2014 年 12 月 4 日

日本船主協会
UNFCCC COP20 に関する ICS プレスリリースならびにパンフレットの発行について～国際海運からの不合理かつ過大な資金拠出には断固反対～2014 年 12 月 1 日から同 12 日の日程で、ペルーにて開催中の UNFCCC COP20 について、ICS（国際海運会議所）※は、関連のプレスリリースを発出するとともに、同会合向けのパンフレットを発行しましたので、その背景・概要について以下の通りお知らせいたします。

1.

ICS プレスリリース／パンフレットの背景
気候変動枠組み条約（UNFCCC）の締約国会議（COP）において、気候変動対策に供される長期資金について、これまで主として以下の議論があった。
・ COP15（2009）；先進国から発展途上国に対する支援を目的に、年間 1000 億ドルの資金（いわゆる長期資金）を官民から広く調達することに合意
・ COP18（2012）；何ら検討なきまま、国際海運より年間 100～150 億ドル（長期資金総額の 10～15%）の潜在的拠出を見込むレポートが提出される以下の理由により、世界の海運産業界は、国際海運からの不合理かつ過大な資金拠出には断固反対の立場を取っている。
① 特定のセクターねらい撃ちで、国際海運からの資金拠出に言及するものである② 国際海運の CO2 排出量（世界の総排出量比 2.2%）に対して極めて過大な負担（総額の 10～15%）に言及しており、深刻な市場歪曲（環境に優しい海上輸送から、陸上輸送への逆モーダルシフトなど）を招く恐れが極めて強い③ ましてや、国境なき国際海運における CO2 排出量削減対策は、国連の専門機関である IMO（国際海事機関）にて検討するよう京都議定書で規定されており、IMO において然るべき対策を実施・検討している状況にある
現状では COP の場で国際海運からの資金拠出に関する決定は何らされていないものの、
COP20 での議論の可能性を懸念し、国際海運の立場を明確にしたものである。

2.

ICS プレスリリース概要
主として以下を主張するものであるが、詳細は本紙(添付)を参照のこと。
・ 国際海運からの CO2 排出量削減は、船籍に関係なく全ての船舶に対する一律適用を原則とする IMO において、検討するのが最も相応しい。

国際海運は、IMO の下で、CO2 の排出量削減のために国際的な規制を導入している唯一の産業である。また、IMO では、船舶からのCO2 排出量削減に向けて、追加措置の検討を進めている。
・ 数百億ドル単位での GCF【Green Climate Fund（緑の気候基金）：長期資金などの資金の受け皿となると目される基金】への貢献を国際海運に求める提言には断固反対であり、国際海運は“cash cow（金の成る木）”ではない。
国際海運からの CO2 排出量削減に関するいかなる決定も、IMO 加盟国により、IMOの場でなされるべきであるが、（例え GCF への貢献を検討する場合においても）全
世界の CO2 排出量に占める国際海運からの CO2 排出量比（2.2% : IMO GHG Study
2014）を踏まえた貢献を検討すべきである。
3.

ICS パンフレット概要
国際海運の CO2 排出量削減に関し、IMO による CO2 排出削減に向けた取り組みの顕著な進展を説明し、UNFCCC が IMO による CO2 排出削減に向けた取り組みを引き続き支持していくべき旨、主張するもの。
UNFCCC の関与により、海運市場に歪曲した深刻な影響をもたらし、また、国際海運
全体として有意義な CO2 排出量削減に全く効果的にならないことなどを懸念している。
＊ その他、概要以下についても触れられているが、詳細は本紙(添付)参照のこと。
・ 世界経済成長が見込まれることにより今後も継続的に海上輸送量の増加が見込まれることの説明・ 船舶は最も環境にやさしい輸送手段との認識である一方、個船の CO2 排出量削減について取組むことには賛同
・ IMO の一律適用の原則、登録船籍国/運航者の船籍が売買船等により頻繁に変わること等から、IMO にて CBDR 原則の概念を直接的に取入れることは非現実的・ 環境関連規則に関する IMO の実績（海洋の油濁低減、SOx 規制合意による大気汚染
物質の大幅な排出削減への取組み）
・ 今後の CO2 排出量削減方法（運航的手法（SEEMP）の活用や船舶の大型化への期待。また、昨今の燃料費の高騰、燃料油 SOx 規制から燃料油コスト増加見込みにより、船社はコスト削減のため燃料消費量削減に対して強い動機がある由。
）※

