EU pollution targets 'unrealistic' say member states

European Union (EU) member states, particularly Sweden and Finland, have opposed an international anti-pollution agreement that aims to limit air-polluting sulphur from marine fuels.

The new rules, which will limit emissions down from 1.5% to just 0.1% by 2015, requires substantial changes in the way vessels are fuelled, which has been claimed to be unrealistic in the time scale proposed. Shipping vessels in Europe's three main seas, the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the English Channel, would either have to switch to no-sulphur fuel such as liquefied natural gas (LNG), or retro-fit ships with fuel-cleaning technology known as scrubbers.

Sweden and Finland have argued against the ruling, saying that it puts their shipping at a disadvantage and necessitates unrealistic changes in the time scale given. The Baltic Sea, for instance, is not equipped to supply liquefied natural gas, and it would take more than four years to provide such a supply. The industry also argues on the grounds of cost, saying it would have detrimental effects on the price of shipping.

Satu Hassi, a Finnish Green MEP who is leading discussions on the subject in the European Parliament, refutes these claims, commenting in European Voice that:

“Having a limit in emissions control areas is an important step, but the health of other citizens, like Italians and Greeks, is as important as our lives in the north,” Hassi said.

She disputes industry claims that scrubbing technology is too expensive: “The industry says only 30% of ships can be retrofitted, while the producers say 80% can.”