suggested two options for its proposal: allowing an emission trading system among airlines or initiating a carbon dioxide charge on airlines.

The EU proposal yesterday faced strong opposition from many delegates from developing countries, he said.

“They fear that a rise in costs from greenhouse gases will affect air fares or route management and in the end reduce the airline industry’s competitiveness,” Sirithan said, adding that the EU plan is expected to be debated more widely in the next round of climate talks in Bonn, Germany, in June.

The EU proposal was submitted to one of the two meetings at the Bangkok Climate Talks – called the Meeting of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol – which will end today.

Kamol Sukin

The Nation

New Water Taxis Clean And Green

Mar 10th, 2008
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Updated on Mar 10, 2008 – SCMPThe nearest craft to a water taxi that we ever had in Hong Kong were the good old walla-wallas. They were noisy and smelly, but provided an essential service in the days before cross-harbour tunnels once the ferries stopped running each night.

I can agree then with Thomas Gebauer (“Water taxi plan is bad news”, March 5) when he writes of smoke-puffing vessels polluting the atmosphere.

However, there is a new breed of water taxi on the waters of Sydney Harbour that is environmentally friendly.

These vessels could well be called water buses, as they can carry 60 to 100 passengers and their power source is solar energy and the wind.

Allan Zeman is criticised for supporting the water taxi concept for access to Ocean Park (“Water taxi plan wins support”, February 29).

Mr Zeman has never picked a dud horse yet, and my bet is he would put his money on this environmentally friendly form of transport. It will surely be a real winner.

Gordon Andreassend, Kowloon

Water Taxi Plan Is Bad News

Mar 5th, 2008
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Updated on Mar 05, 2008 – SCMP
I would like to add to the views of Jon Martin (“Government must act to reduce pollution from pleasure craft”, March 1) on the matter of proposals for “water taxis” to ply the south side of Hong Kong Island (“Water taxi plan wins support”, February 29).

This part of the island is unique, contrasting with the hassle and buzz of the built-up areas like the harbourside and Aberdeen. Tourists are astounded when they see the built-up areas, with the pollution of the roadsides in Central and elsewhere and then experience the tranquillity and beauty of the south side, areas like Deep Water Bay, Middle Bay, Repulse Bay and South Bay.

I can imagine that with a fleet of smoke-puffing water taxis with tourists invading these waters, pollution is guaranteed, and this will have an impact on beaches where people enjoy bathing.

Allan Zeman, the chairman of the Ocean Park, is interested in boosting business for his enterprise, but he should think twice before adding his support to an idea I think will be destructive.

The further build up of Ocean Park and its surroundings with tourist facilities, already adds to the heavy traffic with tourist buses which also go from Ocean Park to Stanley.

We must preserve the uniqueness of the south side of Hong Kong Island.

Thomas Gebauer, Discovery Bay

Government Must Act To Reduce Pollution From Pleasure Craft

Mar 1st, 2008
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Updated on Mar 01, 2008 – SCMPOver the last 10 years the beaches and waterways in the Sai Kung Country Park have witnessed unprecedented growth in the activities of pleasure craft.

What a wonderful resource for those lucky enough to have access.

With this increase, unfortunately, we are witnessing a shocking rise in marine pollution as well.

Many of these otherwise pristine locations are now gasping under raw sewage from the attending boats.

Not only has the number of boats increased, so too has the size, with even ferries from Central and Kowloon bringing thousands of lucky passengers to these Hong Kong jewels.

With this massive pressure being brought to bear I believe it is time to introduce holding tanks for all vessels that have on-board toilets.

With hundreds of tonnes of effluent polluting our beaches from these boats, the jewel is quickly losing its attraction.

With a second pier now under construction in Sai Kung, even more boats can be expected to populate these beaches and waterways.

If we are to save our environment then let the government act swiftly to legislate that all vessels with access to these areas be compliant with holding tanks, and provide suitable facilities ashore to process the contents of these tanks.

A recent memorandum from Sai Kung District Council included the following: “The Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD) will construct a second public pier in Sai Kung.

“The committee suggested that the `hollow’ design be adopted for the pier in order to reduce the impact on the flow of water in the vicinity.”

I applaud both the district council and CEDD for the environmental concern they are showing regarding the “flow of water”, but seriously, the impact of the second pier and the marine traffic it will generate in this precious area is of a hugely more devastating concern.

Would the Environmental Protection Department care to comment?

