Digital Edition

Jan.9, 2017

Issue link: https://jocdigital.uberflip.com/i/764565

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 41 of 139

40 THE JOURNAL OF COMMERCE www.joc.com JANUARY 9.2017 2017 ANNUAL REVIEW & OUTLOOK GOVERNMENT EXECUTIVE COMMENTARY BRYANT'S MARITIME CONSULTING DENNIS L. BRYANT Principal www.brymar-consulting.com THE TERM MORASS is defined as "an entanglement or a disordered situation, especially one impeding progress." Shipowners and opera - tors understand that this term clearly applies to the current state of ballast water management systems. The International Maritime Orga- nization adopted the Ballast Water Management Convention in 2004. The Convention is scheduled to enter into effect on Sept. 8, 2017. In the meantime, the IMO is busy trying to amend certain provisions relating to testing of ballast water management systems and to the dates by which vessels are required to have approved systems installed. In the United States, which is not party to the Convention, the US Coast Guard is testing several systems to deter - mine whether they meet the stricter US requirements. None have been approved to date, but several may achieve USCG approval in the near future. In the mean- time, the Coast Guard has been granting temporary authorizations under its Alter- native Compliance System (AMS) for vessels that have installed an IMO type- approved system. Unfortunately, the Environmental Protection Agency has specifically declined to officially endorse the Coast Guard AMS program. While no vessel has yet been penalized by the EPA for use of an IMO type-approved system, the threat looms. A number of ships, particularly those constructed after 2004, have installed ballast water management systems that met the current IMO type-approval standard. It now appears that those systems may have to be replaced at some time in the future, particularly if the vessel expects to operate in US waters. The maritime industry deserves better. CLECAT NICOLETTE VAN DER JAGT Director General www.clecat.org FREIGHT AND LOGISTICS generate around 6 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Companies are increas- ingly asked to report and systematically reduce emissions, giving companies with a smaller carbon footprint a competitive advantage. Until now, comparing emissions across different modes of transport could be like com - paring apples to oranges because so many methodologies exist. The first green freight program was SmartWay in the US, launched in 2004 and since expanded into Canada and Europe. Regional programs for road freight exist in Europe and Asia, and the Clean Cargo Working Group covers sea freight. These efforts provide a strong basis to build on, and this has now happened with the launch of the GLEC Framework for Logistics Emis - sions Methodologies, which combines existing methods into one framework and fills the gaps, which is a major international collaborative effort, and a milestone for shippers, carriers and logistics service providers who have been waiting for a harmonized cross- modal calculation method. Will these voluntary programs be sufficient. or can we expect more pressure and regulation? I expect more pressure on the industry in the coming year. The pressure on Europe to take action on shipping's climate emissions is build - ing after the IMO decided to delay by at least a further seven years any decision on a global agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions from ships. Shipping is a fast-growing source of greenhouse gases, and is projected to account for 17 percent of global emis - sions by 2050, if left unabated. In Europe, a lot has been said about the US election of Donald Trump as president, which may bring to an abrupt halt the excitement surrounding the Marrakesh COP 22 meeting. This was marked by a rare high point of global cooperation on climate action. But more than 600 companies already have said they expect to change their strategy as a result of the Paris agreement's adop - tion. Despite some growing challenges, we must keep the goal in mind — to create a climate-resilient international freight sector. The participation of all business partners is crucial to this effort. FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION MARIO CORDERO Chairman www.fmc.gov CONSOLIDATION OF CONTAINER carriers and the realignment of ship alliances are commercial developments of significant magnitude, and point to a trio of critical priorities that industry and government must immediately address: advocating the benefits of free trade, engaging governments and the public more effectively, and advocating for shipping and ports to be part of any infrastructure agenda. Admittedly, there are skeptics to arguments supporting unfettered global commerce, but the evidence unquestionably shows eliminating barriers to trade provides far more gains than losses. It is imperative to tell that story forcefully, repeatedly, and with meaningful anecdotes in order for our industry to survive and our economy to grow. Furthermore, cold, hard facts will buttress examples of the gains trade creates, and the entire international trade and transportation community should think about how establishing metrics and sharing data can increase confidence that trade is a "win-win" proposition. While the enduring dismal finan - cial state of carriers is well known, shipping lines should no longer view communications campaigns directed at government officials and the greater public as avoidable expenditures. Rather, they should be viewed as busi - ness necessities. Without convincing key audiences around the world of the importance of trade and the necessity of a healthy shipping sector, people will not benefit from the perspective of those most expert to opine on a system that keeps the global economy func - tioning. Even more worrisome, absent the benefit of those arguments, we may actually be aiding in creating a genera- tion of people who oppose this industry and the economic system it serves. Of course, the ocean container moves on an intermodal transportation system that can be easily overwhelmed. Any infrastructure development strategy that the new administration pursues must include ports and related intermodal links that serve our global trading system. It is incumbent upon each of us to assure projects that sup - port freight movement, particularly at the sea-to-land handover, are not only considered, but funded. Such projects will provide an immediate economic stimulus, and, over the much longer term, will keep the US a global leader in manufacturing and trade. While no vessel has yet been penalized by the EPA for use of an IMO type-approved system, the threat looms. Shipping is a fast-growing source of greenhouse gases, and is projected to account for 17 percent of global emissions by 2050, if left unabated. Any infrastructure development strategy that the new administration pursues must include ports and related intermodal links that serve our global trading system.

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Digital Edition - Jan.9, 2017