1 / 30

Environmental Protection & the Oceans: Regulating Intentional Oil Pollution

Environmental Protection & the Oceans: Regulating Intentional Oil Pollution. “It was in many ways in the field of marine pollution that the international environmental negotiating community learnt its craft” (Tony Brenton, 1993:91).

reese
Download Presentation

Environmental Protection & the Oceans: Regulating Intentional Oil Pollution

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Environmental Protection & the Oceans: Regulating Intentional Oil Pollution “It was in many ways in the field of marine pollution that the international environmental negotiating community learnt its craft” (Tony Brenton, 1993:91)

  2. Environmental Protection & the Oceans: Regulating Intentional Oil Pollution • Intentional discharge of oil is the primary source of oil pollution: 1 million tons annually (60-70% of all oil from ships, including from spills) • Three major sources of intentional oil pollution: * Oil tankers fill their cargo holds with seawater to serve as ballast on return journeys, later pumping this back out to sea * Cleaning tanks with water before receiving more oil * Oil and lubricants leak and mix with ship bilges

  3. Why Regulating ShippingActivities is Difficult • Thousands of ships and port visits around the world each year • Most ships are foreign owned • Most ships registered in foreign countries different than that of owners: “Flag States” (e.g., Bahamas, Cyprus) • Ships operated by other companies usually based in other countries • Crews often from LDC’s: poorly paid with limited training • Officers often of different nationalities from crew • Margins are tight as merchant ships are in oversupply • Maritime “culture” dislikes regulation: the law of the sea is not the same as the law of the land

  4. Early History of Action(1920 - WWII) • 1920s: Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (UK) and National Coast Anti-pollution League (US) lobbied respective governments in response to oiled birds and beaches • 1922: UK responds by banning intentional discharges within 3 miles of shore (territorial limit) • 1924: US does the same • 1926: US convenes first international conference to eliminate intentional discharges: attended by 13 nations • Much debate over the persistence of oil in the ocean • Compromise agreement to restrict discharges to outside 50 miles from coast • Agreement never signed • Limited voluntary compliance by industry (where cost-effective)

  5. Early History of Action(1920 - WWII) • 1920s: Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (UK) and National Coast Anti-pollution League (US) lobbied respective governments in response to oiled birds and beaches • 1922: UK responds by banning intentional discharges within 3 miles of shore (territorial limit) • 1924: US does the same • 1926: US convenes first international conference to eliminate intentional discharges: attended by 13 nations… - Much debate over the persistence of oil in the ocean - Compromise agreement to restrict discharges to outside 50 miles from coast - Agreement never signed - Limited voluntary compliance by industry (where cost-effective)

  6. Early History of Action(1920 - WWII) 1935: Draft Convention: • Expanded restricted zone from 50 - 150 miles • Discussions over requiring on new ships expensive oily water separators (to be discharged in port receptor facilities) overturned by nations with strong shipping interests, including US and UK. i.e., UK/US took leadership role to placate domestic environ. lobbies, but not willing to impose costly regulations • States required to impose fines on violators • Ship masters required to record in log book incidences involving oil discharges • Convention never signed: opposition from Italy, Japan, and Germany and related looming conflict...

  7. Early History of Action(1920 - WWII) • 1936: Oil tanker accidents in US raise concern and prompt passage of Tank Vessel Act = “stricter operational and construction standards for American tankers”, and required US/UK ship owners to expand voluntary compliance to 1926 regulations to 100 miles offshore • These led to noticeable decrease in oil pollution along US coasts with subsequent declining concern by US

  8. Post-War Progress Vastly increased international shipping, especially oil tankers, led to dramatic rise in marine pollution 1954: UK-led International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of Sea by Oil • Meeting in London: 32 countries attended • UK proposed regulating discharges throughout ocean • UK recommends “slop tanks” & reception facilities • Industries opposed slop tanks and governments opposed reception facilities because of costs • Few countries felt problem serious enough to warrant strong regulations • Convention resembled pre-War agreements, but with slightly more stringent requirements for releases within zones (lowered max. from 500 to 100ppm) • Convention was first one officially signed, but problem of enforcement remained and so agreement was largely ineffective

