Arctic Heavy Fuel Oil Ban effective from July 2024: A huge deal but is it enough?

What is Heavy Fuel Oil and why is it a problem?

Heavy fuel oil (HFO) is residual fuel remaining after the refining of oil, typically of low quality and viscosity, making it suitable only for use in ships due to its unsuitability for other modes of transportation. The shipping industry commonly favors HFO because it is a cheaper option compared to other fuels. 

HFO, being dense and viscous, contains toxic substances like polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and heavy metals. In the cold Arctic environment, these pollutants degrade much more slowly, prolonging their harmful impact on marine life and ecosystems. Oil can sink into sediments where it persists for decades, continuously releasing toxins into the environment and affecting the entire food chain. As the Arctic climate warms rapidly, these spills also contribute to environmental changes by contaminating ice and accelerating melting processes.

Furthermore, the region’s remote and harsh conditions also hinder effective cleanup efforts. Ice cover, extreme cold, and limited accessibility make deploying traditional cleanup techniques like booms and skimmers challenging and less effective, allowing spilled oil to spread over a wider area before containment can be achieved.

Arctic communities, especially indigenous peoples, rely heavily on the marine environment for sustenance, cultural practices, and economic activities such as fishing and hunting. Oil spills can disrupt these activities, jeopardizing food security and cultural continuity. Additionally, Arctic wildlife, including marine mammals, birds, and fish, are particularly vulnerable to oil spills.

Thus, the 76th session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 76) adopted the amendments to MARPOL Annex I (addition of a new regulation 43A) to introduce a prohibition on the use and carriage for use as fuel of heavy fuel oil (HFO) by ships in Arctic waters on and after 1 July 2024.

The prohibition covers the use and carriage for use as fuel of oils having a density at 15°C higher than 900 kg/m3 or a kinematic viscosity at 50°C higher than 180 mm2/s. Ships engaged in securing the safety of ships, or in search and rescue operations, and ships dedicated to oil spill preparedness and response will be exempted. Ships which meet certain construction standards with regard to oil fuel tank protection would need to comply on and after 1 July 2029.

Furthermore, a Party to MARPOL with a coastline bordering Arctic waters may temporarily waive the requirements for ships flying its flag while operating in waters subject to that Party’s sovereignty or jurisdiction, up to 1 July 2029.

Is the ban enough to contain the dangers? 

The International Council of Clean Transportation (ICCT) explains that the ban includes exemptions that allow certain ships to continue using HFO in the Arctic until 2029. These exemptions apply to ships with enhanced fuel tank protections and to vessels under the jurisdiction of Arctic coastal states. The ban only covers 16 per cent of HFO burned and 30 per cent of HFO carried as fuel, excluding HFO cargoes entirely. Thus the risk of HFO spills in sensitive Arctic marine ecosystems remains high.

Furthermore, NGO Clean Arctic Alliance has urged for immediate and comprehensive enforcement of the HFO ban without loopholes, urging IMO member states, especially Arctic coastal nations, to take stronger action. They propose switching to cleaner fuels like diesel or adopting alternative propulsion methods along with diesel particulate filters to reduce black carbon emissions by over 90%. Black carbon, a potent short-lived climate pollutant from incomplete fossil fuel burning, constitutes one-fifth of international shipping’s climate impact. The Alliance stresses the urgency of reducing black carbon emissions due to its accelerated impact on Arctic melting. 

Unfortunately, as Reuters reports, another issue is that it remains unclear when Russia, responsible for more than half of the Arctic coastline, will implement the ban. Russia would need to approve amendments to a maritime convention on pollution before the regulations could enter into force, Russia’s mission to the IMO said in an October 2022 submission. 

Enhancing existing legislation while taking the next steps

As Dr Sian Prior, Leader Advisor to the Clean Arctic Alliance, explained in an interview to SAFETY4SEA, a proper approach to protect the Arctic from the impacts of shipping would include: 

• Immediate IMO measures for ships operating in and near to the Arctic to reduce black carbon emissions
• a new MARPOL Annex VI black carbon regulation (requiring a switch to distillate or alternative cleaner, non-fossil fuels or alternative means of propulsion)
• new emissions control areas which effectively reduce black carbon emissions
• Speeding up the implementation of the HFO ban (with immediate implementation, not waiting until July 2024 and July 2029)
• A ban on the use of scrubbers (and scrubber discharges) in the Arctic
• Immediate energy efficiency measures to reduce ships’ CO2 emissions and underwater noise
• Elimination of all routine shipping discharges in the Arctic
• Implementation of a rapid global decarbonisation pathway reducing shipping’s climate impact by 50 percent by 2030 because of the impact of global heating on the Arctic.

There will never be a sustainable future for the Arctic region or indeed for Indigenous communities if we don’t urgently address the impact of short-lived climate forcers such as black carbon and methane, and start decarbonising shipping.

… said Dr Sian Prior