国際海運会議所（International Chamber of Shipping）は、各国船主協会を会員として 1921 年に設立された組織で、本部をロンドンに置く。1948 年に現在の名前に変更された。日本船主協会は 1957 年 4 月に加盟。自由主義海運を標榜するとともに、船主の利益を擁護・代表し、商船隊の発展を促進させることを目的とする団体。海洋環境保全、船舶航行安全、海事法制、情報システム等に関し具体的な検討を行い、IMO 等において海運業界を代表する組織として活動している。

以上

28 November 2014

Immediate Release

SHIPPING INDUSTRY SETS OUT PROGRESS ON CO2 REDUCTION ON EVE OF
UN CLIMATE CONFERENCE, BUT STRESSES INDUSTRY IS NOT ‘CASH COW’
The global shipping industry, which transports around 90% of world trade, only
produced about 2.2% of the world’s total Green House Gas emissions during 2012
compared to 2.8% in 2007. Shipping’s total emissions have reduced by more than
10% during the same period.
In advance of the United Nations Climate Conference in Lima (1-12 December), theglobal trade association for ship operators – the International Chamber of Shipping(ICS) – says that the industry is on track to reduce its emissions by more than 20%
by 2020 (compared to 2005) with further reductions going forward.
This and other information about the impressive progress which the shipping industry
is making to reduce its CO2 emissions is set out in a special brochure prepared for
the UNFCCC Climate Change Conference (COP 20). This can be found on the
global trade association’s website – www.ics-shipping.org/docs/co2
The shipping industry is the only industrial sector which is already covered by abinding global agreement to reduce its CO2 emissions, through technical andoperational measures agreed – with full industry support – by its global regulator, theLondon-based International Maritime Organization (IMO).
ICS explains that the IMO is now developing additional measures to reduce CO2
emissions from shipping and that the UN Conference needs to maintain its support
for IMO as the principal forum for addressing emissions from maritime transport,
which cannot be attributed to individual national economies.
ICS emphasises that any decision, for example, on whether to develop a Market
Based Measure for shipping that might be linked to the Green Climate Fund (GCF)
should be a matter for IMO Member States. IMO will be best placed to develop an
approach that can reconcile the UNFCCC principle of ‘Common But DifferentiatedResponsibility (CBDR)’ – whereby developing countries are treated differently – with
the need for all ships, regardless of flag, to be treated in a uniform manner.
Shipping is a global industry requiring rules on CO2 to be applied on a global basis toall ships. Apart from preventing market distortion in this totally globalised sector, thisis necessary to avoid ‘carbon leakage’ since only about 35% of the world fleet isregistered with those developed nations that are covered by emission reduction
commitments under the existing Kyoto Protocol on climate change prevention.
The position of the shipping industry remains that any contribution by shipping to the
GCF must reflect the sector’s modest contribution to total global CO2 emissions. ICS
is firmly opposed to any suggestion that the shipping industry should collectively pay
tens of billions of dollars each year, stressing that the industry is not a ‘cash cow’.
Notes
The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) is the global trade association formerchant shipowners. Its membership comprises national shipowners’ associations
from 36 countries representing over 80% of the world merchant fleet.
The figures concerning CO2 emissions reductions from shipping are taken from theThird IMO GHG Study, 2014.