Jon Martin, Sai Kung

Marine Pollution Regulations

Jan 8th, 2008
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Danger at sea – Calls are growing to tighten regulation of the world’s shipping fleet, a major source of pollution

Michael Richardson
Jan 08, 2008

Often steaming in international waters far from land, the world’s fleet of ocean-going ships has largely evaded scrutiny as a source of harmful air pollution and global warming emissions. But this lack of regulation is about to change as the fleet, which carries 90 per cent of trade, expands rapidly and pressure increases to impose tighter fuel standards, and others, on the trillion-dollar industry.

Calls are also growing louder to include both the shipping and aviation industries in any new international deal to cut greenhouse emissions. Neither are covered by the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012. The cleanup proposals are being closely watched by major ports like Shanghai, Hong Kong and Singapore because they will add substantially to business costs. They could give other maritime centres a competitive advantage unless the new controls are adopted and enforced by all trading nations.

A report last month by four US environmental groups found that only six countries emitted more carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, than the world’s fleet of 60,000 ships. It said that, each year, the fleet released between 600 million and 900 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, about the same as the 130 million cars on US roads.

However, shipping industry officials say it is difficult to measure carbon dioxide pollution from the global fleet and that some estimates are exaggerated. A figure frequently cited by the industry is a report to the British government by former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern. It concluded that carbon dioxide emissions from ships contributed just 2 per cent to the global total in 2000, compared with 15 per cent from the transport sector as a whole. Critics insist that the level is substantially higher and fails to take account of the rapid expansion of seaborne trade, which has surged 50 per cent in the past 15 years.

Ships are also a source of non-carbon-dioxide pollution. The International Council on Clean Transportation, made up of transport and air quality officials from a wide range of states, reported last year that seagoing ships produced more sulfur dioxide than all the world’s cars, trucks and buses combined. The council’s study showed that the sulfur content of marine bunker fuel is far greater than highway diesel fuel. Bunker fuel is significantly cheaper than road fuel.

Environmental groups say that ships account for between 8 per cent and 10 per cent of sulfur emissions from all types of fossil fuel and also contribute nearly 30 per cent of global releases of nitrogen oxides. These emissions harm human health, cause acid rain and deplete the ozone layer.

Critics say that another pollutant from ships – black carbon, or soot – can warm the atmosphere many times more than the same amount of carbon dioxide.

In November, reacting to public concern about pollution from ships, the European Commission called on the International Maritime Organisation, the United Nations agency responsible for regulating shipping and marine pollution, to do more to help combat climate change. The IMO set up a scientific group in July to study the issue. The group included experts from major shipping and trading nations, including China, Japan and Singapore, as well as non-governmental organisations. Their report is due to be presented at an IMO meeting in London next month.

Any proposals to tighten fuel standards, reduce funnel exhaust gases and use only shore-based electric power when in port would be included as amendments to global marine pollution laws under the IMO’s Marpol Convention. They could be adopted as early as October and come into force 16 months later.

Some ship owners and government officials have cautioned the industry to take a conservative approach to pollution cuts because of the potential costs involved. But Tony Mason, secretary general of the International Chamber of Shipping, warned that if governments and industry failed to come up with improved standards by the end of this year, “we shall see a serious disenchantment with the IMO process and a proliferation of local regulations, led in all probability by the EU and the US”.

National and regional regulation has already begun in America and Europe. For example, the US House of Representatives approved legislation in March to allow the coastguard and Environmental Protection Agency to enforce emission limits on thousands of domestic and foreign-flagged ships that enter US waters each year.

If the IMO fails to come up with credible and enforceable global standards, sea-based transport will be saddled with a patchwork quilt of regulation. This will slow shipping and maritime trade, and increase its cost.

Michael Richardson is visiting senior research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore. This is a personal comment.

Los Angeles Harbor Commission Adopts Proposal to Ban Older Trucks from Port; 80% Reduction in Truck Pollution Projected

Nov 4th, 2007
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

greencarcongress.com, 4 November 2007

At their 1 Nov meeting, The Los Angeles Harbor Commissioners adopted a proposed measure that will implement a progressive ban of older trucks from operation at the port of Los Angeles beginning in October 2008. The ban will reduce port-related truck pollution by approximately 80% over a period of just over five years.

The proposed tariff will also require mayoral and city council approval by adoption as a city ordinance. Port of Long Beach Harbor Commissioners will deliberate a similar ban at the Oct. 29, 2007, meeting of the Long Beach Harbor Commission.

