Cummins Announces EPA Tier 3 Marine Solutions - Maritime Executive

Posted - Wednesday, August 24, 2011 - Maritime Executive

Cummins Inc. (NYSE: CMI), a leading manufacturer of diesel engines for the commercial marine industry, is pleased to announce its U.S. EPA Tier 3 marine product solutions. Improving on the existing EPA Tier 2-certified product line, the company is developing a full range of Tier 3 products from 6.7 to 60 liters and 150 to 2700 HP. Cummins Tier 3 solutions apply advanced combustion technology to reduce emissions in-cylinder without the need for after-treatment. Cummins Tier 3 marine product line will serve as the platform for future, more stringent emissions in the U.S. and globally.
Representing a 50% reduction in particulate matter (PM) and a 20% reduction in nitrogen oxides (NOx) compared to Tier 2 standards, the EPA’s Tier 3 marine emissions regulation takes effect January 1, 2012 for Cummins engines between 3.5 and 7.0 liters per cylinder and continues through 2014.
The QSK60 is the only engine in Cummins marine portfolio requiring EPA Tier
3 certification in 2012; the QSK19, QSK38 and QSK50 are not required to meet EPA Tier 3 until January 1, 2013.

Complete Post at:
http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/cummins-announces-epa-tier-3-marine-solutions

Update on Compliance Requirements—EPA’s Vessel General Permit and MARPOL Annex VI - Martindale.com

Posted - August 22, 2011 - by: Charles E. Wagner - Blank Rome LLP - Washington Office

New Developments

There are three recent developments noteworthy to ship­owners, operators and other maritime industry stakeholders.
(1) On June 27, 2011, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") entered into a Memo­randum of Understanding ("MOU") setting forth the terms by which the Coast Guard and EPA will cooperate in connection with compliance and enforcement of MARPOL Annex VI, as implemented in the United States through the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships ("APPS").
(2) The One Time Permit Report required by the EPA's Vessel General Permit for Discharges Incidental to the Normal Operation of Vessels ("VGP") is due.
(3) The International Maritime Organization's Marine Environ­ment Protection Committee ("MEPC") approved the U.S. Caribbean Emission Control Area ("ECA") at its recently concluded session.
(1) U.S. Coast Guard and EPA Memorandum of Understanding

MARPOL Annex VI sets forth the regulations for the prevention of air pollution from ships. In 2008, MEPC approved amendments to Annex VI, which will reduce emissions of sulfur oxides ("SOx"), nitrogen oxides ("NOx") and particulate matter. See our previous advisory for more information: MARPOL Annex VI Proposed Amendments Move Closer to Implementation. The United States enacted amendments to APPS to implement these changes to Annex VI. Annex VI provides for the designation of ECAs where more stringent emissions standards apply than elsewhere. In 2009, the U.S. and Canada jointly proposed to establish the North American ECA. See our previous advisory for more information: United States and Canada Propose 200 Nautical Mile "Emission Control Area" under MARPOL Annex VI. IMO approved the proposal in 2010 and the North American ECA becomes enforceable in August 2012. On December 22, 2009, EPA issued final regulations implementing the amendments to Annex VI and the North American ECA. See our previous advisory for more information: EPA Finalizes Emissions Standards for Category 3 Marine Diesel Engines and Implements North American ECA. In June, the Coast Guard and EPA formally agreed to cooperate in the implementation of Annex VI and to coordinate interagency compliance enforcement efforts.

