Because ballast water constitutes such big quantities ( in tons ) it's in most countries legally restricted by different authorities than other kinds of emissions. Therefore also on this site ballast water rules are followed up on it's own page: Ballast Water Convention.

Please note : Every link on this page opens in a new window. If your "Pop-up killer" is too efficient it can also stop new windows. When this happens, please press "Ctrl" and click on the link you want.

"Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships" ( Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78 ), which comes under Port State Control, came into force on May 19, 2005.

You can download MARPOL (demo) as a .zip file for free. To get the full version you must get an activation code.

• MARPOL designates the Baltic Sea region as a "special" area (Annexes I, II and V) [ Ship Emissions ]:
  - Clean Seas' Guide for Masters and other Mariners
  - Waste Disposal
  
  • Annex VI ( Air Pollution ) was revised in October 2008 [ Nox ], came into effect July 01, 2010.
  
  
• UK - Implementation Of the Environmental Liability Directive - 2007 (article).
  
  
• European Union policy on ship emissions, with links to related EU documents, studies, and reports. The EU strives for stricter measures than MARPOL VI. Additional information by e-mail.
  
  
• The oil companies' European association for environment, health, and safety in refining and distribution.
  
  
• IMO summary of International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1997. Additional information by e-mail.
  
  
• "Report pollution" gives a possible way for you to report intentional oil spill or other pollution with advice exactly how and what to report.
  
  
• Overview of International Environmental Protection Conventions Implementation in P.R. China, slightly out-dated.
  
  
• Philippine Clean Water Act, 2004    concerns also the Marine Environment, i.e. discharges and/or dumping of waste / pollutants / chemicals into the sea. For instance, use of oil dispersing chemicals is not allowed in Philippine waters.
  
  
• After US became a party to MARPOL Annex VI US Coast Guard has incorporated MARPOL Annex VI, Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships [ USCG CG 543 Policy Letter 09-01    , which came into force in US on January 08, 2009. Covers US flagged vessels and all foreign flagged vessels over 400 GT engaged on International voyages and calling on US ports.

On March 27, 2009, US and Canada submitted a joint proposal to IMO to designate as an emission control area ( ECA ) virtually all coastal waters of the two nations out to 200 nautical miles of their coasts. See green lines in map to the right.

There are two such areas already in existence: The North Sea and The Baltic Sea. The North American area would be the third special control area / zone in the world. US excluded some areas away from the mainland. From the North American mainland the Canadian and US arctic and Western Alaska were also excluded.

The proposal of designing both East and West Coast of North America as Special Zones up to 200 nautical miles from the coast was adopted by Marine Environment Protection Committee ( MEPC ) of the International Maritime Organisation ( IMO ) in March 2010. At the same session another new Marpol regulation to protect the Antarctic from pollution by heavy grade oils was also adopted. These amendments were expected to enter into force on August 1, 2011.

In September 2010 IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee established the guidelines ( MEPC 184 ) for compliance for scrubbing ships' exhaust. The rules come within requirements of the US Emission Control Areas ( ECA ), see map to right. You can download the complete text of MEPC 184 (59) guidelines.

• EPA has published their contribution to air pollution rules and documentation in connection with US joining MARPOL Annex VI.
  
  
• World Shipping Council proposes to IMO global Vessel Efficiency System to reduce carbon emissions. ( January 2010 )
  
  
• California Air Resources Board tightened up their air pollution rules on July 01, 2009 - all vessels entering Californian ports must switch to low sulphur fuel at more than 24 nautical miles from the coast. The requirements will get even stricter in 2012.
  
  
• On December 15, 2008, the Australian Government published their Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme: "Australia's Low Pollution Future" - White Paper ( CPRS ). On March 10, 2009, the paper was tabled in the Australian parliament, possibly because of Australia's "Green Left" 's reaction to emissions trading.
  
  
• Regulations for the prevention of Air Pollution from Ships ( MARPOL Annex VI ) has been incorporated into Irish law (You must register before you get access). Applies to all ships regardless of flag state (2008).
  
  
• In Oct. 2010 Hamburg Süd and Aliança Shipping Lines announced they will voluntarily use fuel with a sulphur content of only 0.5% at berth while their ships are in Hong Kong from Jan. 01 2011 to Dec. 31 2012. At present (2010) a maximum sulphur content of 4.5% is allowed worldwide except for ECAs. It's to be lowered to 0.5% globally only in 2020.
  
  In addition following shipping lines. have announced they will do the same: Maersk Line, OOC, APL ( Singapore ), Evergreen, CMA, and Hapag-Lloyd.
  