For Further Information, please contact:
ICS: Debra Munford, Elaborate Communications
dmunford@elabor8.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 1296 682356

Shipping, World Tradeand the Reduction of
CO2 Emissions
United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

Representing the Global Shipping Industry

CO
LI P 2
M 0
A

INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF SHIPPING (ICS)IMO agreement on technical regulations will reduce ships’ CO2
MARPOL Annex VI, Chapter 4 adopted July 2011, which entered into force in January 2013
Regulations
enter into force
force
for over 94%
90% of
world
of
world
fleet
fleet

EEDI requires
new ships tomeet agreed
efficiency targets

Ship Energy
Efficiency
Ship
EnergyManagement
Efficiency
Plan (SEEMP):Management
mandatory
Plan(SEEMP):
implementation
mandatory
for all ships
implementation
for all ships

New ships
must improve
efficiency up
to 20%New ships
must improve
efficiency 30%

20% CO2
reduction per
tonne/km(industry goal)

2013

2015

2020

50% CO2
reduction per
tonne/km(industry goal)

2025

2030

2050

Comparison of typical CO2 emissions between modes of transport
Grams per tonne-km
3.0 Very large container vessel (18,000 teu)*

0 dwt

5.9 Oil tanker (80,000 – 119,999 dwt)

0 dwt

7.9 Bulk carrier (10,000 – 34,999 dwt)

railerNew ships
must improve
efficiency 10%80.0 Truck (> 40 tonnes)
Air freight (747, capacity 113 tonnes)

flight100

200

Source: IMO GHG Study, 2009 (*AP Møller-Maersk, 2014)

IMO in session in London

Front cover photo: Hapag-Lloyd

300

400

435.0
500

International Shipping –Servant of World Trade
UNFCCC should
continue to support
significant progress
on reducing shipping’s
emissions at IMO
The global shipping industry is firmly on track to reduce
its CO2 emissions per tonne-kilometre by more than
20% by 2020,1 with significant further reductions
going forward.
Global shipping, which transports around 90% ofworld trade, only produced about 2.2% of the world’s
total GHG emissions during 2012 compared to 2.8%
in 2007. Total shipping emissions have reduced by over
10% during the same period.2
The shipping industry is the only industrial sector
which is already covered by a legally-binding global
agreement to reduce its CO2 emissions, throughtechnical and operational measures adopted by theInternational Maritime Organization (IMO).
The next United Nations Climate Change Conference(COP 20) therefore needs to maintain its support for
IMO as the principal forum for addressing emissions
from maritime transport as it continues its vital workof delivering further CO2 emissions reductions frominternational shipping.
IMO work currently includes the establishment ofa global data collection system to measure CO2
emissions from individual ships. The developmentof Market Based Measures for shipping also remains
on IMO’s agenda.
Shipping is a global industry requiring uniform global
regulation. As demonstrated by the ground breaking
IMO agreement that entered into force worldwide
in 2013, IMO is the best place for the delivery offurther emissions reduction measures by the entire
international shipping sector, in a manner that avoids
market distortion or disruption to international tradeflows, while being compatible with the principle of‘Common But Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR)’.

The international shipping industry is responsible forthe carriage of about 90% of world trade and is vitalto the functioning of the global economy.
Intercontinental trade, the bulk transport of raw
materials and the import/export of affordable food andgoods would simply not be possible without shipping.
It is the availability, low cost and efficiency of maritime
transport that has made possible the major shift
towards industrial production in emerging economies,
which has in large part been responsible, in recent years,
for dramatic improvements in global living standards.
The world’s population and economy is expected tocontinue to grow and shipping will need to respond to
the demand for its services (unless existing patterns ofglobal trade were to be fundamentally transformed).
Shipping is an inherently international industry which
depends on a global regulatory framework to operate
efficiently. If a ship trades from Doha to Dalian, thesame rules need to apply (for example: concerning
construction, navigation or atmospheric emissions) atboth ends of the voyage. Otherwise there would bechaos and serious inefficiency.
For over 50 years this global regulatory framework has
been very successfully provided by the United Nations
International Maritime Organization (IMO).

