The China Mail - Did cuts to shipping emissions spur more global warming?

USD -
AED 3.67232
AFN 69.582255
ALL 84.918051
AMD 381.989449
ANG 1.789623
AOA 916.00015
ARS 1182.2858
AUD 1.538746
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.701725
BAM 1.695631
BBD 2.013828
BDT 121.888099
BGN 1.69545
BHD 0.377101
BIF 2969.77342
BMD 1
BND 1.281021
BOB 6.892456
BRL 5.546602
BSD 0.997429
BTN 85.827608
BWP 13.406562
BYN 3.264022
BYR 19600
BZD 2.003511
CAD 1.358395
CDF 2877.000247
CHF 0.811405
CLF 0.024433
CLP 937.593041
CNY 7.181597
CNH 7.184425
COP 4133.49
CRC 502.750432
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 95.597064
CZK 21.462983
DJF 177.611132
DKK 6.45438
DOP 58.90997
DZD 130.113113
EGP 50.609904
ERN 15
ETB 134.56173
EUR 0.86534
FJD 2.24575
FKP 0.736284
GBP 0.73676
GEL 2.739779
GGP 0.736284
GHS 10.273661
GIP 0.736284
GMD 70.49708
GNF 8642.729885
GTQ 7.664931
GYD 208.681027
HKD 7.84968
HNL 26.032225
HRK 6.518029
HTG 130.80701
HUF 348.181496
IDR 16295.1
ILS 3.55795
IMP 0.736284
INR 86.075902
IQD 1306.607597
IRR 42099.999706
ISK 124.579968
JEP 0.736284
JMD 159.696905
JOD 0.70899
JPY 144.043002
KES 128.867253
KGS 87.450149
KHR 3999.323765
KMF 426.533153
KPW 900
KRW 1361.069844
KWD 0.30593
KYD 0.831155
KZT 511.588995
LAK 21520.375564
LBP 89366.224962
LKR 298.647987
LRD 199.484167
LSL 17.949916
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.44962
MAD 9.119803
MDL 17.080413
MGA 4503.821096
MKD 53.236364
MMK 2099.907788
MNT 3581.247911
MOP 8.063844
MRU 39.597557
MUR 45.490459
MVR 15.405002
MWK 1729.48464
MXN 18.92442
MYR 4.244008
MZN 63.950363
NAD 17.949916
NGN 1545.490059
NIO 36.70711
NOK 9.900605
NPR 137.326554
NZD 1.659076
OMR 0.384498
PAB 0.997455
PEN 3.600203
PGK 4.166612
PHP 56.502971
PKR 282.765147
PLN 3.693896
PYG 7958.560003
QAR 3.638523
RON 4.348202
RSD 101.402976
RUB 79.502451
RWF 1440.294076
SAR 3.754305
SBD 8.347391
SCR 14.228557
SDG 600.501551
SEK 9.49724
SGD 1.281215
SHP 0.785843
SLE 22.050262
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 570.036456
SRD 37.528023
STD 20697.981008
SVC 8.727692
SYP 13001.9038
SZL 17.938126
THB 32.458501
TJS 10.073996
TMT 3.5
TND 2.951358
TOP 2.342101
TRY 39.428965
TTD 6.763968
TWD 29.494965
TZS 2586.681991
UAH 41.37256
UGX 3594.480833
UYU 41.007946
UZS 12673.394368
VES 102.16696
VND 26091.5
VUV 119.102474
WST 2.619188
XAF 568.693783
XAG 0.027512
XAU 0.000293
XCD 2.70255
XDR 0.70726
XOF 568.693783
XPF 103.395062
YER 243.350268
ZAR 17.90752
ZMK 9001.199446
ZMW 24.112356
ZWL 321.999592
  • CMSC

    0.0900

    22.314

    +0.4%

  • CMSD

    0.0250

    22.285

    +0.11%

  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    69.04

    0%

  • SCS

    0.0400

    10.74

    +0.37%

  • RELX

    0.0300

    53

    +0.06%

  • RIO

    -0.1400

    59.33

    -0.24%

  • GSK

    0.1300

    41.45

    +0.31%

  • NGG

    0.2700

    71.48

    +0.38%

  • BP

    0.1750

    30.4

    +0.58%

  • BTI

    0.7150

    48.215

    +1.48%

  • BCC

    0.7900

    91.02

    +0.87%

  • JRI

    0.0200

    13.13

    +0.15%

  • VOD

    0.0100

    9.85

    +0.1%

  • BCE

    -0.0600

    22.445

    -0.27%

  • RYCEF

    0.1000

    12

    +0.83%

  • AZN

    -0.1200

    73.71

    -0.16%

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.

L.Johnson--ThChM