The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) began the 80th meeting of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 80) in London today, with member states deeply divided on emissions.
The end of this week, 7 July, is the deadline for adoption of the IMO's revised greenhouse gas (GHG) strategy. Member states must agree on a timeline for reducing GHG emissions and the amount by which to reduce them from 2008 levels.
IMO secretary general Kitack Lim said these discussions had "reached the final stage" following five years of negotiations. Most members agree there should be a target for 2050, and intermediary ones for 2030 and 2040, but there is no coherence on implementation, leniency, nor if these targets should be met around or by these dates.
Australia professed disappointment in what it felt to be the inadequate targets being proposed, calling for full decarbonisation of the shipping industry by 2050 at the latest. This echoed comments from Pacific Islands states, such as Kiribas and the Marshall Islands, which insisted on maintaining the 1.5C temperature rise stipulated in the Paris Agreement. The Netherlands and Sweden pushed for a net zero target.
Others urged the need for practicality and the protection of the shipping industry. China and India painted more ambitious targets as attempts to restrain their economic growth. Brazil argued that developed countries — responsible historically for climate change — were seeking to raise funds, which they had promised to developing countries to support them, through IMO to avoid making reparations.
Venezuela and Argentina opposed decarbonisation and a maritime tax as unfairly burdening countries with distant markets and lower-value goods. They said the shipping industry is disproportionately targeted.
There was much discussion around the effects of any adopted measures on developing states, which are more vulnerable to climate change's consequences and have less funds to sustain a path to lower emissions. A common refrain during the meeting was "a fair, equitable and just transition."
Decisions taken at IMO levels are legally-binding for governments accepting the IMO's convention. The revision of the strategy could have far-reaching consequences for the shipping industry. The IMO's initial strategy on GHG emissions in 2018 set targets for the carbon intensity of shipping to decline by at least 40pc by 2030 and 70pc by 2050 compared with 2008 levels. Members also agreed to reduce overall GHG emissions by at least 50pc by 2050.
How far away is a consensus
Secretary general Lim was optimistic on consensus being reached by deadline, but lack of progress in intersessional meetings puts this into question. Lim said progress had been made in reaching a consensus for the GHG strategy during the intersessional working group (ISWG) last week, but in fact only guidelines on the lifecycle GHG intensity of marine fuels (LCA) were drafted.
Asked if a charge on CO2 emissions could be guaranteed, Lim said the MEPC draft had adopted it as part of its basket of measures, but that its modality had not been agree upon. But a report on the outcome of ISWG-GHG 14 and 15 said consensus could not be reached on economic measures, or on methodology for the impact assessment of the strategy on individual states.
A United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) report concluded that more needed to be done urgently by IMO to reach its decarbonisation targets. Any measure decided this week will have its implementation discussed, probably for a couple of years, and then a further two years would be necessary to put them into actions. There are limits to the IMO's ability to enforce any of its regulations. If a consensus is not found, the committee cannot call for a majority vote, only the member states can.
The GHG working group has not been released at time of publication.