The MOU

Under the MOU, the Coast Guard and EPA agreed to a number of provisions concerning compliance and enforcement actions aimed at installed marine engines, ships, and shoreside facilities that supply marine fuel and/or received ozone depleting substances ("ODS"), which are also regulated under Annex VI. The Coast Guard and EPA agreed to jointly develop protocols for ship examinations, facility inspections, and the conduct of investigations utilizing each agency's expertise.
EPA will develop protocols for installed engine inspections and review of documentation associated with fuel oil quality (Annex VI requires low sulfur fuel) and availability. The Coast Guard will then adapt the EPA protocols into its established ship and facility inspection programs. The two agencies agreed to share information about inspections, examinations and investigations and the EPA further agreed to notify the Coast Guard whenever an Engine International Air Pollution Prevention ("EIAPP") certificate is modified, revoked or otherwise becomes invalid. If either the Coast Guard or EPA determines that an Annex VI violation exists, then it will provide information to the other agency regarding the nature of the violation, the evidence supporting the findings, and the responsible parties. Moreover, the Coast Guard agreed to notify EPA of any ship detentions under Annex VI within the scope of the MOU. This includes foreign-flag ships detained by the Coast Guard under its Port State Control Program, as well as the detention of U.S.-flag vessels by other States.

Complete Post at:
http://www.martindale.com/environmental-law/article_Blank-Rome-LLP_1332604.htm

Very large ships offer solutions to so many of the problems that beset the shipping industry - Balkans.com

Posted - Balkan Business News Correspondent - 23.08.2011

Very large ships, we are confidently told, offer the solution to so many of the problems that beset the shipping industry. To mention just a few of their advantages, there are the obvious benefits of scale economies, with one ship doing the work of perhaps two but gratifying reductions in emissions and environmental effects for the substantial payloads they offer. They save fuel, when this is expected to become still more expensive, and can move a container or a tonne of ore for a dramatically reduced unit price, or a cruise or ferry passenger carried more economically, but unlike aviation with no reduction in luxury!
So is it a convincing case for “gigantism” in the maritime world? Perhaps, but as with all things there are balances which have to be struck and often quite large adjustments that must be considered. There are operational problems which have to be surmounted before the giant ship can be running smoothly and making profits for her owners. The lack of flexibility occasioned by a ship’s great size is usually cited as an important negative factor. It may indeed be a real problem if the ship has to be moved from the route for which she was originally designed, as there may be few alternative places to which she can trade at her full draught.
And it is probably true that the hearts of those running ports will invariably sink as they hear of the latest plans for some great extrapolation in ship sizes. They know the depth of their channels and can imagine the long battles with environmental interests before they can dredge to the new required depth to accommodate the “next generation”. Their finance directors wearily point out the cost of such requirements.

Complete Post at:
http://www.balkans.com/open-news.php?uniquenumber=116792

Feasibility study points to benefits of LNG use in ferries - MarineLog

Posted August 24, 2011 - MarineLog

An LNG-fuelled ferry would not only have significant environmental benefits, but economic ones as well, according to a recently completed feasibility study for Washington State Ferries.
Naval architectural and marine engineering firm The Glosten Associates, Seattle, Wash. recently completed the feasibility study for Washington State Ferries (WSF) on converting its 144-car ferry design to liquefied natural gas (LNG) propulsion. Glosten's study concluded that the conversion is both technically feasible and cost effective, although technical and regulatory challenges remain. The study examined design, economic, regulatory, and environmental issues.
To support the study, Glosten developed a preliminary design for both dual fuel and singlefuel (LNG only) engines. The operational savings for a single vessel are estimated to be between $900,000 and $1.25 million per year, after an upfront capital cost premium of $8.5 million to $10 million. Switching to natural gas fuel will significantly reduce emissions of nitrous oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), particulate matter, and carbon dioxide (CO2). These greenhouse gases have been identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as significant factors in harming human health, including respiratory illnesses, as well as damaging to the environment.
One significant finding in the report was that methane slip from the engines counteracts its reduction in CO2 emissions, minimizing the global warming benefits of switching to the lower carbon fuel.