PREDICTED INCREASES IN WORLDSEABORNE TRADE, GDP AND POPULATIONWorld seaborne trade carried in tonnes (billions)
World economy GDP in US $ (trillions)
World population (billions)
18

Worldseabo
Wold
econ

World Popu

12

120

6

60

billions0

1 Compared to 2005
2 Third IMO GHG Study, 2014

180

2000
,2000

trillions
2005
,2005

2010
,2010

2015
,2015

2020
,2020

2025
,2025

Sources:
World seaborne trade – IHS Global InsightWorld economy – OECD Statistics
World population – UN Department for Economic
and Social Affairs, Population Division

2030
,2030

0

Reducing Shipping’s CO2
The international shipping industry is firmly committed toplaying its part in reducing emissions of CO2 and other Green
House Gases.
International shipping is already, by far, the most carbon
efficient mode of commercial transport and continues toimprove fuel efficiency and thus reduce CO2 emissions. But
it is fully recognised that CO2 emissions from the industry as
a whole (some 2.2% of global emissions) are comparable tothose of a major national economy.
However, shipping is the servant of world trade. The total
emissions of shipping, as a sector, will therefore be determined,
to a significant extent, by the expected long term growth of theworld economy (and population) between now and 2050.

CO2 Reduction Measures for
Shipping Should be Led by IMO
As already acknowledged by the Kyoto Protocol, emissions
from international shipping cannot be attributed to any
particular national economy. Multilateral collaborative action
will be the most appropriate means to address emissions fromthe maritime transport sector.
Multilateral collaborative action will be best achieved bygovernments at the specialist United Nations agency – theIMO − which has a successful track record in the developmentof global regulations governing the shipping industry’s
environmental performance. For example, the International
Convention on the Prevention of Pollution by Ships (MARPOL),
which now contains technical regulations for the reductionof CO2, has been ratified and enforced globally througha combination of flag state and port state control by IMOMember States.
The delivery of significant emission reductions by the maritime
sector will require that any mandatory measures adopted areapplied on a uniform and global basis to avoid ‘carbon leakage’.
Most shipping companies have the freedom to decideto register their ships with the ‘flag state’ of their choiceincluding those which, under the current Kyoto Protocol, are
not Annex I nations. Measures to deliver meaningful emission
reductions are thus much more likely to be achieved byinstruments developed by governments at IMO.

In 2014, only about 35% of the world merchant
fleet is registered in UNFCCC Annex I countries.

Taking Account of CBDRThe UNFCCC principle of ‘Common But DifferentiatedResponsibility’ (CBDR) cannot be practically applied directly
to individual ships without the danger of significant ‘carbon
leakage’. The ‘flag state’3 with which a ship is registered, or
indeed the ‘nationality’ of the entity operating the ship, canchange frequently, especially when ships are bought and sold.
The direct application of the CBDR concept would also cause
gross distortion of shipping markets, reducing the efficiency ofmaritime transport and thus the smooth flow of world trade.

Failure to deliver a global and uniform CO2
reduction regime for international shipping will
greatly reduce the ability of the shipping sector asa whole to reduce its emissions.
However, the IMO principle of ‘no more favourable treatment’ensures that standards adopted for shipping are applied equally
throughout the world, delivering maximum environmental
protection and improvement.
The international shipping industry therefore believes that theachievement of meaningful reductions in CO2 emissions will be
best achieved if nations agree that the development of detailed
measures for the international merchant fleet should be directedby governments at IMO - while fully respecting the UNFCCC
CBDR principle.

IMO Agreement on
CO2 Technical Rules
In July 2011, governments at IMO agreed
a comprehensive package of technicalregulations for reducing shipping’s CO2
emissions which entered into force inJanuary 2013.
The amendments to the MARPOL Convention(Annex VI) include:• A system of energy efficiency design indexing for
new ships (similar in concept to the ratings applied
to cars and electrical appliances). The IMO EEDI willlead to approximately 25-30% emission reductions
by 2030 compared to ‘business as usual’.
• A template for a Ship Energy Efficiency
Management Plan (SEEMP) for use by all ships.
The SEEMP allows companies and ships to monitor
and improve performance with regard to various
factors that may contribute to CO2 emissions.
These include, inter alia: improved voyage planning;
speed management; weather routeing; optimising
engine power, use of rudders and propellers; hull
maintenance and use of different fuel types.

