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

USD -
AED 3.672498
AFN 63.498607
ALL 82.78735
AMD 368.501999
ANG 1.790403
AOA 917.000233
ARS 1470.935397
AUD 1.448551
AWG 1.80125
AZN 1.694136
BAM 1.718856
BBD 2.018008
BDT 123.091796
BGN 1.69088
BHD 0.376982
BIF 2985
BMD 1
BND 1.297974
BOB 6.938524
BRL 5.200103
BSD 1.001973
BTN 94.864877
BWP 13.624819
BYN 2.814079
BYR 19600
BZD 2.015116
CAD 1.42222
CDF 2269.000131
CHF 0.810875
CLF 0.023222
CLP 913.970582
CNY 6.790496
CNH 6.802015
COP 3430.81
CRC 454.535468
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 97.375044
CZK 21.317505
DJF 177.719531
DKK 6.57855
DOP 58.550417
DZD 133.670989
EGP 49.723596
ERN 15
ETB 161.535521
EUR 0.88006
FJD 2.24575
FKP 0.754878
GBP 0.758185
GEL 2.645039
GGP 0.754878
GHS 11.22497
GIP 0.754878
GMD 72.50203
GNF 8774.99996
GTQ 7.644241
GYD 209.623413
HKD 7.840915
HNL 26.807458
HRK 6.626024
HTG 131.00145
HUF 313.018979
IDR 17955.45
ILS 2.99632
IMP 0.754878
INR 94.90525
IQD 1312.563167
IRR 1375050.000192
ISK 126.699631
JEP 0.754878
JMD 157.717811
JOD 0.709021
JPY 161.572007
KES 129.398478
KGS 87.449913
KHR 4010.000075
KMF 430.999912
KPW 900.00035
KRW 1537.540179
KWD 0.30898
KYD 0.834996
KZT 487.384102
LAK 22188.337654
LBP 89725.095575
LKR 335.228721
LRD 182.352683
LSL 16.522564
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.429642
MAD 9.377774
MDL 17.639408
MGA 4185.964758
MKD 54.189119
MMK 2099.387374
MNT 3579.000015
MOP 8.091488
MRU 39.79664
MUR 47.960034
MVR 15.460373
MWK 1737.391847
MXN 17.582298
MYR 4.144989
MZN 63.898816
NAD 16.522564
NGN 1370.503286
NIO 36.867777
NOK 9.82313
NPR 151.78296
NZD 1.769295
OMR 0.384528
PAB 1.001977
PEN 3.39166
PGK 4.394272
PHP 61.597039
PKR 278.668893
PLN 3.76925
PYG 6107.983882
QAR 3.652503
RON 4.615502
RSD 103.302995
RUB 74.501377
RWF 1469.343633
SAR 3.755291
SBD 8.065041
SCR 14.865013
SDG 600.500677
SEK 9.75682
SGD 1.29776
SHP 0.746601
SLE 24.749832
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 572.656446
SRD 37.482985
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.530796
SVC 8.767412
SYP 110.532098
SZL 16.517116
THB 33.385497
TJS 9.293141
TMT 3.51
TND 2.965857
TOP 2.40776
TRY 46.489702
TTD 6.803181
TWD 31.711016
TZS 2625.007993
UAH 44.976754
UGX 3667.442985
UYU 40.189832
UZS 12038.49365
VES 616.865275
VND 26331.5
VUV 118.758526
WST 2.756325
XAF 576.48558
XAG 0.016346
XAU 0.000246
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.805774
XDR 0.716966
XOF 576.48558
XPF 104.811706
YER 238.649628
ZAR 16.591502
ZMK 9001.205488
ZMW 17.97425
ZWL 321.999592
  • CMSC

    -0.0500

    22.11

    -0.23%

  • RBGPF

    0.9600

    61.3

    +1.57%

  • RYCEF

    -0.4700

    18.16

    -2.59%

  • RELX

    0.3800

    31.21

    +1.22%

  • RIO

    -3.7800

    95.58

    -3.95%

  • BCE

    0.3900

    23.04

    +1.69%

  • GSK

    1.3300

    52.07

    +2.55%

  • BTI

    1.8400

    60.74

    +3.03%

  • CMSD

    -0.1200

    21.96

    -0.55%

  • VOD

    -0.0700

    14.05

    -0.5%

  • JRI

    -0.0200

    12.63

    -0.16%

  • BCC

    -0.7400

    71.8

    -1.03%

  • AZN

    4.5900

    181.02

    +2.54%

  • NGG

    0.6000

    81.57

    +0.74%

  • BP

    -0.4500

    39.33

    -1.14%

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