By Vijay Kurup
The pressure in the maritime world is building up. Shipping and aviation are major emitters of carbon. If the maritime industry were a country, it would be the eight largest emitter of carbon. The Clydebank Declaration, introduced at the 26th United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Conference of Parties (COP 26) in Glasgow, addresses the importance of the current reality and the need for a robust interaction with all the stakeholders in the maritime industry. The clarion call is blunt and terse – Decarbonize the supply chain.
What does it entail to the Indian maritime industry? What is India’s response to the COP 26 resolutions?
The signatories of the Clydebank Declarations take into consideration the resolutions adopted in all the previous conferences on climate change and clean air. The resolutions adopted were:
- Recall the long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
- Note the International Maritime Organization (IMO)’s adoption of the Initial IMO Strategy on Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships, Resolution MEPC.304 (72), which aims to align international shipping with the aforementioned temperature target.
- Emphasize the importance of pursuing efforts to limit the increase in the global average temperature to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, to have a greater chance of significantly reducing the risks and impacts of climate change on countries, in particular least developed countries and small island developing states.
- Recognize the benefits of pursuing synergies between decarbonisation and clean air policies in shipping, and building on existing measures related to the reduction of pollution from ships under the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL).
- Express great concern regarding the findings from the Fourth IMO Greenhouse Gas Study 2020, which estimates that if no further action is taken, international shipping emissions are expected to represent 90% to 130% of 2008 emission levels by 2050.
- Express great concern also regarding the findings of the IPCC Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report (2021), which states that global warming of 1.5°C and 2°C will be exceeded during the 21st century unless deep reductions in carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions occur in the coming decades, and hence, endorse the need for international shipping to keep accelerating its level of action.
- Equally recognize that a rapid transition in the coming decade to clean maritime fuels, zero-emission vessels, alternative propulsion systems, and the global availability of landside infrastructure to support these, is imperative for the transition to clean shipping.
- The signatories of this Declaration assert the need for the formation of an international coalition between ambitious governments, to act together and demonstrate that maritime decarbonisation is possible, while unlocking new business opportunities and socioeconomic benefits for communities across the globe.
The Clydebank Declaration is a voluntary participation of 22 countries. The mission statement of the declaration is to develop at least six green shipping corridors through major deep-sea routes between two or more ports by 2025 and sustainably link the world’s largest ports by 2030. The name Clydebank Declaration derives from the heritage City of Glasgow and the River Clyde
As per the annexure A of the policy paper of COP26, for the establishment of green corridors the signatories acknowledge the importance of partnerships in which:
Two or more signatories to the Declaration identify and take steps with relevant willing ports, operator(s) and others along the value chain to decarbonize a specific shared maritime route within the jurisdiction and control of a signatory.
Voluntary participation by operators is a significant element for successful green shipping corridors.
The Clydebank Declaration has clarified that all vessels transiting a green corridor would not be required to have zero emissions or to participate in the partnerships.
In supporting the establishment of green corridors, signatories recognize that fully decarbonized fuels or propulsion technologies should have the capability to not add additional GHGs to the global system through their lifecycle, including production, transport or consumption. A Greenhouse Gas is a gas that absorbs and emits heat energy that is contained in the normal light spectrum, causing the greenhouse effect. Gases in the atmosphere, such as carbon dioxide, trap heat similar to the glass roof of a greenhouse, which makes the earth warmer. These heat-trapping gases are called greenhouse gases.
The purpose of creating green shipping corridors, arising from partnerships between willing ports and operators, is to decarbonize specific maritime routes. Further over 200 businesses across the shipping value chain have committed to scaling down and commercializing zero-emission vessels and fuels by 2030.
Reportedly, conglomerates like Amazon, Ikea, Michelin, Unilever etc., have announced that they will only buy zero-carbon freight from 2040.
The aim of the declaration, as stated earlier, is to reduce emissions to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees centigrade above pre industrial level temperature. But what is the ‘pre industrial level temperature’? The IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C, uses the reference period from 1850 to 1900 to represent pre-industrial temperature, which was 13.7 degrees Celsius. IPCC is an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – a United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change.
The years 1850 to 1900 is the earliest documented period with temperature globally collated and is used as an approximation of pre- industrial temperatures. The current global average surface temperature is then compared with the pre-industrial age temperature to see the extent of rise or fall in temperature. It has been observed that the rise in temperature since the preindustrial era has been roughly 1 degrees Celsius.
The phrase 1.5 degrees Celsius were being bandied about in all global climate conferences? What is the significance of this number? If the temperature were to rise by 1.5 degrees Celsius, it could cause irremediable destruction of coral reefs worldwide. It was estimated that 70 to 90% of the coral reefs would be destroyed. If the temperature were to rise by 2 degrees Celsius, 99% of the coral reefs would be lost. The Declaration signatories are committed to address climate change and emphasized the critical need of limiting the increase in the global average temperature to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
Capt Deepak Tewari, Chairman, Container Shipping Lines Association (India), said, “the rise in sea levels will have an important climate change impact for ports. Higher sea levels and larger waves could cause flooding and affect mooring and quayside operations in ports, including increased loading times and delays to ships arriving or departing.”
The year 2020 saw an unprecedented number of containers falling overboard container ships, over 3000 in all. In 2021, 1000 containers have fallen overboard to date. One of the reasons attributed is due to increased frequency of high intensity storms. Storms are getting stronger and more frequent. The heights of the waves are much higher now. All this is directly attributed to warmer ocean temperatures in the Pacific Ocean. Climate change is creating warmer oceans. It is not only creating more storms, but is increasingly becoming stronger and more powerful.
