Industry Insight: Is the IMO Really Falling Short With its Emission Reduction Targets?

IMO will hold its 68th Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) session in London from May 11-15.

There has been some talk lately that the International Maritime Organization (IMO) is falling short when it comes to setting its emission reduction targets.

With the IMO's 2020 goal to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per tonne-kilometre by more than 20% compared to 2005, is it fair then to infer that the goals of the Organization are a little archaic?

Let's look at the facts. In January 2013, amendments made to MARPOL Annex VI regulations saw the introduction of the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new ships.

The EEDI requires that as of 2020 new ships will be designed to be at least 20% more efficient when compared to the agreed IMO reference line, while ships built after 2030 are required to be 30% more efficient. On paper, this looks like some lofty goals.

However, a new study undertaken by independent research company CE Delft and commissioned by Seas At Risk and Transport and Environment entitled Historical Trends in Ship Design Efficiency has revealed that many recently constructed ships already meet the EEDI standard for 2020.

However, it wasn't so much these findings that raised a few hackles in the shipping sector. Instead it was the follow up by Transport and Environment that emphasised that new ships built in 2013 were on average 10% less fuel-efficient than those built in 1990 and that the EEDI "does little more than bring the efficiency of new ships in 2020 back to levels seen around 1990."

These claims obviously caused a backlash, with the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) stating that the Transport and Environment statement "appears to confuse overall design efficiency with an approximate estimate of fuel efficiency based on generic data."

It's likely that more research is needed to verify these facts, and let us not forget that every study has its limitations as it takes a snapshot approach, however these new findings have brought to light a need to reassess the current targets because how can we create a realistic emission reduction goal without having a well researched baseline?

No doubt the IMO will go back to the drawing board when it holds its 68th Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) session in London from May 11-15, but if you attended any of the original meetings that detailed the EEDI formula, you will know it could be some time before new goals are considered, let alone set.

What this study and subsequently debate has raised, however, is perhaps a bigger issue in the maritime sector. Why is it we so often find ourselves on the backfoot and in a position where we need to defend ourselves when something like this hits the headlines? There is such great work being done by so many and yet self promotion and clear communication doesn't come naturally to this sector. We could argue that news will always report on the most hard hitting stories and that includes spills, emissions and pollution, but these same journalists also report on cutting-edge emission reduction technologies.

As a sector we need to educate, not constantly defend. Shipping as a sector, like the mining, oil and gas industries, will always be in the spotlight, so isn't it about time we took to the stage, stated the facts and then shouted about avenues we are exploring to reduce emissions, rather than sit in the wings waiting to be called upon?