  9. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1958: Inter-governmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO) founded by UN. General mandate to address all aspects of international shipping regulation. Assumed responsibility for marine oil pollution issues. 1962: IMCO sponsored Conference: 38 states attending • Expanded restricted zone to 100 miles in many areas, including whole of Baltic and North Seas • New tankers (>20,000 tons) banned from discharging anywhere in the ocean • Problem of compliance persists • Increasing R&D into alternative technologies for reducing oil discharges. e.g., Load on Top (LOT) method inexpensive and widely adopted by industry 1967: Torrey Canyon spill in English Channel plus general increase in environmental awareness led to greater public pressure 1969 Convention Amendments: Established total discharge limits for all oceans--first time that total discharges were reduced, not just redistributed

  10. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1958: Inter-governmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO) founded by UN. General mandate to address all aspects of international shipping regulation. Assumed responsibility for marine oil pollution issues. 1962: IMCO sponsored Conference: 38 states attending • Expanded restricted zone to 100 miles in many areas, including whole of Baltic and North Seas • New tankers (>20,000 tons) banned from discharging anywhere in the ocean • Problem of compliance persists • Increasing R&D into alternative technologies for reducing oil discharges. e.g., Load on Top (LOT) method inexpensive and widely adopted by industry 1967: Torrey Canyon spill in English Channel plus general increase in environmental awareness led to greater public pressure 1969 Convention Amendments: Established total discharge limits for all oceans--first time that total discharges were reduced, not just redistributed

  11. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1958: Inter-governmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO) founded by UN. General mandate to address all aspects of international shipping regulation. Assumed responsibility for marine oil pollution issues. 1962: IMCO sponsored Conference: 38 states attending • Expanded restricted zone to 100 miles in many areas, including whole of Baltic and North Seas • New tankers (>20,000 tons) banned from discharging anywhere in the ocean • Problem of compliance persists • Increasing R&D into alternative technologies for reducing oil discharges. e.g., Load on Top (LOT) method inexpensive and widely adopted by industry 1967: Torrey Canyon spill in English Channel plus general increase in environmental awareness led to greater public pressure 1969 Convention Amendments: Established total discharge limits for all oceans--first time that total discharges were reduced, not just redistributed

  12. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1972: Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment 1972: Strong domestic pressure in US leads to US Ports and Waterways Safety Act, which unilaterally threatened to deny ships entry to US ports if they failed to comply to a whole sweep of new technology standards 1973: International Conference on Marine Pollution and International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) • Addressed oil discharge within a broader framework of marine pollution (garbage, sewage, chemicals) • Tightened regulations for 1969 Amendments • Required new technologies for all ships built after 1979: Oily water separators using SBT: Segregated Ballast Tanks and monitoring devices. • Increased inspection rights of states for ships entering their ports • Provided funds for training of LDC Merchant Marine and for reception facilities

  13. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1972: Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment 1972: Strong domestic pressure in US leads to US Ports and Waterways Safety Act, which unilaterally threatened to deny ships entry to US ports if they failed to comply to a whole sweep of new technology standards 1973: International Conference on Marine Pollution and International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) • Addressed oil discharge within a broader framework of marine pollution (garbage, sewage, chemicals) • Tightened regulations for 1969 Amendments • Required new technologies for all ships built after 1979: Oily water separators using SBT: Segregated Ballast Tanks and monitoring devices. • Increased inspection rights of states for ships entering their ports • Provided funds for training of LDC Merchant Marine and for reception facilities

  14. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1976/7: Series of oil spills plus pro-environment US President (Carter): threats of unilateral action if MARPOL not strengthened quickly 1978: Protocol to MARPOL • Industry responded to pressures by proposing Crude Oil Washing (COW) on all tankers • All new crude oil tankers over 20,000 tons to install COW and SBT; while requiring existing tankers over 40,000 tons to install either COW or SBT (the former is cheaper so typically used) 1980s -1990s: With regulations in place, effort shifted more towards improving monitoring and compliance. • e.g., EU Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control; increased inspections in US, Canada and Japan 1989: Exxon Valdez spill, Alaska, prompts US 1990 Oil Pollution Act requiring double hulls on tankers by 2015 2003: Spill of coast of Spain: Has prompted efforts to strengthen EU policy with intent to eliminate older tankers from EU waters

  15. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1976/7: Series of oil spills plus pro-environment US President (Carter): threats of unilateral action if MARPOL not strengthened quickly 1978: Protocol to MARPOL • Industry responded to pressures by proposing Crude Oil Washing (COW) on all tankers • All new crude oil tankers over 20,000 tons to install COW and SBT; while requiring existing tankers over 40,000 tons to install either COW or SBT (the former is cheaper so typically used) 1980s -1990s: With regulations in place, effort shifted more towards improving monitoring and compliance. • e.g., EU Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control; increased inspections in US, Canada and Japan 1989: Exxon Valdez spill, Alaska, prompts US 1990 Oil Pollution Act requiring double hulls on tankers by 2015 2003: Spill of coast of Spain: Has prompted efforts to strengthen EU policy with intent to eliminate older tankers from EU waters

