Closed call for evidence

Extending the emission control area to all UK waters

Published 9 January 2024

Foreword

A global transition to greener shipping is underway. In the Clean Maritime Plan, our environment route map of Maritime 2050, my department committed to consult on options for designating UK waters an emission control area (ECA) to reduce pollutant emissions from shipping and improve air quality, which benefits both our health and the natural environment.

As Professor Chris Whitty outlined in the Chief Medical Officer’s annual report 2022, air pollution is an issue that affects us all. Air pollution has negative effects on health, from pre-birth to old age. While air quality in the UK has improved significantly in recent decades, it remains a top environmental risk to human health. The government recognises the need for action and, in the Clean Air Strategy, set out our commitments to improving air quality. The recently published Environmental Improvement Plan 2023 further sets out how this government will improve our environment, including addressing air pollution, here in the UK and around the world.

Shipping, as the backbone of international trade and the global economy, has an important role to play. Historically, the fuel used for shipping has been some of the most polluting fuel used across all transport modes. As a proud seafaring nation, the UK has led international efforts at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to limit pollutant emissions from shipping. The UK took a leading role in advocating the introduction of the 0.5% global sulphur cap in 2020, rather than deferring it until 2025, and in developing the guidance to prepare and support the industry.

Emission control areas allow us to go further by applying stricter controls on air pollutant emissions. Working closely with neighbouring coastal states, the UK led international efforts to designate the North Sea and the English Channel as an ECA. The UK also supported the designation of ECAs across the world, from the Baltic Sea to North America. Last year, we supported the designation of the Mediterranean Sea as a sulphur oxide ECA and continue to support proposals by other countries.

This call for evidence aims to build our evidence on options for extending the North Sea ECA beyond its current geographical limits or establishing a further, geographically distinct ECA in UK waters. This would extend the additional protection from ships’ pollutant emissions, currently in place in the North Sea and English Channel, to all UK waters, benefitting communities across the UK. Your engagement and expertise will help shape our future plans.

Lord Davies of Gower Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department for Transport

Introduction

Improving air quality

As set out in the Environment Improvement Plan (2023), air quality in the UK has improved significantly in recent decades with a decrease in all 5 major air pollutants. Between 2010 and 2020, emissions of:

• fine particulate matter (PM2.5) decreased by 18%
• nitrogen oxides (NOx) decreased by 44%
• sulphur dioxide (SO2) decreased by 70%
• non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC) decreased by 14%
• ammonia (NH3) decreased by 0.2%

These reductions have produced significant benefits for our health and environment.

However, air pollution continues to be the biggest environmental risk to human health, disproportionately affecting those who are already vulnerable. The emission of air pollutants also impacts our natural environment, adversely affecting our waterways, biodiversity and crop yields. Once released, air pollution is dispersed by the weather and can travel significant distances within and between countries.

In 2019, the government published the Clean Air Strategy, setting out plans to make our air healthier to breathe, protect nature and boost the economy. The newly published Environment Improvement Plan sets out the actions the government is taking to build on this and make further progress for our health and environment.

Following on from the landmark Environment Act 2021, the government has set legal targets to:

• reduce population exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) by 35% in 2040 compared to 2018 levels, with a new interim target to reduce exposure by 22% by the end of January 2028
• to require a maximum annual mean concentration of 10 micrograms of PM2.5 per cubic metre (µg/m3) or less by 2040, with an interim target of 12 µg/m3 by the end of January 2028

Shipping is a global industry, often described as the backbone of international trade and the global economy. Like other important sectors of the economy, the maritime sector is increasingly aware of its environmental and social impacts. As set out in Maritime 2050, the sector’s air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions require further attention.

Several studies have demonstrated that shipping is a significant source of air pollutant emissions. In 2021, UK domestic shipping (activity that begins and ends at a UK port as well as ships at berth in UK ports) alone accounted for around:

• 12.7% of the UK’s total domestic emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx)
• 2.2% of the UK’s total domestic primary fine particulate matter (PM2.5)^{[footnote 1]} emissions
• 4.9% of the UK’s total domestic sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions

However, these figures do not account for UK international shipping (ships travelling between UK and non-UK ports) and ships transiting UK waters that do not call at a UK port, all of which create significant air pollutant emissions. For example, it is estimated that, in sea areas surrounding the UK in 2016, the NOx emissions from UK international shipping and shipping in transit were around 3 and 6 times higher respectively, than the NOx emissions from UK domestic shipping.

