Transport & Environment (T&E), a European NGO campaigning for cleaner transport, on Tuesday (18 January) published a legal analysis from Opportunity Green on the responsible party for compliance with the proposed shipping ETS:
The European Commission has proposed adding shipping to the EU Emissions Trading System. The proposal sets the shipowner as the responsible entity, copying the arrangement in the Council position of 25 October 2019 on the Monitoring, Reporting and Verification Regulation (MRV) revision. As shipping companies will soon have to pay for their emissions, rather than just report them as under the original MRV, there is a question as to whether the shipowner is the appropriate responsible entity going forward.
Since ships are often leased out under charter contracts, the charterer makes decisions that affect the day-to-day emissions of the ship. This means that a large part of what determines the number of allowances, and so the ETS compliance cost, of a shipowner is in the hands of the charterer.
If the amendments as suggested here are implemented along with the rest of the ETS proposals for international shipping, there will be a closer reflection of the polluter pays principle in EU law. The shipowner will remain the ‘responsible entity’ under the Directive, but the shipowner will be legally assured the right to reclaim the costs incurred under the ETS and have available remedies as required.
Editor’s note: The legal analysis provided by Opportunity Green can be downloaded from the link here.
Photo credit: Scott Graham on Unsplash
Source: Transport & Environment
Published: 25 January, 2022
Company highlights a common and unhelpful misconception of EU MRV and IMO DCS.
Bulk carrier “Beks Ceyda” received 750 mt of B30 VLSFO bunker fuel at Port of Rotterdam with full lifecycle emissions compensated with carbon credits.
Total bunker sales at Panama was 388,640 metric tonnes (mt) in August, compared to sales of 372,055 mt during the similar period in 2020.
R&T has access to array of confidential documents that risk being abused in order to benefit the supervisors to the detriment of the Lim family, reports Reuters.
Singapore grapples with HSFO380 chloride contamination; demand picks up with quarantine easing in Hong Kong; state emergency and curfews in Sri Lanka hits bunker deliveries.
About 100 mt, out of total 200 mt fuel oil spill, has already been cleared, says port authority.
Program introduces periodic assessments, mass flow metering data analysis, and regular training for relevant key personnel to better handle the MFMS to ensure a high level of continuous operational competency.
U.S. Claims Register Summary recorded a total USD 833 million claim from a total 180 creditors against O.W. Bunker USA, according to the creditor list seen by Singapore bunkering publication Manifold Times.
Glencore purchased fuel through Straits Pinnacle which contracted supply from Unicious Energy. Contaminated HSFO was loaded at Khor Fakkan port and shipped to a FSU in Tanjong Pelepas, Malaysia to be further blended.
Individuals were employees of surveying companies engaged by Shell to inspect the volume of oil loaded onto the vessels which Shell supplied oil to; they allegedly accepted bribes totalling at least USD 213,000.
MPA preliminary investigations revealed that the affected marine fuel was supplied by Glencore Singapore Pte Ltd who later sold part of the same cargo to PetroChina International (Singapore) Pte Ltd.
‘MPA had immediately contacted the relevant bunker suppliers to take necessary steps to ensure that the relevant batch of fuel was no longer supplied. Further investigations are currently on-going,’ it informs.