  16. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1976/7: Series of oil spills plus pro-environment US President (Carter): threats of unilateral action if MARPOL not strengthened quickly 1978: Protocol to MARPOL • Industry responded to pressures by proposing Crude Oil Washing (COW) on all tankers • All new crude oil tankers over 20,000 tons to install COW and SBT; while requiring existing tankers over 40,000 tons to install either COW or SBT (the former is cheaper so typically used) 1980s -1990s: With regulations in place, effort shifted more towards improving monitoring and compliance. • e.g., EU Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control; increased inspections in US, Canada and Japan 1989: Exxon Valdez spill, Alaska, prompts US 1990 Oil Pollution Act requiring double hulls on tankers by 2015 2003: Spill of coast of Spain: Has prompted efforts to strengthen EU policy with intent to eliminate older tankers from EU waters

  17. Post-War Progress, cont`d. 1976/7: Series of oil spills plus pro-environment US President (Carter): threats of unilateral action if MARPOL not strengthened quickly 1978: Protocol to MARPOL • Industry responded to pressures by proposing Crude Oil Washing (COW) on all tankers • All new crude oil tankers over 20,000 tons to install COW and SBT; while requiring existing tankers over 40,000 tons to install either COW or SBT (the former is cheaper so typically used) 1980s -1990s: With regulations in place, effort shifted more towards improving monitoring and compliance. • e.g., EU Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control; increased inspections in US, Canada and Japan 1989: Exxon Valdez spill, Alaska, prompts US 1990 Oil Pollution Act requiring double hulls on tankers by 2015 2003: Spill of coast of Spain: Has prompted efforts to strengthen EU policy with intent to eliminate older tankers from EU waters

  18. Canada and Intentional Oil Pollution • Major Shipping lanes along SE coast of Newfoundland (to St. Lawrence) and east coast off Nova Scotia • Most Obvious Impact: est. 300,000 seabirds die each year from oil exposure (murres, puffins, sea ducks, gulls) • Minimal exposure (spot the size of a quarter) will slowly kill a bird by destroying insulation and enabling freezing water to contact skin directly.

  19. Canada and Intentional Oil Pollution Key Government Players & Responsibilities: • Environment Canada: Pollution (CEPA, Fisheries Act, Migratory Birds Convention Act) • Transport Can.: marine poll’n, safety (Shipping Act) • Coast Guard (DFO): surveillance, search & rescue • National Defense: security, search & rescue • Justice: prosecutions • Foreign Affairs: international law • Industry Canada/Canada Space Agency: commerce and surveillance

  20. Canada, cont’d. Enforcement & Prosecutions: • Surveillance by airplane or satellite (all weather) • Oil analysis: chemical fingerprinting comparing marine spill with on-ship bilge waters • Wind drift back-cast modeling (Meteorological Service) • Formal charges under one of Statutes (CEPA, FA, CSA, MBCA) • 2005: Bill C-15: Act to Amend the Migratory Birds Convention Act and Canadian Environmental Protection Act: Puts teeth in government’s ability to prosecute infractions

  21. Canada, cont’d. Enforcement & Prosecutions: • Surveillance by airplane or satellite (all weather) • Oil analysis: chemical fingerprinting comparing marine spill with on-ship bilge waters • Wind drift back-cast modeling (Meteorological Service) • Formal charges under one of Statutes (CEPA, FA, CSA, MBCA) • 2005: Bill C-15: Act to Amend the Migratory Birds Convention Act and Canadian Environmental Protection Act: Puts teeth in government’s ability to prosecute infractions

  22. Canada, cont’d. Enforcement & Prosecutions: • Surveillance by airplane or satellite (all weather) • Oil analysis: chemical fingerprinting comparing marine spill with on-ship bilge waters • Wind drift back-cast modeling (Meteorological Service) • Formal charges under one of Statutes (CEPA, FA, CSA, MBCA) • 2005: Bill C-15: Act to Amend the Migratory Birds Convention Act and Canadian Environmental Protection Act: Puts teeth in government’s ability to prosecute infractions