Complete Post at:
http://www.marinelog.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1253:lngferrystudy23august2011j01&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=107

Can we reduce harmful emissions? - Bimco

Posted - August 22, 2011 = Bimco

Other than CO2 (see Seascapes No.104) ships also produce a number of atmospheric emissions which are considered harmful. They are products of combustion, and the most significant are sulphur oxides (SOx and nitrous oxides (NOx), along with tiny waste particles known as particulates. All are now being limited by international, regional and national laws and will be subject to increasing severity of regulations over the next few years. Emission Control Areas, where these limits apply, might be expected to spread around the world in the future.
What practical means can be undertaken to reduce, or even prevent any of these emissions entering the atmosphere? In the case of sulphur, the quality of the fuel that is used can be changed to low sulphur oil or distillates, which will make a marked difference. Alternatively, the emissions can be scrubbed to clean them before they pass into the atmosphere. Or it might be feasible to use liquefied natural gas which burns cleanly, or even biofuels, although there are issues about the use of products which would otherwise have been available for food, and objections to the felling of tropical rainforests for the planting of oil palms.

Complete Post at:
https://www.bimco.org/en/Education/Seascapes/Questions_of_shipping/Reduce_harmful_emissions.aspx

MARPOL Convention amendments start August - Manila Bulletin Websites and Publications

Posted - August 21, 2011 - Manila Bulletin Websites and Publications

MANILA, Philippines — Amendments to the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) MARPOL Convention for the prevention of pollution from ships took effect on August 1, 2011, banning heavy fuel oil from the Antarctic and creating a new North American Emission Control Area (ECA).
MARPOL (Marine Pollution) Convention is the International Convention for the prevention of pollution from ships.
A new MARPOL regulation to protect the Antarctic from pollution by heavy-grade oils is added to MARPOL Annex I (Regulations for the prevention of pollution by oil), with a new chapter 9 on special requirements for the use or carriage of oils in the Antarctic area.
Regulation 43 prohibits both the carriage in bulk as cargo and the carriage and use as fuel, of: Crude oils having a density, at 15°C, higher than 900 kg/m3; oils, other than crude oils, having a density, at 15°C, higher than 900 kg/m3 or a kinematic viscosity, at 50°C, higher than 180 mm2/s; or bitumen, tar and their emulsions.
This means, in effect, that ships trading to the area, whether passenger or cargo ships, would need to switch to a different fuel type when transiting the Antarctic area, defined as “the sea area south of latitude 60°S.”
An exception is for vessels engaged in securing the safety of ships or in a search-and-rescue operation.
Amendments to MARPOL Annex VI (prevention of air pollution from ships) will formally establish a North American Emission Control Area, in which emissions of sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter from ships will be subject to more stringent controls than the limits that apply globally.

Complete Post at:
http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/331578/marpol-convention-amendments-start-august

Ship Operating Costs Under Immense Pressure - Marinelink.com

Posted August 19, 2011 - Marinelink.com -

If it wasn’t bad enough that demand in the shipping markets has not recovered, commodity price rises have put more than a little pressure on ship operating costs. Fleet owners and managers are certainly feeling the squeeze in 2011.
Drewry has just published its latest annual analysis of ship operating costs, covering 8 vessel sectors and over 35 different sizes of vessel plus detailed operating budgets for a range of oil tankers, chemical tankers, gas carriers, dry bulk vessels, container vessels, ro-ro, general cargo and reefer vessels; making it the most comprehensive survey of this crucial area of vessel management.
Paula Puszet, managing editor commented, “In 2010, vessel operating costs overall remained static. However, in 2011 commodity price increases will push up lube, repair and maintenance costs. With some owners having to take additional insurance cover for kidnap and ransom, overall costs are forecast to rise by between 4% and 6%, depending upon vessel sector.”
- Manning – the key change here is that low market demand has kept wage levels down across the globe. This has also had the effect of narrowing the gap between demand and supply for experienced seafarers... a continual problem over the last few years. However, as more new-builds come on stream, the gap will no doubt widen again forcing wages up.
With the next STWC round as well as ILO MLC regulations cutting in next year, owners and managers will come under wage and staff cost pressure – particularly in the areas of travel, training and victualing.
- Insurance - in H&M, premiums have barely risen. Vessel values have become more stable following the drop in recent years, the outlook points to premiums rising to reflect the pressures the insurance market will find itself under following non-marine related claims, such as the earthquakes in New Zealand and Japan.