Recognition of CBDRThe July 2011 agreement demonstrates that IMO iseminently capable of delivering a global solution forshipping which can be reconciled with the principleof CBDR - without prejudice to what UNFCCC might
decide with respect to other industries. To address
CBDR, the IMO agreement includes a regulation forthe promotion of technical co-operation and thetransfer of technology relating to the improvementof energy efficiency of ships, and requires maritime
administrations - in co-operation with IMO - to provide
support directly to developing states that request
technical assistance.

IMO is also Developing
additional Measures
The IMO agreement on technical measuresdemonstrates that there is widespread understanding
amongst governments worldwide that the mosteffective means of reducing CO2 emissions fromships will be for COP 20 to recognise IMO’s ability
to regulate shipping, so that it can continue its
consideration of Market Based Measures (MBMs).
Governments have already made various detailed
proposals for a shipping MBM. These have beenassessed by an international panel of experts.

An MBM Linked to Fuel Consumption?
In the event that IMO Member States should decide to
develop a climate change funding mechanism to whichshipping might contribute, the clear preference of the
majority of the shipping industry is for a mechanism
linked to fuel consumption, rather than a system
based on emissions trading. Most shipping companies,
perhaps 90%, are small to medium sized enterprisesthat have a sound dislike of unnecessary complication.
An IMO MBM linked to fuel consumption is the option
which most shipping companies can probably accept
and support, if agreed by governments.

CO2 data collection
As an interim measure IMO has now agreed in principle
to the development of a global data collection system
to measure CO2 emissions from individual ships. Thisis fully supported by the industry provided that thesystem is primarily based on fuel consumption, is
simple to administer, and will not be used to develop
a mandatory operational index with the risk of market
distortion (identical ships on identical voyages may havevery different fuel consumption due to differing ocean
and weather conditions).

IMO’s Track Record on
Environmental Regulation
The level of ratification and enforcement of IMO Conventions
is very high in comparison to international regulations
governing many land based industries.4
The impressive track record of IMO is demonstrated by the
success of the MARPOL Convention (which also now includes
regulations to reduce ships’ CO2) in contributing to thesubstantial reduction of oil pollution since it entered into force.

MARPOL 73/78 has helped ensure
a dramatic reduction in oil spilled
Average number of major oil spills per year (over 700 tonnes)
30
20

30
24.5

10

9.4

1970s

If IMO Member States so decide, any MBM adopted
by IMO could potentially involve a linkage to theGreen Climate Fund that was established by COP 17,
in Durban, in 2011. However, this is a decision for
IMO Member States which will be best placed todevelop an approach that can reconcile the principleof CBDR with the need for all ships, regardless of flag,
to be treated in a uniform manner.
The Green Climate Fund aims to generate US$100
billion per year by 2020, in order to help mitigation
and adaptation projects in developing nations. The
position of ICS is that any contribution by shipping
must reflect the sector’s modest contribution to total
global CO2 emissions. As such, ICS will firmly resist
any suggestion that shipowners should collectively pay
tens of billions of dollars per year. The international
shipping industry is not a cash cow!

1980s

10
7.7

3.5

2.0

1990s

2000s

2010-13

Source: ITOPF

In addition to the ground breaking agreement to reduce CO2,
the ability of governments at IMO to respond to politicalpressure and to deliver global environmental regulations
involving complex issues has also been demonstrated by theagreement5 to reduce pollutant atmospheric emissions (suchas sulphur) from ships dramatically.

