Green
IMO 2020: The Big Shipping Shake-Up
IMO 2020: The Big Shipping Shake-Up
Over 90% of all global trade takes place on our oceans.
Unfortunately, the network of 59,000 vessels powering international commerce runs on sulfur-laden bunker fuel, and resulting emissions are causing problems on dry land.
As today’s infographic by Breakwave Advisors demonstrates, new emissions regulations taking effect in 2020 will have a big impact on the world’s massive fleet of marine shipping vessels.
The Regulatory Impact
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) – the UN agency responsible for ensuring a clean, safe, and efficient global shipping industry – will be implementing new regulations that will have massive impact on maritime shipping.
The regulations, dubbed IMO 2020, will enforce a 0.5% sulfur emissions cap worldwide starting January 1, 2020 ─ a dramatic decrease from the current emissions cap of 3.5%.
Here are a few ways marine fuel will likely be affected by these regulations:
- High-sulfur fuel oil will drop in price as the demand drops dramatically after January 1, 2020
- Diesel, a low-sulfur fuel oil, will be in higher demand and should see a price increase
- Refiners should also expect higher profits as refining runs increase to satisfy the new regulations
The Economic Impact
IMO 2020 will be one of the most dramatic fuel regulation changes ever implemented, with a significant impact on the global economy.
New regulations are certain to influence freight rates ─ the fees charged for delivering cargo from place to place. These rates can fluctuate depending on:
- Time and distance between ports
- Weight and density of the cargo
- Freight classification
- Mode of transport
- Tariffs and taxes
- Fuel costs
Rising fuel costs means rising freight rates, with much of these costs being passed to consumers.
In a full compliance scenario, we estimate the total impact to consumer wallets in 2020 could be around US$240 billion.
─ Goldman Sachs
The Environmental Impact
Not surprisingly, the world’s 59,000 transport ships, oil tankers, and cargo ships have a consequential impact on the environment.
Bunker fuel accounts for 7% of transportation oil consumption (~3.5 million barrels/day). Burning this fuel generates about 90% of all sulfur oxide and dioxide (SOx and SO2) emissions globally. In fact, the world’s 15 largest ships produce more SOx and SO2 emissions than every car combined.
These sulfur emissions can cause several harmful side effects on land ─ acid rain, smog, crop failures, and many respiratory illnesses such as lung cancer and asthma.
Changing Currents in the Shipping Sector
As IMO 2020’s implementation date nears, shippers have a few courses of action to become compliant and manage costs.
1) Switch to low-sulfur fuel
Bunker fuel use in the shipping industry was 3.5 million barrels per day in 2018, representing roughly 5% of global fuel demand.
Annual bunker fuel costs are predicted to rise by US$60 billion in 2020, a nearly 25% increase from 2019. Price increases this significant will directly impact freight rates ─ with no guarantee that fuel will always be available.
2) Slower Travel, Less Capacity
The costs of refining low-sulfur fuel will increase fuel prices. To offset this, shippers often travel at slower speeds.
For example, large ships might burn 280-300 metric tons of high-sulfur fuel oil (HSFO) a day at high speeds, but only 80-90 metric tons a day at slower speeds. Slower travel may cut costs and help reduce emissions, but it also decreases the capacity these vessels can transport due to longer travel times, which shrinks overall profit margins.
3) Refueling Detours
Adequate fuel supply will be a primary concern for shippers once IMO 2020 takes effect. Fuel shortages would cause inefficiencies and increase freight rates even more, as ships would be forced to detour to refuel more often.
4) Installing Scrubbers
A loophole of IMO 2020 is that emissions are regulated, not the actual sulfur content of fuel itself.
Rather than burning more expensive fuel, many shippers may decide to “capture” sulfur before it enters the environment by using scrubbers, devices that transfer sulfur emissions from exhaust to a disposal unit and discharges the emissions.
With IMO 2020 looming, only 1% of the global shipping fleet has been retrofitted with scrubbers. Forecasts for scrubber installations by mid-2020 run close to 5% of the current ships on the water.
There are a few reasons for such low numbers of installations. First, scrubbers are still somewhat unproven in maritime applications, so shippers are taking a “wait and see” approach. As well, even if a ship does qualify for a retrofit, cost savings won’t take effect until several years after installation. On the plus side, ships with scrubbers installed will still be able to use the existing, widely-available supply of bunker fuel.
Moving Forward
No matter which route shippers choose to take, the short-term impact is almost certainly going to mean higher freight rates for the marine shipping industry.