Complete Post at:
http://www.marinelink.com/news/operating-pressure340042.aspx

IMO Adopts HELCOMs Proposal to Ban Sewage Discharge from Ships in Baltic Sea - HELCOM

Posted - Thursday, 18 August 2011 - Hellenic Shipping Worldwide

The Baltic Sea Action Plan milestone makes Baltic the first sea in the world designated by IMO as a Special Area for sewage discharges;

The HELCOM Maritime Group proposal to ban all sewage discharge from passenger ships in the Baltic Sea was adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) on 15 July 2011. Any such discharge will be prohibited unless the ship uses an approved sewage treatment plant capable of sufficiently reducing nutrients, or delivers untreated sewage to a port reception facility. The elaborate process of reaching the agreement between the Baltic Sea countries, developing the proposal and negotiating it in IMO took less than four years.
“This achievement is part of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (2007-2021) and I am proud to say that all the nine HELCOM countries were active in backing up the joint stand in IMO. The Baltic is now the first sea in the world designated by IMO as a Special Area for sewage discharges under the international shipping law”, says JormaKämäräinen from the Finnish Transport Safety Agency, who took the lead in the proposal process.
In order to enforce the new regulations, reception facilities for sewage in ports used by passenger ships need to be adequate, and upgraded where needed. The upgrading efforts, agreed by the coastal countries and facilitated by HELCOM Cooperation Platform on Port Reception Facilities, are expected to be completed by 2015 at the latest.

Complete Post at:
http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=41782:finland-imo-adopts-helcoms-proposal-to-ban-sewage-discharge-from-ships-in-baltic-sea-&catid=44:latest-news&Itemid=64

A first step: The IMO`s regulation of shipping emission - Environmental Expert = Transport and Environment (T&E)

Posted 16 August 2011 - Environmental Expert = Transport and Environment (T&E)

Last month’s decision at the IMO to adopt an Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new ships was a significant first step to address GHG emission from international shipping but it cannot be seen as a solution on its own.
Only new ships are affected, so the measure will take over 30 years to have full effect and the imple¬mentation waiver means it will be nearly 2020 before all new ship builds are required to comply.
The waiver and the accompanying commitments on technical assistance were directed at developing country concerns over accepting a global measure. Any waivers would be granted on a ship-by-ship basis. However IMO’s principle of equal treatment of ships and wish not to discriminate on the basis of flag, as China, Brazil and others so persistently pressed for, means that the waiver can in theory be enjoyed by any new ship built anywhere.
A non-EEDI compliant ship could be commissioned by a western owner and built in a western yard and sailed out to sea under a flag of convenience. More likely is that western shipowners will build non-EEDI compliant ships in the Far East and flag them out to a developing country. And possibly re-flag them back to an EU country shortly afterwards.
The question is will they? Or will western owners be more responsible? Some shipowners have said that it’s all a question of value (not morals!); that a non- EEDI compliant ship will have a lower resale value and uncertainty about port access or future charges associated with it, so owners wouldn’t take the risk. Maybe.
And in the scenario just outlined, it’s not clear whether EU member states would agree to such re-flagging. In either case, industry associations and individual ship¬owners should be happy to sign on to a code of conduct whereby all developed country shipowners publicly certify ship by ship their commitment to respect the intent of the IMO decision. NGOs would be happy to join with others and keep track of these commitments – assuming we can keep track of the owners.

