Thursday, 14 November 2024
Home Topics Climate New shipping fuel requirements in Arctic risk worse oil spills, report says
ClimateEmissionsEnvironmentFuelMaritimeNewsOilTransport

New shipping fuel requirements in Arctic risk worse oil spills, report says

38
FILE PHOTO: A tanker waits to dock at Western Europe's largest liquefied natural gas plant Hammerfest LNG, in Hammerfest, Norway, March 14, 2024. REUTERS/Lisi Niesner/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: A tanker waits to dock at Western Europe's largest liquefied natural gas plant Hammerfest LNG, in Hammerfest, Norway, March 14, 2024. REUTERS/Lisi Niesner/File Photo

HOUSTON – The Arctic could face more severe environmental impacts from oil spills if shippers switch to very-low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) following new, restrictive fuel regulations in the region, the Arctic Council said in a statement on Monday.

Ships sailing through Arctic waters can no longer use or carry heavy bunker fuel oil as of Monday, following a new regulation from United Nations shipping agency the International Maritime Organization (IMO) that aims to reduce pollution.

WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

The widely used alternative to heavy fuel oil (HFO) is VLSFO. European shippers broadly opted for VLSFO in 2020 when the same regulation took effect there.

If exposed to cold water in a spill, VLSFO forms clumps, whereas HFO remains liquid. Current oil spill equipment is not designed to collect oil clumps, Arctic Council working groups Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) and Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) have found.

“We are not in a position to comment on specific studies. However, IMO welcomes submissions from Member States and international organizations to the relevant IMO body,” a spokesperson for the agency told Reuters on Monday.

CONTEXT

Shipping traffic in Arctic waters rose by more than a third from 2013 to 2023, according to PAME, and the distance traveled by vessels more than doubled, raising the risk of a spill.

KEY QUOTES

“The IMO had the best intentions when they introduced the Heavy Fuel Oil ban, and it will no doubt make a positive environmental impact in many ways,” expert and project lead for PAME and EPPR, Jon Arve Royset said in Monday’s Arctic Council statement.

“However, in the event of an oil spill, the new fuels being used as a result of this ban could have a far worse environmental impact than the old fuels they are banning.”

(Reporting by Georgina McCartney in Houston; editing by Jonathan Oatis)

Related Articles

FILE - An above-ground section of Enbridge's Line 5 at the Mackinaw City, Mich., pump station is seen, Oct. 7, 2016. (AP Photo/John Flesher, File)
IndigenousInfrastructureNatural GasOilRegulationsTransmission

Wisconsin agency issues first round of permits for Enbridge Line 5 reroute around reservation

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has issued the first round of...

BiofuelsBusinessEconomy

Credits tied to biogas slump on EPA’s proposed waiver to supply mandates

Prices for cellulosic biofuel production credits fell to their lowest in over...

BiodiversityEnvironmentIndigenousPoliticsResiliency

Indigenous groups, government and industry launch $375M for conservation initiatives

The fund being created in the Northwest Territories is the largest single...

Login into your Account

Please login to like, dislike or bookmark this article.