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

USD -
AED 3.673104
AFN 64.000368
ALL 80.950403
AMD 369.010403
ANG 1.789884
AOA 918.000367
ARS 1398.655759
AUD 1.37874
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.70397
BAM 1.662466
BBD 2.013854
BDT 122.689218
BGN 1.668102
BHD 0.377404
BIF 2975
BMD 1
BND 1.267973
BOB 6.9098
BRL 4.915095
BSD 0.999873
BTN 94.420977
BWP 13.425192
BYN 2.825886
BYR 19600
BZD 2.010964
CAD 1.36705
CDF 2265.000362
CHF 0.776955
CLF 0.022646
CLP 891.290396
CNY 6.80075
CNH 6.796265
COP 3750.48
CRC 459.648974
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 94.050394
CZK 20.636704
DJF 177.720393
DKK 6.340404
DOP 59.350393
DZD 132.260393
EGP 52.744691
ERN 15
ETB 157.303874
EUR 0.84804
FJD 2.18304
FKP 0.734821
GBP 0.73346
GEL 2.67504
GGP 0.734821
GHS 11.29039
GIP 0.734821
GMD 73.503851
GNF 8780.000355
GTQ 7.634866
GYD 209.223551
HKD 7.83175
HNL 26.620388
HRK 6.393304
HTG 130.919848
HUF 300.190388
IDR 17377.45
ILS 2.901304
IMP 0.734821
INR 94.425504
IQD 1310
IRR 1311500.000352
ISK 122.010386
JEP 0.734821
JMD 157.601928
JOD 0.70904
JPY 156.66204
KES 129.180385
KGS 87.420504
KHR 4010.00035
KMF 418.00035
KPW 899.950939
KRW 1461.920383
KWD 0.30766
KYD 0.833358
KZT 462.122307
LAK 21955.000349
LBP 89550.000349
LKR 321.915771
LRD 183.503772
LSL 16.390381
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.325039
MAD 9.12038
MDL 17.099822
MGA 4165.000347
MKD 52.252978
MMK 2099.606786
MNT 3578.902576
MOP 8.06268
MRU 39.945039
MUR 46.820378
MVR 15.403739
MWK 1742.000345
MXN 17.177604
MYR 3.921039
MZN 63.910377
NAD 16.390377
NGN 1365.000344
NIO 36.715039
NOK 9.209304
NPR 151.087386
NZD 1.675884
OMR 0.384942
PAB 0.999962
PEN 3.434504
PGK 4.350375
PHP 60.515038
PKR 278.650374
PLN 3.59545
PYG 6107.687731
QAR 3.640374
RON 4.426304
RSD 99.473038
RUB 74.240007
RWF 1460.5
SAR 3.782036
SBD 8.019432
SCR 13.958442
SDG 600.503676
SEK 9.215704
SGD 1.267304
SHP 0.746601
SLE 24.650371
SLL 20969.496166
SOS 571.503662
SRD 37.399038
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.15
SVC 8.749309
SYP 110.543945
SZL 16.370369
THB 32.203038
TJS 9.329718
TMT 3.5
TND 2.866038
TOP 2.40776
TRY 45.349038
TTD 6.776593
TWD 31.316038
TZS 2598.394038
UAH 43.92104
UGX 3746.547108
UYU 39.879308
UZS 12135.000334
VES 499.23597
VND 26308
VUV 118.026144
WST 2.704092
XAF 557.575577
XAG 0.012439
XAU 0.000212
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.802048
XDR 0.695511
XOF 557.503593
XPF 101.625037
YER 238.625037
ZAR 16.380704
ZMK 9001.203584
ZMW 19.037864
ZWL 321.999592
  • GSK

    -0.0900

    50.41

    -0.18%

  • VOD

    0.5100

    16.2

    +3.15%

  • AZN

    0.3300

    182.85

    +0.18%

  • RIO

    2.2700

    105.38

    +2.15%

  • BP

    -0.4700

    43.34

    -1.08%

  • RBGPF

    0.7000

    63.61

    +1.1%

  • BTI

    0.2000

    58.28

    +0.34%

  • RYCEF

    -0.4100

    16.37

    -2.5%

  • CMSC

    0.1400

    23.11

    +0.61%

  • NGG

    0.9800

    86.89

    +1.13%

  • CMSD

    0.1140

    23.534

    +0.48%

  • BCC

    -2.0900

    70.67

    -2.96%

  • JRI

    0.0000

    13.15

    0%

  • BCE

    -0.4300

    24.14

    -1.78%

  • RELX

    0.0759

    33.58

    +0.23%

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