  
• A new international environmental coalition dedicated exclusively to the greening of international shipping was launched in April 2010. The Clean Shipping Coalition will promote policies aimed at the protection and restoration of the marine and atmospheric environment that are consistent with the safe operation of ships, sustainable development, social and economic justice, and human health.

Summary of EU legal situation 2011

Europe's major carbon emitters such as power, iron, and steel plants are already subject to the annually monitored ( carbon cap ) scheme. The aviation industry will enter the scheme in January 2012. Possibly the maritime industry could be the next one in 2014 / 2015.

Background to Emissions Trading Scheme

The Kyoto Conference on Climate Change in December 1997 proposed the establishment of a legally binding agreement on reductions of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by developed countries. The EU has agreed to reduce emissions. The Protocol resulting from Kyoto identified emissions trading as one of the means by which reductions could be achieved.

What is Carbon Trading ?

Carbon emissions from a particular organisation is calculated using specific technology and on the basis of that, "Carbon Credits" are awarded for each metric ton of carbon produced.

Under this system, there is a regulation giving the amount of carbon that can be produced by an organisation. They are awarded carbon credits if the emissions are lower than that the permissible level ( limit ). These credits can later be sold on the open Carbon Trading Market in exchange of extra emissions.

IMO and Emissions Trading

UN's top "climate body" [ Framework Convention on Climate Change ] is leading global negotiations, which were planned to be agreed on in Copenhagen at end of 2009. Main sectors' targets under discussion are the International aviation and maritime sectors. For the maritime sector IMO is supposed to be the leading UN "body".

IMO and the European Union, as regulating bodies, have introduced "Emission Control Areas" ( ECAs ). The intention is to reduce ships' emissions. In December 2008 the UK Chamber of Shipping came out in support of a global Emissions Trading Scheme ( ETS ).

ETS is a methodology seeking to award lower emitters and encourage higher emitters to improve their performance by its very basic design. Shipping contributes about 3% of all CO₂ into the atmosphere [ close to one billion ( thousand millions ) tonnes CO2 ( long ton )] per annum.

The Shipping Emissions Abatement and Trading ( SEAaT ) commission did host a seminar on April 2, 2009, in London to collect ideas, reports, and opinions from the shipping community on market based emissions trading, which were to be discussed at IMO meeting in July 2009.

SEAaT is sponsored by BP, Shell, Teekay, Stena Lines, and the Norwegian Shipowners Association. [Source: Marine Reporter 03 / 2009]

On April 17, 2009, the EU halted plans to impose more strict emission laws on the shipping industry because of the global recession and on May 04 Australia followed suit (may be you must register to get access).

In 2011, less than half year before the scheme should take effect in the aviation industry, EU is bringing the aviation industry into the Emissions Scheme against strong protests from Airlines. "This is a tax! We have never before paid tax on aviation fuel for International voyages". And from the German aviation industry: "If this is not sorted out in the next six months we run the risk of a trade conflict between the EU and third countries."

On Sept. 07, 2011, Germany, and G20 leader France, international anti-poverty lobby group Oxfam and International environmental group the World Wide Fund for Nature ( WWF ) proposed a global carbon price for ships, at around $25/ton of carbon dioxide emitted, with rebates for developing- and least-developed countries.

US airlines were preparing to join the Emissions Trading Scheme "under protest". For more on carbon trading schemes see Carbon Positive Net. Instead of Carbon trading many ship owners are discussing the possibilities of using LNG instead of fuel oil. Norway is already doing so in their domestic market.

Speed and Fuel Consumption

During second half of 2010 many container ships dropped their speed from 24 to 18 knots. Main gain for owners is they save just over 40% in fuel by steaming at this lower speed. Of course they can also advertise they are environmentally friendly. The most optimistic forecasts give as one result that all currently laid up container ships would be sailing again in middle of 2011. For every three ships that reduces speed from 24 to 18 knots one laid up ship of same size gets a full cargo.

There's been strong rumours Maersk Line - among others - are preparing their high speed diesel engines for slow speed. The intention is to start steaming at only 12 knots - difference between 24 and 12 knots would be a fuel saving of about 75%. The reason for this is that the relationship between speed and required energy is exponential. When you double the speed ( x2 ) you need 4 times ( x2² ) the energy.

When reducing speed below 12 knots the fuel consumption per time unit is reduced by such a small amount it doesn't compensate for the longer time it takes to travel one nautical mile. The most economical ship speed ( with a traditional hull shape ) is therefore very close to 12 knots with the smallest consumption per nautical mile.

For every container vessel dropping the speed from 24 to 12 knots there will be need for one more container ship of same size. Two container ships steaming at 12 knots require only 50% of the fuel of one ( same size ) vessel steaming 24.knots. This should lead to lower freight rates, which would boost word trade. An additional advantage would be less stress for the seafarers which could reduce number of accidents.