IMO agreement to reduce
atmospheric pollution from ships
Sulphur content of fuel permitted in Emission Control Areas
1.5

1.5

1.5%

1.0

Shipping and the UNFCCC Green Fund

20

1.0

1.0%

0.5

0.1%
2005

2010

0.5

2015

Sulphur content of fuel permitted outside Emission Control Areas
4.5

4.5

4.5%
3.5%

3.0
1.5

3.0

0.5%
2005

2012

1.5

2020/2025

3 Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea (UNCLOS), theflag state is the administration or government of the state whose flag theship is entitled to fly.
4 MARPOL Annexes I and II (governing prevention of oil and chemical
pollution) have been ratified by 150 nations covering over 99% of theworld merchant fleet. Recent amendments to MARPOL Annex VI (which
now address CO2) already cover over 94% of the world fleet.
5 The 2008 amendments to MARPOL Annex VI will, inter alia, reduce thesulphur content in fuel to just 0.1% in Emission Control Areas in 2015.

How is Shipping Reducing its CO2 Emissions?
The consensus of opinion within the global industry
is that it will be possible for shipping to reduce CO2
emitted per tonne of cargo transported one kilometre(tonne/km) by 20% between 2005 and 2020, througha combination of technological and operational
developments, as well as the introduction of new
and bigger ships, designed to the new IMO Energy
Efficiency Design Index.
In the longer term, depending on technologicaldevelopments which at the moment cannot be fully
anticipated, the industry believes it should be possible
to deliver even more dramatic emissions reductions.
Although the shipping industry is already very
energy efficient, additional improvements to hull,engine and propeller design are expected to produce
further reductions in fuel consumption. There may
also be possibilities for the better utilisation ofwaste heat.

The increasing size of many ships is also expected to
improve fuel efficiency. In addition, operational measures(e.g. better speed management throughout the course of avoyage) are also expected to reduce fuel consumption andare addressed in detail by the new Ship Energy Efficiency
Management Plan that has been made mandatory by IMO.
Shipping companies have a very strong incentive to
reduce their fuel consumption and thus reduce their
CO2 emissions: bunker costs represent an increasingly
significant proportion of ships’ operational expenses,
having increased by about 400% since 2000.
There is every expectation that marine bunker prices
will remain high. Furthermore, the cost of ships’ fuel is
expected to increase by a further 50% as a result of theincreased use of (low sulphur) distillate fuel that will follow
the implementation of the new IMO rules (MARPOL AnnexVI) that will apply in Emission Control Areas in 2015 andglobally from 2020.

Alternative Fuel Sources
The latest IPCC Synthesis Report (November 2014) suggests that all fossil fuels should bephased out by 2100. For the immediate future, shipping will probably remain dependent
on fossil fuels. In the longer term, however, the shipping industry is exploring a number ofalternative fuel sources to help reduce CO2 emissions.
Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) produces lower CO2 emissions and could be an interim solution until
a viable alternative to fossil fuels is eventually found, especially for shorter voyages provided that
supply infrastructure can be developed. Third or fourth generation biofuels might conceivably
provide a possible alternative although there is, of course, considerable public debate about the
net environmental costs (and social effects) of the wider use of such fuels.
Renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, may have a place in helping tomeet some ancillary requirements, such as lighting on board ships. However, they are notpractical for providing sufficient power to operate ships’ main engines (the huge physical sizeof ships should not be underestimated).
Fuel cells may be a possibility for new ships in the very long term, although they are currently
too limited in range to offer a viable solution. Even nuclear propulsion for merchant ships istechnically possible, although safety and security implications and support infrastructure costs
would require serious consideration.
The current assumption, therefore, remains that ships will continue to burn fossil fuels for theforeseeable future, and that the most significant means of reducing CO2 emissions will beachieved by further improvements in efficiency across the entire transport chain.

Published in 2014 byInternational Chamber of Shipping
38 St Mary Axe
LondonEC3A 8BH
Telephone + 44 20 7090 1460
info@ics-shipping.org
www.ics-shipping.org

The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) is the global trade association
for shipowners and operators, comprising national shipowners’ associations
from 36 countries, representing over 80% of the world merchant fleet.