ICS rebuffs carbon charge proposals

ICS said that the poposed charge is almost three times higher than the carbon price paid by shore based industries in developed nations. It also warned that because 70% of the world merchant fleet is registered in UNFCCC ‘non-Annex I’ developing countries, not all will be able to afford the charges.

Peter Hinchliffe, ICS Secretary General, said: “While shipping may currently have CO2 emissions comparable to a major OECD economy, it is inappropriate for the ITF to propose that the industry should be treated like an OECD economy.”

He added that the UNFCCC recognises that developed and developing nations should accept differing commitments, and shipping is no different, especially in view of its vital role in the movement of about 90% of global trade.

But shipping has already reduced its total CO2 emissions by more than 10% (2007- 2012) and CO2 per tonne-mile by around 20% (2005 – 2015), so it is already on course for carbon neutral growth.

ICS also criticised the ITF for saying that a proposal by the Marshall Islands to discuss the development of a CO2 reduction target for shipping ‘was not acted upon within the IMO’.

The issue was placed on the agenda of the next IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee, and will be debated fully by IMO in April 2016, taking account of the outcome of the UN Climate Conference in Paris.

Finally, ICS said that the fact remains that if IMO Member States should decide to adopt shipping Market Based Measures, the industry’s clear preference is for a fuel levy, rather than an emissions trading scheme or other complex alternatives that would distort global shipping markets.

If a levy was developed by IMO, ICS said that any money collected should be proportionate to international shipping’s share of the world’s total CO2 emissions (2.2% in 2012 compared to 2.8% in 2007), not the $US26 billion a year suggested by the ITF.