Environment
How Carbon Dioxide Removal is Critical to a Net-Zero Future
Here’s how carbon dioxide removal methods could help us meet net-zero targets and and stabilize the climate.
How Carbon Dioxide Removal is Critical to a Net-Zero Future
Meeting the Paris Agreement temperature goals and avoiding the worst consequences of a warming world requires first and foremost emission reductions, but also the ongoing direct removal of CO2 from the atmosphere.
We’ve partnered with Carbon Streaming to take a deep look at carbon dioxide removal methods, and the role that they could play in a net-zero future.
What is Carbon Dioxide Removal?
Carbon Dioxide Removal, or CDR, is the direct removal of CO2 from the atmosphere and its durable storage in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products.
And according to the UN Environment Programme, all least-cost pathways to net zero that are consistent with the Paris Agreement have some role for CDR. In a 1.5°C scenario, in addition to emissions reductions, CDR will need to pull an estimated 3.8 GtCO2e p.a. out of the atmosphere by 2035 and 9.2 GtCO2e p.a. by 2050.
The ‘net’ in net zero is an important quantifier here, because there will be some sectors that can’t decarbonize, especially in the near term. This includes things like shipping and concrete production, where there are limited commercially viable alternatives to fossil fuels.
Not All CDR is Created Equal
There are a whole host of proposed ways for removing CO2 from the atmosphere at scale, which can be divided into land-based and novel methods, and each with their own pros and cons.
Land-based methods, like afforestation and reforestation and soil carbon sequestration, tend to be the cheapest options, but don’t tend to store the carbon for very long—just decades to centuries.
In fact, afforestation and reforestation—basically planting lots of trees—is already being done around the world and in 2020, was responsible for removing around 2 GtCO2e. And while it is tempting to think that we can plant our way out of climate change, think that the U.S. would need to plant a forest the size of New Mexico every year to cancel out their emissions.
On the other hand, novel methods like enhanced weathering and direct air carbon capture and storage, because they store carbon in minerals and geological reservoirs, can keep carbon sequestered for tens of thousand years or longer. The trade off is that these methods can be very expensive—between $100-500 and north of $800 per metric ton.
CDR Has a Critical Role to Play
In the end, there is no silver bullet, and given that 2023 was the hottest year on record—1.45°C above pre-industrial levels—it’s likely that many different CDR methods will end up playing a part, depending on local circumstances.
And not just in the drive to net zero, but also in the years after 2050, as we begin to stabilize global average temperatures and gradually return them to pre-industrial norms.
Carbon Streaming uses carbon credit streams to finance CDR projects, such as reforestation and biochar, to accelerate a net-zero future.
Learn more about Carbon Streaming’s CDR projects.
-
Green1 month ago
Charted: Share of World Forests by Country
We visualize which countries have the biggest share of world forests by area—and while country size plays a factor, so too, does the environment.
-
Green2 months ago
Which Countries Have the Largest Forests?
Together, the top five countries with the largest forests account for more than half of the world’s entire forest cover.
-
Healthcare3 months ago
Visualized: What Lives in Your Gut Microbiome?
The human gut microbiome contains a world of microbes. We look at the the bacteria that deeply affect our health and well-being.
-
Green3 months ago
Mapped: Global Temperature Rise by Country (2022-2100P)
In this set of three maps, we show the global temperature rise on a national level for 2022, 2050, and 2100 based on an analysis by…
-
Environment3 months ago
Ranked: Per Capita Carbon Emissions by Country
Which countries rank the highest in per capita carbon emissions, and how do they impact the world’s total carbon emissions?
-
Environment4 months ago
Visualizing All the World’s Carbon Emissions by Country
China, India, and the U.S. together account for roughly half of the world’s CO₂. This visual breaks down all carbon emissions by country.
-
Money7 days ago
Visualizing All of the U.S. Currency in Circulation
-
Markets2 weeks ago
Ranked: South Korea’s Largest Companies by Market Capitalization
-
VC+2 weeks ago
What’s New on VC+ in March?
-
Economy2 weeks ago
Confidence in the Global Economy, by Country
-
Wealth2 weeks ago
Mapped: Where Do the Wealthiest People in the World Live?
-
Misc1 week ago
Ranked: Global Airlines with the Most Plane Crashes
-
Technology1 week ago
Visualizing iPhone 15 Production by Manufacturer in 2023
-
Automotive1 week ago
Visualizing Global Electric Vehicle Sales in 2023, by Market Share