Complete Post at:
http://www.environmental-expert.com/news/a-first-step-the-imos-regulation-of-shipping-emission-252873

UK Chamber of Shipping demands review of low emission drive - Climate Action

Posted - August 12 - Climate Action - Linton Nightingale Carbon, Transportation, Europe

The UK Chamber of Shipping has urged the international shipping industry to keep the door open on all options to drive a reduction of its carbon emissions.
The Chamber is leading the debate by launching ‘manuals’ on the two main options. This is the first time an attempt has been made to set out the practical implications for the shipping industry.
As Climate Action reported on Tuesday the UK shipping industry had rejected the European Union’s proposed emissions trading scheme, amidst suggestions ships will refuel at non EU ports if the scheme is enforced.
The Chamber has welcomed the advances made by the International Maritime Organization to promote the reduction of shipping’s carbon emissions through technical efficiencies but believes that it will prove necessary for the industry to go further – through the adoption of economic (or ‘market-based’) measures to meet governments’ expectations and targets.
International opinion is divided on the best model for reducing the shipping industry’s carbon emissions. Some support the idea of a greenhouse gas (GHG) contribution fund, in which shipping companies would contribute as part of purchases of bunker fuel. Others prefer an Emissions Trading System (ETS), in which shipping companies would buy a shipping allowance or ‘emissions unit’, which they would then surrender according to their actual carbon emissions.

Complete Post at:
http://www.climateactionprogramme.org/news/uk_chamber_of_shipping_demands_review_of_low_emission_drive/

Presentation by the Coast Guard - TVNCOEU Update

Link - http://www.americanwaterways.com/commitment_safety/meetings/2011SummerInterregion/TVNCOEUpdate.pdf

Shipping trade body floats global emissions reduction plan - Business Green

Posted - August 11, 2011 - By Will Nichols - Business Green

A global carbon trading mechanism or a system of additional fuel levies would provide a more effective means of curbing greenhouse gas emissions from shipping than incorporating the industry into the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
That is the view of UK trade body the Chamber of Shipping, which released new 'manuals' yesterday outlining how both market-based policies could work.
The move came just days after the group publicly dismissed the EU's plans to pull the international shipping industry into its emissions trading scheme.
The international shipping industry's agreement last month to mandatory fuel efficiency standards for new ships has not stopped the EU pursuing its 2005 proposal to include shipping in the ETS from 2013 - an idea that has gained traction with politicians and green groups keen to curb the shipping sector's growing carbon footprint.
Over 1.1 billion tonnes of carbon are emitted each year by ships, around three per cent of the global total and greater than all but four countries - China, the US, India and Russia. With an anticipated long-term increase in global trade, the sector's emissions are expected to double over the coming decades if no action is taken to curb emissions.
Shipping is in a similar situation to the aviation industry, which is to see all flights in and out of the EU included in the ETS from the beginning of next year, assuming that the ongoing legal action from US airlines challenging the decision is resolved and the EU can face down similar complaints from airlines in China, Russia and a number other countries.

Complete Post at:
http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2100888/shipping-trade-body-floats-global-emissions-reduction-plan

ICS supports the role of IMO on CO2 emission reduction - hellenicshippingnews.com

Posted - Tuesday, 09 August 2011 - hellenicshippingnews.com

The shipping industry remains firmly behind the International Maritime Organization (IMO) as the architect of change when it comes to regulating shipping’s CO2 emissions,