This proposed tariff moves our air quality goals forward next year with a progressive truck ban schedule that is not only consistent with the anticipated requirements proposed by the California Air Resources Board, but actually achieves even more emissions reductions in an accelerated timeframe. While we are still working on the broader Clean Trucks Program components, this tariff shows our commitment to advancing the air quality goals we set forth in the Clean Air Action Plan approved by both port boards last November.

—Geraldine Knatz, Ph.D., executive director of the Port of Los Angeles

Under this tariff, trucks will only be granted access to Port terminals if they are registered with the Ports and have a Radio Frequency Identification Device (RFID) tag that will provide information about each truck to the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Port marine terminal operators will be required to equip their terminals with RFID tag readers to manage access of drayage trucks and ensure that they are compliant with the emissions standards that the ports are establishing through the progressive ban schedule.

The tariff language specifies that, beginning 10 October 2008, the Ports would reduce harmful emissions at the Port terminals by denying access to older trucks according to a progressive ban by model year scheduled over the five-year Clean Trucks Program schedule. The schedule for the progressive ban is as follows:

· Ban pre-1989 trucks from Port service by October 1, 2008

· Ban 1989-1993 trucks from Port service by January 1, 2010

· Ban unretrofitted 1994-2003 trucks from Port service by January 1, 2010

· Ban pre-2007 trucks from Port service by January 1, 2012

The tariff would not apply to “Dedicated Use Vehicles,” defined in the tariff as On-Road Vehicles that do not have separate tractors and trailers, including auto transports, fuel delivery vehicles, concrete mixers; mobile cranes and construction equipment.

Losing Sight of Hong Kong’s Harbour

Apr 30th, 2006
by AdminCTA.
No comments yet

Losing Sight of Hong Kong’s Harbour

Douglas Woodring, Associate, Civic Exchange pens his second article for Britain in Hong Kong on the burning issue of Hong Kong’s worsening air pollution. He brings our attention, this time, to local marine emissions and the negative impacts they are having on our air quality.

Impact of Marine Emissions

Hong Kong’s greatest asset is its harbour, yet as we all know, this has become harder and harder to appreciate with clarity as air pollution appears to be steadily on the increase. We often focus on vehicle, power plant and industrial emissions as the culprits, but what about marine emissions? What impact does living next to two of the world’s top four busiest ports have on our air quality, and what is being done about it?

Unfortunately, the answer is that port traffic is a significant contributor to the deterioration of our air quality, and that a lot more can be done to make improvements. Based on transportation figures, in 2004, more than 225,000 vessels arrived in Hong Kong. Of them, 16% (36,000) were ocean going vessels and 84% (190,000) were river vessels (38% ferries and 62% cargo vessels). As it stands today, marine air pollution is not regulated within the Air Pollution Control Ordinance which is the main regulatory control mechanism for emissions within Hong Kong.

Marine emissions in Hong Kong are important for two reasons. Firstly, they are one of the only emission sources whose emissions continue to increase year on year, and secondly, although the absolute amount of marine emissions are less than motor vehicles, are emitted in the heart of Victoria Harbour and are released close to the ground level and within a few kilometers of the densely populated Kowloon peninsula. They pose as serious health risk. In fact, Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and Sulphur Dioxides (SO2) have both been on the constant increase in Hong Kong since 1990, with both almost doubling in the past 10 years. Each of these pollutants are contributors to the haze and grey skies that are seen in our city, with NOx being a source of ozone creation which is widely considered to be dangerous in terms of health and environmental impacts. A recent study by CLSA and Civic Exchange has shown that Hong Kong’s hazy days have increased from less than 10 per month in 1990, to over 25 per month in 2004.

Sulphur Oxides

While the extent of the influence of PRD regional based pollution has been long known, the influence of local marine sources on local SO2 levels is relatively new information which contributes to the mounting concerns over marine emissions. Ocean going cargo vessels are legally able to use high sulphur fuels with sulphur content up to 4.5%, which contrasts with current requirements and availability of road vehicle fuel in Hong Kong which is 0.005% for motor diesel and petrol/gasoline. Marine fuels are often called Heavy Oil or Bunker Fuel, and these contain high amounts of sulphur which forms SO2 upon combustion, along with substantial amounts of elemental-carbon, nickel and vanadium, all which have significant health implications for affected populations. To put this all into perspective, recent studies show that marine vessels around Kwai Chung are responsible for 36% of total SO2 concentrations measured at the Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department’s air quality measuring stations. Surprisingly, local power plants were only responsible for 7% of total SO2 concentrations at the same stations. Furthermore, marine vessels burning high sulphur fuel appear to be the major source of SO2 in specific locations within the heart of the urban area. To further show the severity of marine vessels’ contribution to sulphur oxides (SOx), ships anchoring at Tokyo’s port emit eight times more SOx per year than the total amount emitted by autos in six Tokyo Wards along the bay.

