Addressing shipping emissions with Professor Alice Larkin in interview with Kevin Anderson

Shipping emissions is one of those niche areas, part of Transport emissions, that needs to be tackled. There is both a huge freight and logistics component, a smaller passenger component and the tourism component of cruise ships.

Most of the interview is focussed on the Freight component. About 3 percent of global emissions are due to shipping. This is about equivalent to the emissions of Germany.

The shipping sector is large, complex, with many different vessels, many actors. 

About a third of all goods transported by ship are fossil fuels: coal, oil and gas. So the implementation of the Paris Agreement should see a reduction in transport of fossil fuels.

Other major areas are the transport of consumer goods in container vessels, and bulk carriers such as carrying iron ore or minerals or food and grains.

Shipping levy on maritime emissions opposed by Australia at IMO conference

Shipping, in transporting around 90% of world trade, creates about 1 billion tonnes of greenhouse gasses, or nearly 3 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions. It is about the same amount as Germany or Japan. 

Pacific Island nations including Solomon Islands and Marshall Islands, proposed the introduction of a $100 per tonne levy on maritime emissions in order to make cleaner fuels cost-competitive with the dirtier heavy fuel oil that is the industry standard. 

But Australia appears to have joined Saudi Arabia, China, Russia, Brazil and other major states, to oppose this Pacific initiative for a levy on maritime emissions. Climate Home report identifies Latin American countries were also most vocal against the measure.

Fiji had proposed for the IMO, supported by a broad coalition of other Pacific nations, small island states and Least Developed countries:

• 37% GHG emissions reductions by 2030
• 96% by 2040 
• full decarbonization of shipping industry by 2050. 

A carbon levy and global fuel standards was also proposed as part of the basket of measures. 

Conference outcomes:

• failure to agree on absolute emission reduction targets for 2030 and 2040, 
• identified “indicative checkpoints” of at least 20%, striving for 30% emission reduction by 2030, 
• at least 70%, striving for 80% reduction by 2040. 
• aim to reach only net-zero “by or around, i.e., close to 2050”, depending on “national circumstances”.
• Green fuel mandates deferred.
• “pricing of greenhouse gas emissions” (a levy), deferred, earliest would be in 2027.

John Maggs, from the Clean Shipping Coalition, said:

 “There is no excuse for this wish and a prayer agreement. They knew what the science required, and that a 50% cut in emissions by 2030 was both possible and affordable. Instead the level of ambition agreed is far short of what is needed to be sure of keeping global heating below 1.5ºC and the language seemingly contrived to be vague and non-committal. The most vulnerable put up an admirable fight for high ambition and significantly improved the agreement but we are still a long way from the IMO treating the climate crisis with the urgency that it deserves and that the public demands.” Read more by Clean Shipping, 7 July, 2023, UN agrees on a new climate plan for global shipping, but not 1.5°C aligned.