according to Peter Hinchliffe, Secretary General of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS).
While it is clearly in the interest of shipping to minimize its CO2 output by reducing fuel consumption, recently agreed amendments to Annex VI of IMO’s MARPOL Convention which – on a global basis - will make the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) mandatory for new ships, and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) mandatory for existing vessels, were ‘absolutely’ what had been hoped for by ICS.
Addressing delegates attending a special Guest Lecture at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in Hamburg, Mr Hinchliffe said: “The EEDI is a non-prescriptive requirement, as the decision over which technologies to use within a specific ship design are left to the industry. So long as the required energy-efficiency level is achieved, naval architects and ship builders may employ whichever solutions they deem fit. The new regulations are also being presented as a vehicle for technical cooperation and the transfer of technology where improvements in energy efficiency are concerned, particularly as administrations must cooperate with international bodies such as the IMO to offer support to states requesting technical assistance.
“Prior to
The regulations were ‘absolutely’ what this organization had hoped for and the IMO’s decision is an important one, not just for the shipping industry, but I think it shows that a consensus can be achieved on climate change within an international debate. It’s a global first and because the IMO has done this for operational and technical measures, this means it can generate the will to do something about market-based measures as well,” he stressed.
The shipping industry will fully support measures which are ‘parented in the IMO’ and I am confident that the impact on world trade and on the business of shipping will be taken into account. I am not confident that these factors would be taken into account if the debate occurs at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change or as a result of the outcome of the high level advisory group which the UN Secretary General convened. We want the IMO to continue to work on this process and we believe it has demonstrated that it can do just that.”
He added: “The European Commission or perhaps more correctly the European Parliament, makes a habit of trying to force IMO’s hand; we saw it done over recent fuel sulphur content legislation and we are seeing it again over CO2 emissions. The EC has told the IMO on several occasions that if it does not have legislation in place by a certain date then Brussels will impose unilateral legislation within Europe.
“Although people imagine that this could mean the inclusion of shipping in the European Emission Trading Scheme like international aviation, in practice it is clear that Europe does not really know how to deal with the complexity of shipping. With aviation recently having been given leave to go to the European Court of Justice, this seems to question the confidence with which Europe felt it could regulate the airlines of non-European States. But the problem that Europe is creating is a rush to conclusion in IMO that may very well be at the cost of good legislation. If the rush is too fast then the legislation may merely increase costs across the industry without actually reducing CO2 emissions at all – a rather pointless exercise in bureaucracy.
“CO2 emissions from international shipping cannot be reduced effectively and meaningfully through the incorporation of shipping into any regional financial instrument. Therefore ICS is strongly opposed to the application of any regional Green House Gas scheme to international shipping.
“In fact ICS is strongly opposed to the application of the European ETS to shipping. We believe that if and when governments are ready to apply a global market-based mechanism to shipping then a compensation fund-based approach is more likely to offer a bankable solution that will have the least negative impact on the carriage of goods by sea. There is no doubt that the IMO’s success at delivering technical and operational legislation was an astonishing success – perhaps this will put a spotlight on UNFCCC at its Durban meeting in December,” he stressed.

Post at:
http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40263:ics-supports-the-role-of-imo-on-co2-emission-reduction-&catid=44:latest-news&Itemid=64

IMO’s Environmental Committee Approves Several New Requirements - O'Melveny & Myers LLP

Posted - August 8, 2011 - O'Melveny & Myers LLP - Eric Rothenberg, Bob Nicksin


The International Maritime Organization’s (“IMO”) Marine Environment Protection Committee (“MEPC”) has approved several amendments to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (“MARPOL”), including designation of portions of the Caribbean Sea as a new emission control area (“ECA”), designation of the Baltic Sea as a Special Area with respect to sewage pollution from ships, and adoption of a revised Annex V related to the control of garbage. The MEPC also adopted mandatory measures to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (“GHGs”) from international shipping through energy-efficiency improvements, designated the Strait of Bonifacio as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (“PSSA”) and adopted recommendations and guidelines aimed at reducing transfer of aquatic species, ballast water management, and ship recycling.

Energy Efficiency

New regulations governing energy efficiency for ships were adopted, including a mandatory Energy Efficiency Design Index (“EEDI”) for new ships, and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (“SEEMP”) for all ships. The EEDI is a performance-based mechanism that leaves the choice of technologies to use in a specific ship design to the industry, so long as the required energy-efficiency level is attained. The SEEMP establishes a mechanism for operators to improve the energy efficiency of ships.

The MEPC also agreed to continue the work on energy efficiency measures for ships, including development of the EEDI framework for ship types and sizes, and propulsion systems, not covered by the current EEDI requirements, and the development of EEDI and SEEMP-related guidelines.

The regulations apply to all ships of 400 gross tonnage and above and are expected to enter into force on January 1, 2013, unless waived on an individual basis by the IMO.

