The Fort Worth Press - Did cuts to shipping emissions spur more global warming?

USD -
AED 3.672498
AFN 64.496875
ALL 81.380528
AMD 369.184597
ANG 1.789884
AOA 917.999724
ARS 1395.381205
AUD 1.3837
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.697085
BAM 1.667512
BBD 2.020641
BDT 123.098172
BGN 1.668102
BHD 0.378875
BIF 2985.894118
BMD 1
BND 1.270084
BOB 6.932419
BRL 4.930102
BSD 1.003253
BTN 94.565375
BWP 13.432689
BYN 2.835207
BYR 19600
BZD 2.017742
CAD 1.365255
CDF 2315.999881
CHF 0.779175
CLF 0.022638
CLP 890.970154
CNY 6.80505
CNH 6.800575
COP 3738.9
CRC 460.209132
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 94.012576
CZK 20.69725
DJF 178.651968
DKK 6.36203
DOP 59.661791
DZD 132.335032
EGP 52.717504
ERN 15
ETB 156.643406
EUR 0.85136
FJD 2.18685
FKP 0.734821
GBP 0.736365
GEL 2.680059
GGP 0.734821
GHS 11.286699
GIP 0.734821
GMD 72.999748
GNF 8804.55958
GTQ 7.660794
GYD 209.901226
HKD 7.827605
HNL 26.670759
HRK 6.419303
HTG 131.399121
HUF 303.012017
IDR 17365.95
ILS 2.91051
IMP 0.734821
INR 94.41075
IQD 1314.280599
IRR 1312900.000132
ISK 122.430342
JEP 0.734821
JMD 158.020607
JOD 0.709014
JPY 156.800501
KES 129.150246
KGS 87.420497
KHR 4024.093407
KMF 418.999754
KPW 899.950939
KRW 1467.765006
KWD 0.307795
KYD 0.836058
KZT 464.61503
LAK 22016.463537
LBP 89533.723815
LKR 323.055346
LRD 184.10709
LSL 16.368643
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.604889
LYD 6.345837
MAD 9.195197
MDL 17.26071
MGA 4165.565455
MKD 52.51478
MMK 2099.606786
MNT 3578.902576
MOP 8.092183
MRU 40.138456
MUR 46.820229
MVR 15.455001
MWK 1739.54559
MXN 17.262901
MYR 3.919502
MZN 63.905048
NAD 16.368783
NGN 1361.979903
NIO 36.917043
NOK 9.29545
NPR 151.292686
NZD 1.679839
OMR 0.384501
PAB 1.003253
PEN 3.475021
PGK 4.365952
PHP 60.544997
PKR 279.534225
PLN 3.600795
PYG 6140.362095
QAR 3.656974
RON 4.479694
RSD 99.945022
RUB 74.639547
RWF 1470.817685
SAR 3.780174
SBD 8.032258
SCR 14.098598
SDG 600.501353
SEK 9.25905
SGD 1.268503
SHP 0.746601
SLE 24.547226
SLL 20969.496166
SOS 573.372496
SRD 37.431033
STD 20697.981008
STN 20.887684
SVC 8.778354
SYP 110.543945
SZL 16.363923
THB 32.219503
TJS 9.375794
TMT 3.51
TND 2.910164
TOP 2.40776
TRY 45.363901
TTD 6.786684
TWD 31.373302
TZS 2608.394049
UAH 43.928641
UGX 3752.28603
UYU 40.11647
UZS 12157.202113
VES 496.20906
VND 26311
VUV 118.026144
WST 2.704092
XAF 559.236967
XAG 0.012394
XAU 0.000212
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.808106
XDR 0.695511
XOF 559.267959
XPF 101.680898
YER 238.579251
ZAR 16.412899
ZMK 9001.200987
ZMW 19.111685
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    63.18

    0%

  • CMSC

    -0.0400

    22.97

    -0.17%

  • CMSD

    0.0000

    23.42

    0%

  • RYCEF

    -0.0500

    17.45

    -0.29%

  • NGG

    -1.9400

    85.91

    -2.26%

  • BCE

    0.3400

    24.57

    +1.38%

  • AZN

    -2.4000

    182.52

    -1.31%

  • VOD

    -0.4400

    15.69

    -2.8%

  • RIO

    -2.4000

    103.11

    -2.33%

  • GSK

    -0.0300

    50.5

    -0.06%

  • RELX

    -1.5900

    34.16

    -4.65%

  • BTI

    -1.4800

    58.08

    -2.55%

  • BCC

    -1.4800

    72.76

    -2.03%

  • JRI

    -0.0200

    13.15

    -0.15%

  • BP

    -0.8200

    43.81

    -1.87%

Did cuts to shipping emissions spur more global warming?
Did cuts to shipping emissions spur more global warming? / Photo: © AFP

Did cuts to shipping emissions spur more global warming?

Could a sudden drop in pollution from cargo vessels criss-crossing global shipping lanes be inadvertently making the world hotter?

Text size:

The main reason for global warming is the heat-trapping emissions from burning fossil fuels.

But scientists have been looking at the extent to which a shift to cleaner, lower-sulphur shipping fuels in 2020 may have fuelled warming by reducing the amount of particles in the atmosphere that reflect heat back into space.

This theory surfaced again when January was declared the hottest on record, extending a streak of exceptional global temperatures that has persisted since mid-2023.

- Why did shipping emissions drop? -

On January 1, 2020, the sulphur content in engine fuel used to power container vessels, oil tankers and other ships in global trade was slashed by decree from 3.5 percent to 0.5 percent.

This was mandated by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a UN agency that regulates the global shipping sector, including its environmental impact.

Sulphur oxides in fuels are tiny airborne particles harmful to human health and linked to strokes and the development of lung and cardiovascular diseases.

Some jurisdictions have even tighter restrictions in so-called "emissions control areas" in the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, the North American zone and the US marine Caribbean area.

- Is it working? -

The IMO estimated its fuel mandate would cut emissions of sulphur oxide by 8.5 million tonnes a year.

Last June, research published in the academic journal Earth System Science Data reported that sulphur oxide emissions from the shipping industry declined 7.4 million tonnes between 2019 and 2020.

The IMO said that in 2023 just two vessels flagged for inspection were found to be using fuel with a sulphur level above the 0.5 percent requirement.

Since the new regulation came into force, only 67 violations have been recorded.

- Is there a link to global warming? -

Sulphur oxides are not greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide or methane which are effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere, raising global temperatures.

On the contrary, they boost the reflectivity of clouds by making them more mirror-like and capable of bouncing incoming heat from the Sun back into space.

The sudden decline in these particles may have spurred recent warming "but we can't quantify it in an ultra-precise manner", said Olivier Boucher from the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS)

He said studies had detected changes in clouds above major shipping lanes since 2020, including a greater presence of larger particles less reflective of sunlight.

Scientists could say shipping emissions had aided warming to some degree "but we are not able to say that it contributes a lot", Boucher added.

One study published in August in the journal Earth's Future concluded that the IMO regulation could increase global surface temperatures by nearly 0.05 degrees Celsius a year up until 2029.

The drastic reduction in airborne sulphur pollution helps to explain the exceptional heat of 2023 but the authors said the magnitude of the temperature extremes meant other factors were likely also at play.

S.Rocha--TFWP