  23. Summary: Lessons Learned • Experience showed a history of low compliance on discharge standards, but high compliance on equipment and construction standards because the latter are easier to enforce and also produce a “level-playing field” for industry. Newer ships are far less polluting and so can expect continued improvements. • Unilateral action to spur international action was critical: US/UK in early years and US in later years (1970s) • Industry influential, both in stalling early progress and later developing cost-effective alternatives; motivated by desire to head-off more rigorous regulations • Continued problem of inadequate reception facilities, especially in LDCs • Influence of environmental disasters: oil tanker accidents have often triggered action, even though accidents and intentional releases are largely un-related issues • Minor role of science (in contrast to Ozone, Whaling, Climate change, etc.). In fact, there still is little consensus over just how serious a threat intentional oil releases are to the environment

  24. Summary: Lessons Learned • Experience showed a history of low compliance on discharge standards, but high compliance on equipment and construction standards because the latter are easier to enforce and also produce a “level-playing field” for industry. Newer ships are far less polluting and so can expect continued improvements. • Unilateral action to spur international action was critical: US/UK in early years and US in later years (1970s) • Industry influential, both in stalling early progress and later developing cost-effective alternatives; motivated by desire to head-off more rigorous regulations • Continued problem of inadequate reception facilities, especially in LDCs • Influence of environmental disasters: oil tanker accidents have often triggered action, even though accidents and intentional releases are largely un-related issues • Minor role of science (in contrast to Ozone, Whaling, Climate change, etc.). In fact, there still is little consensus over just how serious a threat intentional oil releases are to the environment

  25. Summary: Lessons Learned • Experience showed a history of low compliance on discharge standards, but high compliance on equipment and construction standards because the latter are easier to enforce and also produce a “level-playing field” for industry. Newer ships are far less polluting and so can expect continued improvements. • Unilateral action to spur international action was critical: US/UK in early years and US in later years (1970s) • Industry influential, both in stalling early progress and later developing cost-effective alternatives; motivated by desire to head-off more rigorous regulations • Continued problem of inadequate reception facilities, especially in LDCs • Influence of environmental disasters: oil tanker accidents have often triggered action, even though accidents and intentional releases are largely un-related issues • Minor role of science (in contrast to Ozone, Whaling, Climate change, etc.). In fact, there still is little consensus over just how serious a threat intentional oil releases are to the environment

  26. Summary: Lessons Learned • Experience showed a history of low compliance on discharge standards, but high compliance on equipment and construction standards because the latter are easier to enforce and also produce a “level-playing field” for industry. Newer ships are far less polluting and so can expect continued improvements. • Unilateral action to spur international action was critical: US/UK in early years and US in later years (1970s) • Industry influential, both in stalling early progress and later developing cost-effective alternatives; motivated by desire to head-off more rigorous regulations • Continued problem of inadequate reception facilities, especially in LDCs • Influence of environmental disasters: oil tanker accidents have often triggered action, even though accidents and intentional releases are largely un-related issues • Minor role of science (in contrast to Ozone, Whaling, Climate change, etc.). In fact, there still is little consensus over just how serious a threat intentional oil releases are to the environment

  27. Summary: Lessons Learned • Experience showed a history of low compliance on discharge standards, but high compliance on equipment and construction standards because the latter are easier to enforce and also produce a “level-playing field” for industry. Newer ships are far less polluting and so can expect continued improvements. • Unilateral action to spur international action was critical: US/UK in early years and US in later years (1970s) • Industry influential, both in stalling early progress and later developing cost-effective alternatives; motivated by desire to head-off more rigorous regulations • Continued problem of inadequate reception facilities, especially in LDCs • Influence of environmental disasters: oil tanker accidents have often triggered action, even though accidents and intentional releases are largely un-related issues • Minor role of science (in contrast to Ozone, Whaling, Climate change, etc.). In fact, there still is little consensus over just how serious a threat intentional oil releases are to the environment

  28. Summary: Lessons Learned • Experience showed a history of low compliance on discharge standards, but high compliance on equipment and construction standards because the latter are easier to enforce and also produce a “level-playing field” for industry. Newer ships are far less polluting and so can expect continued improvements. • Unilateral action to spur international action was critical: US/UK in early years and US in later years (1970s) • Industry influential, both in stalling early progress and later developing cost-effective alternatives; motivated by desire to head-off more rigorous regulations • Continued problem of inadequate reception facilities, especially in LDCs • Influence of environmental disasters: oil tanker accidents have often triggered action, even though accidents and intentional releases are largely un-related issues • Minor role of science (in contrast to Ozone, Whaling, Climate change, etc.). In fact, there still is little consensus over just how serious a threat intentional oil releases are to the environment

More Related