Complete post at:
http://www.omm.com/imos-environmental-committee-approves-several-new-requirements-08-08-2011/

IMO okays use of armed guards on ships - Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide

Posted - August 2, 2011 - Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide - Source PNA

The United Nations' (UN) International Maritime Organization (IMO) has endorsed the use of private armed guards to protect ships from pirate attacks.


After a meeting in IMO's London headquarters, the maritime body issued guidelines for the use of guards on board ships in areas of high risk, including in the Indian Ocean.
About one in 10 ships off the Somali coast already carry armed guards.
But observers say this number is likely to rise now that the UN has endorsed the practice.
The IMO says there were 489 reports of piracy and armed robbery against ships in 2010 - up to more than 20 percent on 2009.
The areas worst affected were the Indian Ocean, East Africa and the Far East including the South China Sea, South America and the Caribbean.
So far this year, more than 200 cases have been reported.
Reports say piracy in the Indian Ocean is getting more lucrative and more violent, despite an anti-piracy European Union naval force patrolling the area.
The IMO insists that the guidelines are not intended to institutionalize the use of armed, privately contracted security staff on ships and that they do not address all the legal issues that could be linked to their use.
The IMO describes the guidance as "interim recommendations" and says it will review them in September.

Post at:
http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=39060:imo-okays-use-of-armed-guards-on-ships-&catid=44:latest-news&Itemid=64

The Global Maritime Emission Trading System and Its Effects on the Shipping Industry - Marine Insight

Posted: by Soumyajit Dasgupta 1 August 2011 - Marine Insight

Global Maritime Emission Trading System is a system that has been applied in a manner consistent with its purpose or design that is capable of being done with means at hand and circumstances as they are, especially for the greenhouse gas emissions in the maritime transport sector. The system requires constant monitoring of the emissions of each ship from international shipping organization and an equivalent amount of emission allowances to be surrendered to the scheme administrator. This emission trading system is assumed to have huge impacts on the shipping sector and on the economies of regions and country groups. Read on to learn more about its features in greater details.
The European Union Emissions trading scheme provides a global cap and trade system for carbon credits. In order to make international shipping contribute to climate change extenuation by a cost-efficient reduction of greenhouse gases the scheme must:

Target real emissions of CO2 calculated on the basis of fuel consumption data
Allow marginal equivalent incentive
Aim at gradual expansion into global coverage
Avoid all the complexities of allocating free emissions allowances
Be non-discriminatory and be applied to all vessels irrespective of its carrier flag
Comply with Annex 1 countries and with developing nations too
Follow the context of inter-port competition
Assure legal, political and institutional acceptability
Be non- evasive and easily enforced, administered and monitored.


Complete Post at:
http://www.marineinsight.com/news/headline/the-global-maritime-emission-trading-system-and-its-effects-on-the-shipping-industry/

EEDI only the start of brave new world for shipping - Carbon Positive

Posted - July 28, 2011 - Carbon Positive

Industry opinion among those closely watching the development of maritime CO2 regulation suggests that the IMO’s approval of mandatory EEDI and SEEMP measures is only the beginning of an evolving era of greenhouse-gas emissions (GHGs) regulation for shipping. Forward thinking ship owners and operators would do well to start taking measures now to lower the carbon footprint of their fleets and reduce their exposure to rising future compliance costs, they argue.
The IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) decision this month to adopt mandatory energy efficiency measures in design and operation of ships is set to come into force at the beginning of 2013. It will see new ships having to meet index benchmarks requiring ever more fuel efficient ships over the next two decades.
A compromise won by developing nations means flag states could seek a waiver for their obligations, delaying their compliance for up to six years beyond 2013. But this may not turn out to be much consolation for ship owners hoping to forestall the impact of a new layer of environmental regulation. And now that IMO has after many years come to an agreement to act, nor should mandatory EEDI be seen as the endgame in regulation of shipping’s emissions. Far from it, this is only the start.

The realities are:

Complete Post at:
http://www.carbonpositive.net/viewarticle.aspx?articleID=2362