Tackling shipping pollutant emissions

International law provides for 2 levels of control on emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulphur oxides (SOx)^{[footnote 2]} from internationally trading ships. These are developed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the United Nations specialised agency with responsibility for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine and atmospheric pollution by ships. Regulations on pollutant emissions are contained in Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) and supplemented in guidelines.

First, there are controls on emissions that apply globally to ships. These include the global 0.5% limit on the amount of sulphur contained in marine fuels that can be used, which came into force on 1 January 2020. They also include 2 levels (Tier I and Tier II) of control for NOx emissions, which apply to marine diesel engines of over 130kW output power, irrespective of the tonnage of the ship on which such engines are installed. The rules for applying NOx Tiers are set out in the NOx Technical Code 2008 (resolution MEPC.177(58), as amended by resolution MEPC.251.(66)), but are determined by the ship’s construction date and the engine-rated speed.

Emission control areas provide a second level of control that can be applied to ships on a regional basis under Regulations 13.6 and 14.3 of MARPOL Annex VI. ECAs impose additional emission standards to prevent, reduce and control NOx or SOx (and indirectly limiting particular matter (PM)) emissions from ships. Vessels operating in an ECA will be required to take actions to ensure they are compliant with the more stringent limits that operate in the area. For SOx emissions, this could mean using low sulphur fuels or using an exhaust gas cleaning system (EGCS), and for NOx emissions, this could mean the fitting of a Tier III engine or using other abatement technologies.

ECAs apply in sea areas up to a coastal state’s territorial sea baseline (generally, the low tide mark), but do not apply to inland waters. ECAs designated at the IMO apply to all domestic and international shipping in scope of the requirements, whether calling at a port or transiting through designated waters. Exceptions are made for ships with less than 130kW power output or under Regulation 13.1.2 MARPOL Annex VI, with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) considering such exceptions on a case-by-case basis.

The UK has consistently supported international efforts through the IMO to limit air pollutant emissions from shipping. The UK took a leading role in advocating the introduction of the 0.5% global sulphur cap in 2020, rather than deferring it until 2025, and made a significant contribution in developing the guidance to prepare and support industry before it came into effect on 1 January 2020. The UK co-sponsored the designation of the North Sea as a NOx emission control area (it was already a sulphur oxide (SOx) ECA) and supported the recently approved proposal to designate the entire Mediterranean Sea as a SOx ECA.

In January 2019, the government published a Maritime 2050 Strategy and a Clean Air Strategy. The Maritime 2050 Strategy sets out the vision for clean shipping in the UK. The Clean Air Strategy sets out the actions to be taken to tackle poor air quality attributable to a wide range of sources, including the maritime sector. The government then published the Clean Maritime Plan (2019), which identified ways to tackle air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions in parallel while securing clean growth opportunities for the UK.

In July 2021, the Department for Transport (DfT) published the Transport Decarbonisation Plan. It builds on the approach announced in the Clean Maritime Plan and Maritime 2050 and sets out clear commitments to accelerate the transition to Net Zero shipping. In March 2022, the government announced the £206 million UK Shipping Office for Reducing Emissions (or UK SHORE) as the biggest government investment ever in our commercial maritime sector. It works in partnership with industry to tackle supply and demand side barriers, as well as developing the infrastructure and consumer confidence to support zero emission technologies.

Decarbonisation offers a unique opportunity to address air pollutant emissions from the maritime sector on a permanent basis, by shifting to fuels and engine systems that either avoid combustion entirely or utilising clean burning fuels in engines optimised to minimise air pollutants. Efforts to improve fuel efficiency will also reduce both greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions.

However, there are circumstances where a trade-off between reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution emissions occurs. For example, liquefied natural gas (LNG) produces significantly lower quantities of SOx, NOx and particulate matter, leading to important air quality improvements but there are risks of methane – which is 28 times more potent a greenhouse gas than CO2^{[footnote 3]} – escaping into the atmosphere throughout its lifecycle. Conversely, green ammonia produced from renewables is a promising zero-carbon fuel but can produce NOx pollutants during combustion and is highly toxic to aquatic life^{[footnote 4]}.

What is in scope and how you can contribute

Scope

This call for evidence seeks views and evidence on the potential for extending the North Sea emission control area to all UK waters or options to establish a further, geographically distinct emission control area along Northern Ireland and the west coast of Great Britain. For the purpose of this call for evidence, ‘UK waters’ means the UK’s exclusive economic zone.

Figure 1^{[footnote 5]} shows the current geographical limits of the North Sea ECA and Figure 2 shows the UK’s territorial sea and exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

Figure 1: Current geographical limit of the North Sea ECA

The North Sea Emission Control Area includes the North Sea proper and any seas within the boundary between:

• the North Sea southwards of latitude 62°N and eastwards of longitude 4°W
• the Skagerrak, the southern limit of which is determined east of the Skaw by latitude 57°44.8΄N
• the English Channel and its approaches eastwards of longitude 5°W and northwards of latitude 48°30΄N

While the term ‘emission control area’ can be used interchangeably to describe any sea area with restrictions on vessel emissions (for example, at berth or in a sea area where a coastal state has introduced its own emission controls), there is a specific legal term for those designated under the auspices of the IMO. In this document, the term ‘ECA’ will be used to refer to waters designated by the IMO as an ECA. Areas that are not IMO designated ECA will be referred to as a ‘domestic ECA’ or ‘national restrictions’.

Purpose

This is a call for evidence, reflecting the limitations that we currently have in the evidence base available to the government. It invites consultees to suggest which (if any) UK waters, in addition to the North Sea, should be designated as an ECA and detail the scope of any future ECA. Where possible, we would be particularly interested in any supporting evidence that can be provided to support your assessment.

This document does not include a formal proposal for an ECA or network of ECAs and does not attempt to provide a formal recommended sea area or specify the type of ECA for adoption. It does, however, include some scenarios to illustrate different types of ECA that were considered in 2019 for the Irish Sea and Western Approaches, covering the west coast of Great Britain and the coastline of Northern Ireland. Respondents are encouraged to consider these scenarios along with other approaches and evidence and indicate which they consider the most effective.

Who is this call for evidence aimed at?

DfT invites participation from any organisation, group, business or individual with a view on air quality and the emissions of air pollutants from shipping in the UK and neighbouring waters.

The main legislation dealing with UK shipping and air pollution is reserved to the UK government. However, the devolved administrations and impacted crown dependencies have their own environment policies and powers which affect ports within their territories. Any proposal to designate coastal waters near Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or the Isle of Man will have a significant impact on these territories. Consequently, all options to produce an ECA proposal will be developed in cooperation with the devolved administrations and impacted crown dependencies.

ECAs touch on areas of multilateral responsibility shared with neighbouring states, as well as sea areas that are directly under the sovereignty of neighbouring states, most critically those of Ireland, France and the Kingdom of Denmark. DfT has held informal discussions with neighbouring states to inform them about this call for evidence, and a copy of the call for evidence package has been shared with them. The inclusion of waters under the sovereignty of neighbouring states is considered necessary due to traffic patterns in the region and the importance of understanding the case for a possible ECA beyond UK waters.

An ECA proposal, accompanied by a comprehensive impact assessment, would require intensive discussion, negotiation and agreement with any neighbouring coastal states likely to be affected before it can be taken forward. An integral part of this process will be to undertake a comprehensive study to meet the criteria established by the IMO to justify a new ECA. The IMO criteria for supporting an ECA can be found at Criteria for an IMO ECA (Appendix III to Annex VI MARPOL).

Figure 2: Illustration of the UK’s exclusive economic zone, by the UK Hydrographic Office

The EEZ, as set out by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, stretches from the outer limit of the territorial seas (12 nautical miles from the coast) out to 200 nautical miles.

Maritime pollutant emissions and emission control areas

There is growing evidence of the adverse impacts of shipping on UK air quality. The Air Quality Expert Group, an expert committee of the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), released a report on the impacts of shipping on air quality in the UK in 2017. This report found that shipping is a significant source of NOx, SO2 and primary PM2.5 and PM10 emissions. It concluded that these emissions lead to ‘adverse human health effects in the UK and elsewhere (including cardiovascular and respiratory illness and premature death), as well as environmental damage through acidification and eutrophication’.

Further research, commissioned by Defra and published in 2021, found that secondary particulate matter dominates shipping’s contribution to the exposure of the UK population to PM2.5. This is a long-range effect, with the NOx emissions from international and in-transit shipping activity being a particularly important cause of the creation of secondary particulate matter. The report estimates that the contribution that shipping makes to exposure to PM2.5 results in health costs of about £1.5 billion per year for the UK population in 2017 prices.

Tighter international and local controls on the sulphur content of marine fuels have meant that between 1990 and 2021, the sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions from UK domestic shipping declined by around 94% and the particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions from UK domestic shipping declined by around 89%^{[footnote 6]}.

Since 2015, a stricter 0.1% sulphur limit has applied to ships operating in the North Sea and English Channel. In addition, from 1 January 2020 a 0.5% sulphur limit – known as IMO 2020 – has applied globally to ships operating outside ECA waters. Reducing sulphur in fuel also contributes to reducing the amount of particulate matter (PM) emitted directly by ships and created indirectly when different pollutant emissions combine.

Emissions of NOx have declined more slowly since these emissions are addressed by regulations that target new ships coming into service. But NOx emissions from UK domestic shipping have still declined by around 48% between 1990 and 2021^{[footnote 7]}. In addition, the NOx Tier III controls apply a strict standard that reduces NOx emissions by around three-quarters from new ships operating within the North Sea NOx ECA from 2021 (see next section for further details).

Current emission controls in UK and neighbouring waters

The region covered by the North Sea ECA, adopted in 1997, is illustrated in Figure 1. This ECA originally applied to SOx only but in 2017 the IMO designated the North Sea as a NOx ECA, which came into effect in 2021 – see the table in Figure 3. This meant that the North Sea ECA became subject to the stricter NOx Tier III standard. The NOx Tier III standard applies to ships constructed since 1 January 2021, defined as when the keel for the new ship is laid. It also applies to existing ships that replace an engine with a non-identical engine or install an additional engine when operating in designated waters.

In April 2010, the UK implemented national restrictions on the amount of sulphur a ship could use while at berth in a UK port – irrespective of whether the port was located inside or outside an ECA. Ships at berth for 2 hours or more – defined as ships that are securely moored or anchored in a port while they are loading, unloading or hotelling – must switch to fuel with a sulphur content of 0.1% or less unless they use shoreside power or an abatement technology that provides equivalent protection. This requirement was introduced at a time when the sulphur limit in ECA waters was still 1.0% and consequently reduced SOx emissions at all UK ports.

In 2015, the IMO brought into effect new rules requiring ships operating in ECAs to use onboard fuel oil with a sulphur content of no more than 0.1%. This made the current at berth restrictions redundant for ports within the North Sea ECA. However, these national restrictions continue to provide additional protection at UK ports outside the North Sea ECA, where ships would otherwise be permitted to use 0.5% sulphur fuel. There are no separate national NOx requirements for ships berthed at a UK port.

The impact of the SOx ECA on the SO2 emissions from all shipping around the southwest of the British Isles in 2020 is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: SO2 emissions from all shipping around the south-west of the British Isles in 2020^{[footnote 8]}.

The SECA (sulphur emission control area) to the east of the dotted white line (bottom centre) can be seen as a reduction in emissions.

Geographical scope for a future ECA

In 2019, DfT commissioned Frontier Economics and UMAS to examine 3 illustrative scenarios for extending the current North Sea ECA^{[footnote 9]}. The scenarios explored extending the North Sea ECA to:

• all major ports in England not already in an ECA
• all UK territorial waters
• the Irish Sea and down to the English Channel (including the Isle of Ouessant but not going South to the Biscay Bay)

These do not represent the complete suite of options but are worked examples of the range of potential actions.

Overall, the research by Frontier Economics and UMAS estimated that the third option would deliver the largest net present value (NPV) to the UK (defined as the excess of benefits over costs, discounted). This illustrates the advantages that an ECA designated by the IMO could have in comparison to national restrictions. However, the focus of the research was on the costs and benefits to the UK, so any submission to the IMO would need to consider the costs and benefits to other states as well as the UK.

In addition, the estimates produced during the research are sensitive to the data and evidence used in this analysis and to the assumptions that were made. Developments in the available evidence and analytical methods may lead to different conclusions on the scale of the impacts of any given policy option in future analysis.

The Frontier Economics and UMAS research also suggests that a new ECA in waters adjoining the UK would result in costs to ship owners and operators, but that overall, the value of the benefits to the UK would exceed the value of the costs for all 3 options included in the assessment. Costs to ship owners and operators arise when vessels are required to change how they operate to comply with the ECA.

In practice, as with the benefits, the costs of a new ECA will depend on its scope, including whether controls are applied to both SOx and NOx emissions, as well as the geographical size of the ECA and when it is introduced.

Globally, there is growing appetite for designating emission control areas to limit and reduce air pollutant emissions and improve air quality, with multiple countries looking to present proposals to the IMO. The European Union (EU) has committed to establishing ECAs in all EU waters, as part of its Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy (2020). It has also spearheaded efforts in the recent designation of the Mediterranean Sea as an ECA and, together with its member states, is starting work in other EU waters.

Questions

Question 1

Do you consider the air pollutant emissions from ships in waters not currently included in an ECA to be a significant problem? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 2

In your view, should we prioritise an IMO-designated ECA over domestic restrictions to limit air pollutant emissions from ships? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 3

In your view, should we extend the existing North Sea ECA to all UK waters or designate a geographically distinct new ECA along the west coast of Great Britain and Northern Ireland? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 4

In your view, should we work with neighbouring coastal states to designate an ECA beyond UK waters across the North Atlantic? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 5

Apart from a new ECA in UK waters, what, if any, other measures do you think we should take to address air pollutant emissions from shipping in UK waters? Please include evidence to support your answer.

Question 6

Are you able to provide any additional evidence on the air pollutant emissions from shipping and how this may change in the future in the absence of further intervention?

SOx and NOx limits

An ECA can apply limits on either SOx or NOx and indirectly limit PM. The 4 existing IMO-designated ECAs which are in force are listed in Table 1.

These apply a stricter 0.1% sulphur limit on ships using marine fuels and a stricter NOx Tier III standard on newer ships. In 2022, the IMO agreed to designate the entire Mediterranean Sea as a SOx ECA, which will come into force from 1 July 2025.

Table 1: Adoption, entry into force and date of taking effect of ECAs

ECA special areas	Adopted	Entry into force	In effect from
Baltic Sea SOx	26 September 1997	19 May 2005	19 May 2006
Baltic Sea NOx	7 July 2017	1 January 2019	1 January 2021**
North Sea SOx	22 July 2005	22 November 2006	22 November 2007
North Sea NOx	7 July 2017	1 January 2019	1 January 2021**
North American ECA SOx and PM	26 March 2010	1 August 2011	1 August 2012
North American NOx	26 March 2010	1 August 2011	1 January 2016*
US Caribbean Sea SOx and PM	26 July 2011	1 January 2013	1 January 2014
US Caribbean Sea NOx	26 July 2011	1 January 2013	1 January 2016*

Source: IMO
* NOx Tier III standard applies to ships constructed on or after 1 January 2016 operating in this ECA.

**NOx Tier III standard applies to ships constructed on or after 1 January 2021 operating in this ECA.

Sulphur limits have been applied to ships in stages when implementing global and regional limits. Since 2015, the maximum sulphur limit, which applies to marine fuel for ships operating in an ECA, has been 0.1% (one-tenth of the 1% limit introduced in 2010). It is also one-fifth of the global sulphur cap applied to fuels used by ships operating outside an ECA (0.5% since 1 January 2020).

Ships can comply with the ECA sulphur limit by using the 0.1% distillate marine gas oil (MGO) fuel or by using a 0.1% marine diesel oil (MDO) which is predominantly a distillate with a small amount of residual fuel oil. Different fuel types must be kept in separate fuel tanks and most commercial ships have 2 or more fuel tanks for this purpose.

Ships must carry a written procedure showing how the changeover from one fuel to another is carried out. The changeover must allow sufficient time for the fuel oil system to be fully flushed out of any non-compliant fuel before entering an emission control area.

Alternatively, ships can use an exhaust gas cleaning systems (EGCS) to comply with the ECA sulphur limit, often referred to as a ‘scrubber’. Although there are capital costs associated with retrofitting an EGCS, it enables a ship operator to use cheaper residue high sulphur fuel oil. These systems spray water on exhaust emissions to remove sulphur dioxide before releasing emissions into the atmosphere. The water used is then released overboard and the IMO has adopted strict criteria for discharge of wash water from EGCS. However, concerns remain about the impact of using EGCS which are currently being discussed at the IMO.

The NOx Tier controls apply only to marine diesel engines of over 130kW output power. Outside ECAs, the Tier II controls apply to engines on ships constructed on or after 1 January 2011 and Tier I on ships constructed since 1 January 2000. The stricter NOx Tier III standard only applies to engines on ships while operating inside an established ECA.

Ships constructed on or after 1 January 2016 must meet the NOx Tier III standard when operating in either the North American or the US Caribbean Sea ECAs. However, the same ship is not required to comply with the Tier III standard when operating in the North Sea or Baltic ECAs, unless it was constructed on or after 1 January 2021 (see Table 1).

To comply with the Tier III NOx limit in an ECA, vessels could install an abatement technology – such as a selective catalytic reduction system (SCR) or an exhaust gas recirculation system (EGRS) – to reach the compliance limit. Secondly, the vessel could switch to using an alternative fuel to meet the stricter NOx limits, such as using liquefied natural gas (LNG).

We are not aware of any marine engines using diesel fuel that are able to comply with the NOx Tier III requirement without an abatement system or alternative fuel, although that could change in future.

More broadly, it should be recognised that the use of fuels that achieve significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions does not necessarily achieve similar reductions in air pollutant emissions. For example, research commissioned in 2019 estimated that significant NOx emissions could remain under scenarios that achieve deep decarbonisation through significant use of low carbon ammonia.

For a new ECA, a key consideration is how much notice ship operators should be given before the requirements come into effect. We would welcome views on the minimum notice period that is required.

Questions

Question 9

Do you have any feedback on the analysis of benefits included in the research published alongside the call for evidence?

Question 10

What, in your view, are the key costs of introducing a new ECA and how might these costs vary under different circumstances?

Question 11

Are you able to provide any additional evidence that could help us to analyse these costs?

Question 12

Do you have any feedback on the analysis of costs included in the research published alongside the call for evidence?

Question 13

What additional analysis and research would you like to see undertaken?

Question 14

In your view, how effective is the current at berth requirement for controlling air pollutant emissions at UK ports outside an ECA? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 15

In your view, should any future ECA in UK waters apply to both sulphur oxides (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) or only SOx? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 16

In your view, how long would the shipping industry require to adapt to the requirements of a SOx ECA in UK waters? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 17

In your view, how long would the shipping industry require to adapt to the requirements of a NOx ECA in UK waters? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 18

In your view, are there any risks of unintended consequences from the introduction of a new ECA (for either SOx or NOx)?

Question 19

In your view, are there any risks from the increased use of distillate 0.1% sulphur fuels by ships in a new ECA for the maritime industry or other sectors of the UK economy?

Question 20

In your view, would a new ECA add significant costs to importing goods by sea to the UK?

Question 21

In your view, would a new ECA add significant costs to exporting goods by sea from the UK?

Question 22

In your view, would a new ECA negatively impact UK port operations?

Question 23

In your view, would a new ECA negatively impact any other sectors of the UK economy?

Question 24

In your view, are there any other barriers to the maritime industry to adapt to a new ECA (for either SOx or NOx) in UK waters? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 25

What other measures could shipping take to reduce their air pollutant emissions? Include details of any technology or other measures and provide evidence to support your answer.

Question 26

Do you have any other information or evidence that you would like to submit as part of your call for evidence response?

How to respond

The call for evidence period began on 9 January 2024 and will run until 4 March 2024. Please ensure that your response reaches us before the closing date.

The easiest way to respond is via the online questionnaire. You can find a link to the questionnaire in the Ways to respond section for this call for evidence.

If you cannot respond online, there is also a downloadable form and an email and postal address.

When responding, state whether you are responding as an individual or representing the views of an organisation. If responding on behalf of a larger organisation, make it clear who the organisation represents and, where applicable, how the views of members were assembled.

We do not expect you to submit evidence or views in response to every question listed if not applicable.

If you have any suggestions for others who may wish to be involved in this process, contact us.

What happens next

Responses will help to inform further policy development work.

Paper copies will be available on request.

If you have questions about this call for evidence, contact MaritimeAirQuality@dft.gov.uk.

Full list of questions

These questions are listed here to give you an overview of what we are asking.

Question 1

Do you consider the air pollutant emissions from ships in waters not currently included in an ECA to be a significant problem? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 2

In your view, should we prioritise an IMO-designated ECA over domestic restrictions to limit air pollutant emissions from ships? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 3

In your view, should we extend the existing North Sea ECA to all UK waters or designate a geographically distinct new ECA along the west coast of Great Britain and Northern Ireland? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 4

In your view, should we work with neighbouring coastal states to designate an ECA beyond UK waters across the North Atlantic? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 5

Apart from a new ECA in UK waters, what, if any, other measures do you think we should take to address air pollutant emissions from shipping in UK waters? Please include evidence to support your answer.

Question 6

Are you able to provide any additional evidence on the air pollutant emissions from shipping, how these emissions impact UK air quality, and how this may change in the future in the absence of further intervention?

Question 7

What, in your view, are the key benefits of introducing a new ECA and how might these benefits vary under different circumstances?

Question 8

Are you able to provide any additional evidence that could help us to analyse these benefits?

Question 9

Do you have any feedback on the analysis of benefits included in the research published alongside the call for evidence?

Question 10

What, in your view, are the key costs of introducing a new ECA and how might these costs vary under different circumstances?

Question 11

Are you able to provide any additional evidence that could help us to analyse these costs?

Question 12

Do you have any feedback on the analysis of costs included in the research published alongside the call for evidence?

Question 13

What additional analysis and research would you like to see undertaken?

Question 14

In your view, how effective is the current at berth requirement for controlling air pollutant emissions at UK ports outside an ECA? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 15

In your view, should any future ECA in UK waters apply to both sulphur oxides (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) or only SOx? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 16

In your view, how long would the shipping industry require to adapt to the requirements of a SOx ECA in UK waters? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 17

In your view, how long would the shipping industry require to adapt to the requirements of a NOx ECA in UK waters? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 18

In your view, are there any risks of unintended consequences from the introduction of a new ECA (for either SOx or NOx)?

Question 19

In your view, are there any risks from the increased use of distillate 0.1% sulphur fuels by ships in a new ECA for the maritime industry or other sectors of the UK economy?

Question 20 

In your view, would a new ECA add significant costs to importing goods by sea to the UK? 

Question 21 

In your view, would a new ECA add significant costs to exporting goods by sea from the UK? 

Question 22 

In your view, would a new ECA negatively impact UK port operations? 

Question 23 

In your view, would a new ECA negatively impact any other sectors of the UK economy?

Question 24

In your view, are there any other barriers to the maritime industry to adapt to a new ECA (for either SOx or NOx) in UK waters? Include evidence to support your answer.

Question 25

What other measures could shipping take to reduce their air pollutant emissions? Include details of any technology or other measures and provide evidence to support your answer.

Question 26

Do you have any other information or evidence that you would like to submit as part of your call for evidence response?

Criteria for an IMO ECA (Appendix III to Annex VI MARPOL)

Criteria and procedures for designation of emission control areas (ECA) found in MARPOL Annex VI (regulations 13.6 and 14.3)

Objectives

The purpose of this appendix is to provide the criteria and procedures to Parties for the formulation and submission of proposals for the designation of emission control areas and to set forth the factors to be considered in the assessment of such proposals by the Organization.

Emissions of NOx, SOx and particulate matter from ocean-going ships contribute to ambient concentrations of air pollution in cities and coastal areas around the world. Adverse public health and environmental effects associated with air pollution include premature mortality, cardiopulmonary disease, lung cancer, chronic respiratory ailments, acidification and eutrophication.

An emission control area should be considered for adoption by the Organization if supported by a demonstrated need to prevent, reduce and control emissions of NOx or SOx and particulate matter or all three types of emissions (hereinafter emissions) from ships.

Process for the designation of emission control areas

A proposal to the Organization for designation of an emission control area for NOx or SOx and particulate matter or all 3 types of emissions may be submitted only by Parties. Where 2 or more Parties have a common interest in a particular area, they should formulate a coordinated proposal.

A proposal to designate a given area as an emission control area should be submitted to the Organization in accordance with the rules and procedures established by the Organization.

Criteria for designation of an emission control area

The proposal shall include:

• a clear delineation of the proposed area of application, along with a reference chart on which the area is marked

• the type or types of emission(s) that is or are being proposed for control (NOx or SOx and particulate matter or all 3 types of emissions)

• a description of the human populations and environmental areas at risk from the impacts of ship emissions

• an assessment that emissions from ships operating in the proposed area of application are contributing to ambient concentrations of air pollution or to adverse environmental impacts. Such assessment shall include a description of the impacts of the relevant emissions on human health and the environment, such as adverse impacts to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, areas of natural productivity, critical habitats, water quality, human health and areas of cultural and scientific significance, if applicable. The sources of relevant data including methodologies used shall be identified

• relevant information, pertaining to the meteorological conditions in the proposed area of application, to the human populations and environmental areas at risk, in particular prevailing wind patterns, or to topographical, geological, oceanographic, morphological or other conditions that contribute to ambient concentrations of air pollution or adverse environmental impacts

• the nature of the ship traffic in the proposed emission control area, including the patterns and density of such traffic

• a description of the control measures taken by the proposing party or parties addressing land-based sources of NOx, SOx and particulate matter emissions affecting the human populations and environmental areas at risk that are in place and operating concurrent with the consideration of measures to be adopted in relation to provisions of regulations 13 and 14 of Annex VI

• the relative costs of reducing emissions from ships when compared with land-based controls, and the economic impacts on shipping engaged in international trade

The geographical limits of an emission control area will be based on the relevant criteria outlined above, including emissions and deposition from ships navigating in the proposed area, traffic patterns and density, and wind conditions.

Procedures for the assessment and adoption of emission control areas by the Organization

The Organization shall consider each proposal submitted to it by a Party or Parties.

In assessing the proposal, the Organization shall take into account the criteria that are to be included in each proposal for adoption as set forth in Criteria for designation of an emission control area.

An emission control area shall be designated by means of an amendment to this Annex, considered, adopted and brought into force in accordance with article 16 of the present Convention.

Operation of emission control areas

Parties that have ships navigating in the area are encouraged to bring to the Organization any concerns regarding the operation of the area.

Freedom of information

Information provided in response to this call for evidence, including personal information, may be subject to publication or disclosure in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

If you want information that you provide to be treated as confidential, please be aware that, under the FOIA, there is a statutory Code of Practice with which public authorities must comply and which deals, amongst other things, with obligations of confidence.

In view of this, it would be helpful if you could explain to us why you regard the information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a request for disclosure of the information, we will take full account of your explanation, but we cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in all circumstances. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded as binding on DfT.

DfT will process your personal data in accordance with the Data Protection Act (DPA) and in the majority of circumstances this will mean that your personal data will not be disclosed to third parties.

Data Protection

DfT is carrying out this call for evidence to gather evidence on the designation of an emission control area in UK waters outside the North Sea ECA. This call for evidence and the processing of personal data that it entails is necessary for the exercise of our functions as a government department. If your answers contain any information that allows you to be identified, DfT will, under data protection law, be the controller for this information.

As part of this call for evidence process, we’re asking for your name and email address. This is in case we need to ask you follow-up questions about any of your responses. You do not have to give us this personal information. If you do provide it, we will use it only for the purpose of asking follow-up questions.

DfT’s privacy policy has more information about your rights in relation to your personal data, how to complain and how to contact the Data Protection Officer.

Your information will be kept securely on a secure IT system within DfT and destroyed within 12 months after the call for evidence process has been completed.

1. Airbourne particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 micrometres. ↩

2. The term SOx is used in MARPOL Annex VI to include all emissions of sulphur oxides, including SO2. ↩

3. Emissions from each greenhouse gas are weighted by the Global Warming Potential (GWP) so that total greenhouse gas emissions can be reported on a consistent basis in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). ↩

4. For example, see European Maritime Safety Agency (2022), Potential of ammonia as fuel in shipping, EMSA, Lisbon. ↩

5. ECG, sulphur content in marine fuels, 2011, page 7. ↩

6. Defra/BEIS (2022), Annex I Sectoral UK Emissions for 1990-2021 (2023 Submission). ↩

7. Defra/BEIS (2022), Annex I: Sectoral UK Emissions for 1990-2021 (2023 Submission). ↩

8. Report: UK Spatial Emissions Methodology – A report of the National Atmospheric Emission Inventory 2020 – Defra, UK. ↩

9. Frontier Economics and UMAS, Options for Extending the North Sea Shipping Emissions Control Area: A Report for the Department for Transport (published alongside this call for evidence). ↩