Nineteen nations have committed to the Clydebank Declaration at COP26, this November, pledging, interalia, the establishment of green shipping corridors – zero emission maritime route between two or more ports. The three possible green shipping corridors that are being developed are the Asia – Europe container trade, the Korea-Japan-US pure car carrier (PCC) corridor, and the Australia – Japan iron ore corridor. China and India are not signatories to this declaration as yet. However Capt. Tewari feels that India is strategically located on the Asia-Europe shipping route and as and when the green corridors take shape, our ports should gear up to provide the fuels of the future to enable the ships meet their net zero carbon targets.
Though India has not signed the Clydebank Declaration, the Prime Minister Narendra Modi has committed to a graded five-point response towards stemming the global rise in temperatures. He has termed them as ‘Panchamrit’, to deal with this challenge.
First- India will take its non-fossil energy capacity to 500 GW by 2030.
Second- India will meet 50 percent of its energy requirements from renewable energy by 2030.
Third- India will reduce the total projected carbon emissions by one billion tonnes from now till 2030.
Fourth- By 2030, India will reduce the carbon intensity of its economy by less than 45 percent.
And lastly by the year 2070, India will achieve the target of Net Zero.
The Prime Minister Narender Modi has, interalia, stated that India will take its non-fossil energy capacity to 500 GW by year 2030. And will reduce the total projected carbon emissions by one billion tonnes from now till 2030. Further by 2030, India will reduce the carbon intensity of its economy by less than 45 percent and by the year 2070, India will achieve the target of Net Zero.
Decarbonisation will not be without a hike in logistics costs. Capt Tewari said, “ It must be clearly understood that decarbonising the world fleet is not just an issue for the shipping Industry. Most major economies and global businesses have all made pledges to reach net-zero emissions, but they won’t be able to do it unless the shipping industry gets their first. That will mean paying more to move their goods around the world.”
He further added that according to a Global Maritime Forum study, decarbonising the global shipping fleet, which includes the land-based port and fuel infrastructure will cost about $ 1.9 trillion over 20 years. Society must accept the fact that shipping costs will increase. Given the 24,000 TEUS ships are already in place, if there is a big increase in fuel price during the transition phase, that costs will be spread across the containers and result in a freight rate increase.
Which are the clean fuels? Why is it difficult to change to clean fuels? The list of clean fuels includes Ammonia, Hydrogen, LNG, Biofuels, and Methanol etc. If there are pros for these gases there are cons too, making its adoption difficult. Some of these gases have low energy content, as compared to traditional fuel gases and therefore require larger storage capacity. Liquefied Hydrogen, makes for a powerful fuel, requires a -253 degrees centigrade environment for storage, which exponentially increases its handling costs. LNG is not carbon neutral, but emits less carbon content in comparison to traditional fuels. The technology is there to build vessels that run on clean fuel. The main stumbling blocks are the availability and cost of alternative fuels.
Conforming to the Clydebank Declaration would entail infrastructural changes in the port. Says Captain Tewari, “Rise in sea levels will be an important climate change impact for ports. Higher sea levels and larger waves could cause flooding and affect mooring and quayside operations in ports, including increased loading times and delays to ships arriving or departing. “
“Extreme events, such as storm surges, may lead to breakwaters being overtopped or damaged, and sediment being swept into the approach channels making them unnavigable. Different patterns of storminess, heavy rainfall, river discharge and wave direction could also change the way sediment moves, requiring changes to existing maintenance dredging strategies,” Capt Tewari warned.
In a sign of growing awareness of the pernicious influence of climate change, six European investing firms involved in capital financing for the dry bulk industry were reportedly mulling to reduce their exposure to vessels that transport coal. The pressure is from the insurance companies that use the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criterion to screen companies. ESG is the new norm that companies are now adopting, before it makes any investments.
Transportation of coal accounts for almost 30% of cargo volume. The port in Antwerp and the Peel Port in Scotland Ports too are shying away from handling coal. Shipping companies that transport the world’s coal are under scrutiny of financial institutions also who are now beginning to look for vessels conforming to regulations.
“Ports need to plan and implement adaptation measures to increase the resilience of operations and of infrastructure, and to reduce their vulnerability to the effects of climate change,” said Capt Tewari. He emphasises, “Plans need to be site-specific – each port or harbour has its own meteorological conditions, orientation, coastline and sediment regime.”
Capt Tewari pointed out the importance of the synergies between the Government and the private sector in this mission. He said that Governments played a key role in supporting and regulating maritime activities, but the business of shipping cargo was primarily managed by private enterprises across the globe. In response to IMO 2020 low Sulphur emission norms, shipping Lines had already embarked on a massive journey in adopting cleaner and alternative forms of fuel for their ships and that journey would continue in keeping with the global move towards cleaner energy.
In order to assess the progress made, all these efforts need to be measured and tabulated. Inspection agencies like the Bureau Veritas, would have a pivotal part to play in charting and verifying the progress. All this calls for transparency by the various stakeholders in the supply chain.
The path ahead is carved in stone. There cannot be any wavering of focus. The end result would be sacrosanct, if achieved. There is a growing awareness to move away from fossil fuels. We have not as yet transgressed ourselves to the point of no return. But the question remains – would the efforts be enough? How committed would be the nations in implementing their promises? There are still many miles to go and promises to be kept. The goals are doubtless ambitious, but achievable. Moving forward, the agenda now is to swim together and not sink together.