An Overlooked Problem?

In some aspects, marine pollution has been overlooked as a problem source, partly because marine vessels do not operate on land where the human population moves about each day. Similarly, there are various local and international bodies that govern marine transport, and because ocean going vessels move from port to port, a higher level of international cooperation and understanding of these problems is necessary in order to effectuate a policy on emissions which can be widely accepted, adopted and monitored.

Currently, most of the shipping industry (for ocean going vessels) feels that shipping regulation should be undertaken and enforced uniformly on an international basis through the United Nation’s International Maritime Organisation (IMO). Regulatory issues in the PRD then involve consideration of three different jurisdictions: (i) Hong Kong’s, (ii) Mainland China’s, and (iii) the international jurisdiction of the IMO. International pollution controls are primarily implemented through the MARPOL Convention, of which Annex VI “Prevention of air pollution from ships” came into force in May 2005. This sets limits on SO2 and NOx emissions, and prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances. Currently 27 countries have ratified Annex VI, representing 64% of the world’s tonnage in ships. Hong Kong and China have yet to ratify Annex VI, with only Japan and Singapore complying with this annex within Asia. Hong Kong authorities have stated that they expect to ratify Annex VI within 2006 and in any event their current regulations are largely compliant with its requirements.

The IMO also enables regions to be declared Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA). To date there are two SECAs in the world which require ships to reduce SOx emissions within their boundaries through using cleaner fuels within those zones. Other emission reductions are also being achieved, largely in the US and European Union, through the reduction of vessel speeds within harbours, changing to cleaner fuels while operating auxiliary engines when approaching harbour, retrofitting ships with emission reduction equipment and the use of shore-side power while docked at port. It is unlikely that Hong Kong will be able to establish a SECA under the IMO regulations. This is largely because in order to achieve SECA status, Hong Kong and Mainland China, being two adjoining countries, must jointly apply and each must have already ratified Annex VI. Moreover, each must have individually taken strong measures nationally to reduce marine emissions before SECA status is granted. Neither Hong Kong or the Mainland appears to have made any effort thus far to reduce marine emissions at its increasingly busy ports, with one commentator saying that “the [Chinese] government has made great efforts to reduce emissions from stationary sources and vehicle exhaust; however, emissions from ships are usually neglected.”

What Can We Do?

What then, can Hong Kong do to improve this situation within our jurisdiction and the PRD? Examples from the U.S. and Europe have shown that two different approaches are being explored and implemented: (i) the use of incentives for complying vessels in the form of reduced fees, shorter waiting time for dock space, and reduced inspection times, and (ii) taxation, differentiated dues and other penalties for failing to comply. In some cases, incentives given by individual ports have shown to be just as effective in cleaning up emissions as regulations handed down from national or supra-national bodies. Use of clean vehicles and equipment at the port itself must also be a coherent part of emission reduction policy.

Hong Kong’s high level of river traffic should also be a main focal point for making improvements, as this accounts for 84% of our marine traffic. In this case, close coordination and cooperation from the PRD will need to be put into place. Cleaner fuels and shore-based power are two of the most likely options for progress, but this then runs into issues relating to fuel policy and availability in the PRD which will be covered in the next article in this series.

In summary, marine pollution is an increasingly worrying contributor to our local air quality problems, and one which is having a clear health impact on the entire population of Kowloon. International protection through the designation of a SECA will be difficult without the support of many countries/ports in the region, and Asia is lagging behind other regions in respect to this type of coordinated response to marine emissions. Hong Kong’s main target for improvement should therefore be aimed at local port policies (Hong Kong and Shenzhen), and programmes to address the use of fuel and/or emission standards on the vessels that constitute the high volume of river traffic within the PRD. Lack of action in the marine industry will contradict any improvements that may be made in land-based emission improvements.

This is the second article in a four-part series on Hong Kong’s air pollution. The next piece will focus on fuel options in the Pearl River Delta, and how that can impact our situation in Hong Kong.

Further information on shipping emission reduction options is available in Civic Exchange’s recently released report “Marine Emission Reduction Options for Hong Kong and the Pearl River Delta”, March 2006, available at www.civic-exchange.org

← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →