The container shipping industry has a profound effect on marine life. From the smallest bacteria to the biggest beasts, ships are a direct threat to wildlife and habitats.

Underwater Noise Pollution

The Port of Vancouver recently announced a project to monitor underwater noise pollution in the Haro Strait, running from August to October this year. Marine life conservationists suggest that noise pollution has brought Orcas in the Salish Sea to near extinction, so the announcement of this study is welcomed by the industry. This could provide an important insight into how Orcas are affected by noise pollution and how we offset the problem.

But the issues extend far beyond North American waters. Ambient noises produced by ships disturb all cetaceans around the world. This group of marine animals rely on sound to communicate, navigate and find prey by transmitting and receiving acoustic information. Scientists call this process ‘echolocation’ and it is vital for their survival. However, noisy ship engines make it much harder for these creatures to thrive.

Various solutions have been discussed. For example, slower sailing speeds are thought to reduce noise pollution thus lessen the disturbance. As a part of their study, the Port of Vancouver has limited vessels to 11 knots to test this hypothesis.

As with so many aspects of modern life, commercial pressures can be used to adjust behaviour. Underwater noise reduction technology exists and the Port of Vancouver offers lower port fees to vessels with the technology installed. Noise reduction measures can be as simple as insulating engine rooms as well as regular maintenance of propellers and hull but the Port of Vancouver can only promote this through this incentive. Vancouver is a world leader in marine conservation but it is fair to say that this technology should be mandatory across all international shipping. The conservation of marine life is a global concern so worldwide legislation is necessary.

Dr Jeremy Goldbogan of Stanford University suggested that strikes happen due to the evolutionary makeup of a whale. The sheer size of these beasts means they have never had to defend themselves from predators. There is no innate ‘fight or flight’ mode, so whales don’t know how to deal with the threat of a ship.

Their size makes it hard to dive fast enough to clear a vessel’s path. Some of the most affected species are the biggest, the Humpback Whale and Blue Whale, but ships are getting larger and this adds to the problem. Post-Panamax ships find it difficult to notice whales in the water. Sometimes the ship doesn’t know when they have struck a whale and carcases can become stuck on the bulbous bow and carried for some distance.

To curb this problem the IMO (International Maritime Organisation) have introduced speed limits and Areas to be Avoided (ATBA) for ships. Areas around the Bay of Fundy, Panama and Spain have permanent restrictions while some correspond with the seasonal behaviour patterns. Whale’s behaviour is easily predicted so the IMO can implement seasonal routeing measures in areas such as the Roseway Basin and the Great South Channel which sees seasonal whale distribution. The IMO has also implemented whale reporting and detection networks which allow ships to locate whales in real time. And as numbers of Blue Whales and Humpback Whales are steadily increasing the mitigation measures seem to be working.

Ballast Water and Invasive Species

The shipping industry affects not just the biggest creatures but also the smallest.

Ballast water is an essential part of nautical technology. It gives stability, balance and trim to a ship in poor weather conditions and during voyages without cargo. It works by sucking up water at the port of discharge and stores it in the ballast tanks in the ship’s hull. Once the port of loading is reached the tanks are then unloaded.

But marine life can get into the ballast tanks when water is being taken on. That marine life is then placed into a foreign habitat when the ballast is discharged and newly introduced bacteria, plants and animals can have a devastating effect on ecosystems. Scientists call this a bio-invasion because foreign species can become invasive for native species. Foreign marine life can kill off native species by controlling food resources and this starts a chain reaction as prey dies out.

Throughout history, environmental and humanitarian problems often stemmed from bio-invasions. For instance, problems were seen in the Great Lakes after the Lamprey Eel was introduced. The eels were native to the lakes in the east and were able to move west using newly opened canals in the late-1890s. The eels completely turned the eco-system around by killing off 90% of the native trout in the western lakes. This made many unemployed in the towns around the lakes as the fishing industry vanished.

But a more recent demonstration of a deadly bio-invasion is due to ballast water. In 1991 a type of cholera, only seen in Bangladesh, broke out in Peru. The disease killed over 10000 people in the South American state through the early-1990s. Ballast water introduced the disease to Peruvian waters but a poor public health infrastructure spurred this into a pandemic.

To solve this problem the IMO has adopted the Ballast Water Management Convention (BWMC). The convention requires all ships in international transit to carry a ballast water record and meet regulation standards using ballast water management systems. All ships, both new and existing, must install technology which monitors and manages ballast. This is predicted to cost some ship owners up to USD 5 billion to meet the new IMO standards.

Some have opposed the original enforcement date that was set for 2017. The ICO (International Chamber of Shipping) proposed a further two years to allow existing ships adequate time to implement the changes required by the convention. At the 71st Maritime Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting in 2017, the ICO’s wish was granted. So we will have to wait until 2019 to see this tech in action across the entire world fleet.

Maritime industries such as fisheries and shipping share the same waters and have to work side by side. Often they are subject to the same regulations. Changes made for the good of one should be beneficial in time for all seafaring industries, and this may explain why shipping is tackling marine conservation proactively. Unlike the problems of greenhouse gases and global warming, there has been a punctual reaction. Perhaps the problems caused by maritime industries are quicker and easier to fix. Of course, there is still a long road ahead. It will be hard to find a full solution but our industry must persist. We need to implement, develop and improve our efforts for the conservation of marine life.

The logistics industry must achieve zero emissions. If we continue to burn the 4 billion tonnes of crude oil we go through every year, then all known oil deposits will be gone by 2050. But the question of what shape the industry takes after fossil fuels still lingers despite the answer being in everyone’s best interest.

So, what are the ICAO and IMO doing?

The ICAO proposes levies, emissions trading and offsetting with CORSIA (Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme). Airlines can implement the scheme according to their business’s needs. Over 80% of the international aviation community already intend to participate in CORSIA, which comes into action in 2020.

Whilst the IMO proposed an initial roadmap which runs from 2018 to 2023, after which a revised strategy is implemented. The plan includes mandatory data collection of fuel oil consumption, a global sulphur cap by 2020 and further GHG (Greenhouse Gases) studies.

Although these steps should be welcomed, carbon-emitting fuels are still being burnt. Alternative energy solutions must be found for the sake of environmental protection and international trade. Long-term alternatives must come to the forefront of the ICAO’s and IMO’s mind, not the short term observations they propose. Consequently, the private sector has become the driver for enduring green innovation.

The answer seems simple in some areas; electrification. We have hybrid and fully electric cars and trucks on our roads on a commercial scale and such technology can move into container handling equipment.

This is becoming the case with Hyster’s recent announcement of an electric container truck, capable of carrying 48-tonne loads. Though only in early stages of development, it’s a step in the right direction.

Ports have to lower their GHG emissions and swapping diesel vehicles is the place to start and despite Trump’s decision to exit the PA, some American ports continue to pursue zero emission promises. Los Angeles and Long Beach ports have aimed for this by 2035. The renovations include a fully automated electric gantry and new adjacent rail line to eliminate thousands of truck journeys thus eliminating emission.

Air freight is also becoming greener. The JKIA (Jomo Kenyatta International Airport) cargo facility recently began using renewable energy to power their cold stores, cutting the terminal’s energy bill by 33%. There is also space for swapping diesel engine vehicles for electric power in air terminals.

But the biggest long-term goal has to be zero emissions from vessels and aircraft.

For maritime travel, this end may be close. MOL’s fleet includes Emerald Ace, a hybrid car carrier using solar panels and lithium-ion batteries, the only operational ship of this kind. When in berth the ship uses its stored solar energy to power the electricity on board as opposed to a diesel generator. This is an exciting development albeit a small one as the vessel still uses its diesel engine in transit.

Although, expect a fully electric container cargo ship by late 2018. The chemical company YARA plans to launch YARA Birkeland, the zero emission vessel which will haul between their Norwegian production plant and the cities of Brevik and Larvik. This will replace 40000 truck journeys needed every year for the company’s haulage. Birkeland’s service will only be small voyages, exclusive to YARA but will act as a rehearsal for further electric nautical development. The industry shall eagerly observe the vessel and if it proves successful, we shall certainly witness a movement towards electrification.

Greener aviation is not as developed as the maritime sector but there is movement from passenger aircraft companies. EasyJet unveiled a hydrogen aircraft concept in early 2016. It uses the energy from the aircraft’s breaks and stores it in hydrogen cells. The cells will power the aircraft’s taxi to the runway and the electronics when grounded, estimating to save EasyJet up to £27 million in fuel. No information has emerged regarding tests since the concept was revealed.

This may suggest biofuels are the best alternative for aviation because they are already operating and proving successful, but these flights are not completely running off biofuels. They use a ‘drop-in’ technique; a mixture of 50% biofuel and 50% conventional kerosene fuel, so the aircraft does not need to undertake modifications to accept the biofuel.

‘Drop in‘ fuel used on KLM biofuel flights:

These are important steps towards sustainability but as a whole, the industry has fallen behind. It is imperative to reduce carbon emissions yet we continue to burn away. But developing alternatives is a serious cost. Currently, biofuel is 3 times the price of kerosene and it was recently revealed that the Long Beach renovations will cost £1 billion. But it’s the private sector who are the driving forces behind better efficiencies and current financial pressures on logistics providers make research and development nearly impossible.

The ICAO and the IMO look to reduce emissions but fear investment. It has fallen on the brave few companies to invest heavy sums into new technology. But these high prices will fall once the supply chain realises its responsibility. Ports, liners, fuel companies and vehicle manufacturers, both sea and air alike, must make zero emission commitments to stimulate a competitive market and achieve long-term sustainability goals.

But we must also see the ICAO and IMO take up some of the slack. We, therefore, welcome the inauguration of the GIA (Global Industry Alliance). The 13 company alliance who will work with the IMO to develop and implement zero emission solutions right across the maritime industry.

We also advocate the CBP (Corporate Biofuel Programme) initiated by KLM to sustain and develop their biofuel operations. Once again it has been the private sector investment as the major contributors to this programme and a public/private bridge must be constructed with this programme, or similar synergies, to develop better efficiencies in aviation.