Copenhagen failure on aviation and shipping

The outcome of the Copenhagen summit proved extremely disappointing as regards international aviation and shipping emissions.

The outcome of the Copenhagen summit proved extremely disappointing as regards international aviation and shipping emissions, according to an analysis by the European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E). Despite intensive discussion on bunker fuels in the months leading up to the December Climate Summit, it proved impossible to bridge the continuing differences.

The final draft text of the bunkers working group of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) secured no consensus and no mention was made concerning bunkers in the Copenhagen Agreement – save a single reference to innovative sources of finance which could be construed as including bunkers.

The conference failed to act on the question of setting global sectoral targets for international aviation and maritime emissions because there was neither agreement on whether the UN FCCC or the International Civil Avaiation Organisation (ICAO)/International Maritime Organisation (IMO) should set them, nor the level of cuts required. (The EU had proposed a 10-per-cent cut for aviation and a 20-per-cent for shipping over 2005 levels.)

The major expectation on bunkers at Copenhagen was to resolve the competing principles of equal treatment of aircraft and ships (ICAO and IMO) and the UN FCCC principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) governing climate negotiations. China, India, Saudi Arabia and a number of other key developing countries had made it very clear in prior ICAO and IMO meetings that discussion of potential market based measures – including their global scope and application – could not be progressed pending the outcome of the Copenhagen negotiations.

So what are we left with after Copenhagen?

Firstly, a heightened profile for the international bunkers issue and the potential for revenues from global measures to play a major role in climate finance at some stage in the future. But set against this is a sense of renewed unclarity and uncertainty regarding bunker fuels. They were not even mentioned in the Copenhagen Agreement save indirectly in the reference to alternative sources of finance.

ICAO and IMO will proceed to discuss further the issues at their upcoming meetings in 2010 but without any formal guidance or timelines on the key issues from Copenhagen that they claimed was needed to enable them to progress bunker issues. Bunkers also remain in the so-called LCA track of the UN FCCC, presumably to be discussed further in Bonn in May 2010.

Will ICAO and IMO seriously address the question of targets? Target setting is not on the IMO agenda. ICAO made clear at its Copenhagen side event that it believes the two-per-cent fleet efficiency improvement aspirational goal is a target in itself.

Meanwhile, aviation emissions continue to grow and the industry’s reputation continues to decline.

The shipping industry’s call for global measures and even target setting at Copenhagen was more genuine. But even though there are clear proposals before the IMO for a global levy or emissions trading, the chances of early progress do not look promising. The new European Commission and Parliament must be looking seriously now at introducing unilateral legislation to control emissions from ships calling at EU ports.

Note: This text is a summary of an analysis, dated 4 January 2010, made by T&E after the Climate Summit in Copenhagen in December 2009. The full text can be read or downloaded at: www.transportenvironment.org/News/2009/12/Analysis-Aviation-and-Shipping-Emissions-after-Copenhagen/

In this issue

Asian emissions increase ozone over North America

Increases in tropospheric ozone levels above western North America during springtime are due to eastward air flows across the Pacific Ocean, with the largest increases associated with air that comes from South and East Asia, according to a recent study.

Air quality benefits from climate policy

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions will help to avert dangerous climate change, but it will also bring other benefits, such as cuts in health-damaging air pollutants, including particulate matter, nitrogen oxides and sulphur dioxide.

Rapid action to abate methane needed

Rapid reductions in emissions of methane and other short-lived greenhouse gases are needed to slow down global warming, especially in the Arctic region.

Ozone pollution could kill millions

Ozone pollution could cause hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of damage to human health and result in millions of premature deaths around the world by 2050.

Solar power from Sahara for fossil-free Europe

Solar electricity from the Sahara could supply Europe with 15 per cent of its electricity by 2050, at a price tag of 400 billion euros.

Supergrid paves the way for wind power expansion

A supergrid connecting Scandinavia and large parts of western Europe may pave the way for an even faster expansion of off-shore windpower.

IMO urged to take action on black carbon emissions

Three countries – Norway, Sweden and the United States – are asking the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to take action to reduce shipping emissions of black carbon (BC).

Copenhagen failure on aviation and shipping

The outcome of the Copenhagen summit proved extremely disappointing as regards international aviation and shipping emissions.

Greenhouse gas reductions will benefit human health

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions will have major direct health benefits, especially in low-income countries.

New air quality standards in India

For the first time in 15 years India has revised its air quality standards. The new standards were notified by the environment ministry in November, and have lowered maximum limits for health damaging pollutants such as sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and PM₁₀, and introduced new limits for pollutants left out earlier, including ozone, PM_2.5, arsenic, nickel, benzene and polyaromatic hydrocarbons (as benzo(a)pyrene).

Great health benefits from new US air quality standards

New air quality standards announced by the EPA are estimated to yield health benefits in the USA of between 13 and 100 billion dollars.

Parliament debate on IPPC revision

The second reading debate on the proposed revision of the industrial pollution directive (IPPC) is about to take place.

New EU sulphur regulations in ports

From 1 January 2010, ships using ports within the EU are not allowed to use marine fuels with a sulphur content exceeding 0.1% while at berth. Moreover, marine gas oils with a sulphur content higher than 0.1% are not allowed to be marketed in any EU member state.

Review of the VOC paints directive underway

An EU consultancy report published in December recommends extending the 2004 directive on volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in paints and varnishes to other products such as hairsprays, solvent-based adhesives, window cleaning products and wood coatings.

Tough stance on air quality derogations

European Commission objects to vast majority of requests for more time to comply with EU air quality legislation.

Air pollution abatement - success and failures

The convention on long range air pollution has helped to clear the skies over Europe and North America over the last three decades - but a few countries are still notorious in failing to fulfil their committments.

Renewable energy can power the world by 2030

Renewable energy sources could produce all the energy the world needs in as little as 20 years from now and at a lower cost than the present energy mix, two American experts claim.

Cutting NOx emissions - the Norwegian way

Through an agreement between the Norwegian government and business organisations, a tax was transformed into a fund for investments - and emissions began to decrease rapidly.

Editorial: Clear the air

Everyone has the right to breathe clean air. In 2006, the World Health Organization (WHO) released revised guidelines for four outdoor air pollutants: particulate matter (PM), ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide. For some pollutants, such as PM, no threshold value for harmful effects could be determined, and WHO therefore decided to set values, which if achieved, would be expected to result in significantly reduced rates of adverse health effects.

Main menu

Copenhagen failure on aviation and shipping

In this issue

Asian emissions increase ozone over North America

Air quality benefits from climate policy

Rapid action to abate methane needed

Ozone pollution could kill millions

Solar power from Sahara for fossil-free Europe

Supergrid paves the way for wind power expansion

IMO urged to take action on black carbon emissions

Copenhagen failure on aviation and shipping

Greenhouse gas reductions will benefit human health

New air quality standards in India

Great health benefits from new US air quality standards

Parliament debate on IPPC revision

New EU sulphur regulations in ports

Review of the VOC paints directive underway

Tough stance on air quality derogations

Air pollution abatement - success and failures

Renewable energy can power the world by 2030

Cutting NOx emissions - the Norwegian way

Editorial: Clear the air

Publications

Food for Thought

Northern forests, climate change and the UNFCCC

EU climate targets aligned with the Paris agreement’s 1.5°C objective

Baltic Sea Offshore Wind Collaborative-Learning project

Air pollution in Europe and children’s health

Climate Change: A Himalayan Odessey

No further discussion needed. The agreed global goal is to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C

Fossil-free electricity 2021

What we do

Air pollution

Climate Change

Policy initiatives

Do Your Bit!