Scientists and environmentalists are sounding the alarm as this new type of fuel can unexpectedly result in high levels of black carbon – a pollutant especially harmful to the Arctic environment.
This document discusses the implications for the Arctic of a recent study indicating that blended low sulphur residual fuels that have been developed to meet the IMO 2020 sulphur limit requirement will result in a significant increase in Black Carbon emissions, and calls on IMO to mandate an urgent switch to distillates for ships operating in the Arctic to avoid a sharp rise in emissions of short-lived climate forcers in this vulnerable area
This infographic details how many ship operating in the Arctic use heavy fuel oil (HFO) – the residual waste of the petroleum refining process. It is extremely viscous and virtually impossible to clean up in the case of a spill. It also looks at Black Carbon, a critical contributor to human-induced climate warming, especially in the Arctic. The combustion of heavy fuel oil produces high levels of Black Carbon.
This document responds to a recent study showing that new blended low sulphur residual fuels designed to meet the IMO 2020 mandated 0.50% global sulphur limit will result in very significant increases in ships’ Black Carbon emissions, reflects on the implications of this for shipping’s contribution to the climate crisis and calls on IMO to regulate to stop their use
This document discusses the implications for the Arctic of a recent study indicating that blended low sulphur residual fuels that have been developed to meet the IMO 2020 requirement will result in a significant increases in Black Carbon emissions, and calls on the IMO to mandate an urgent switch to distillates for ships operating in the Arctic to avoid a sharp rise in emissions of short-lived climate forcers in this vulnerable area
The anniversary of the Erika HFO spill serves as a stark reminder of the need for urgent action to protect the Arctic from HFO spills, while the recent evidence from fuel oil spills demonstrates that only a few hundred tonnes of HFO could easily lead to an ecological disaster in the Arctic
‘The anniversary of the Erika HFO spill serves as a stark reminder of the need for urgent action to protect the Arctic from HFO spills, while the recent evidence from fuel oil spills demonstrates that only a few hundred tonnes of HFO could easily lead to an ecological disaster in the Arctic,’ argues Dr Sian Prior
“Iceland’s new regulation to limit exhaust emissions with high levels of sulphur from shipping in Iceland’s waters is a positive step forward by Environment Ministers Guðmundur Ingi Guðbrandsson, but fails to address emissions of black carbon, which accelerates Arctic sea ice melt, and in turn accelerate the effects of human-induced climate change,” said Árni Finnsson, of the Iceland Nature Conservation Association. “The only viable step forward is for Iceland to completely ban the use and carriage of heavy fuel oil from its territorial waters, ahead of an International Maritime Organization ban currently in development to ban its use and carriage in the Arctic”.
“With an International Maritime Organization ban on the use of carriage of heavy fuel oil in the Arctic coming over the horizon, we welcome the decision made by AECO’s 30 expedition cruise companies to get ahead of the crowd, and to forge a path towards powering Arctic shipping with cleaner fuels.”
“The Clean Arctic Alliance welcomes MSC’s decision to avoid using the Northern Sea Route to ship goods between Asia and Europe. While MSC have understandably come under fire for their environmental record elsewhere, we note that some shipping companies appear to be thinking about the bigger picture, by recognising how a ‘surge in container shipping traffic in the Arctic’ could have a detrimental impact on the environment.”