The international cruise sector is asking Transport Canada to relax a requirement that all ships use cleaner fuel than they burn on the open seas within 200 nautical miles of Canada and the United States.
“We’re asking them to look at the idea of ‘did we go too far’ with the 0.1 per cent within the emission control area – and do the boundaries of this area need to be so broad,” Michael Crye, executive vice-president of the Cruise Lines International Association, said on Tuesday. “Those are the types of things we will be talking to the governments about.”
At the request of Canada and the United States, the International Maritime Organization – a United Nations agency that oversees the global shipping industry – adopted an emission control area around North America in March. Transport Canada would enforce the regulations. The zone would apply to all large ships, including container and cargo ships, but would affect cruise ships the most because they ply coastal waters up and down both sides of the continent and would be inside the restricted zone for the duration of their journeys.
Cargo and container ships would come in and out of the zone and still be able to use cheaper, higher-sulphur fuel for ocean crossings.
The rule would be enforced by the two countries and calls for sulphur content of fuels used within the zone to be reduced to 1 per cent by July, 2010, and to 0.1 per cent in 2015. The current limit in the zone is 1.5 per cent. Globally, most ships use fuel with an average 2.5 per cent sulphur content.
Based on current prices, cleaner fuels cost up to $350 a tonne more than higher-sulphur varieties. Fuel consumption varies, but a cruise ship might use 80 tonnes of fuel a day.
From a passenger perspective, the higher fuel costs could add $100 or more to the price of a seven-day cruise, John Hansen of the North West CruiseShip Association said on Tuesday.
“Nobody knows what the cost implications will be and whether fuel will be available to meet the standards,” Mr. Hansen said. “We in the cruise sector have been moving toward lighter fuel, lower-sulphur fuel for some years. At this point, we don’t know whether the fuel to meet the standards five years out – when the really low requirements kick in – whether fuel will be available and how much it will cost.”
Port operators from west and east coasts of the continent have also voiced concerns to Ottawa that the planned buffer zone could drive cruise ships away from North American routes.
“We would share the cruise industry’s concerns about the impact of ECA [emission control area],” Greg Wirtz, manager of trade development with Port Metro Vancouver, said on Tuesday.
The port supports the public health and environmental goals of the ECA, Mr. Wirtz emphasized, but worries about economic effects.
The port has been in “close contact” with Transport Canada on the issue and wants to ensure that alternative technologies such as shore power are taken into account, he added.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said the changes will save as many as 14,000 lives a year by improving air quality.
Fuel with high sulphur content emits high levels of particulate matter and nitrogen oxide, which can cause respiratory distress and illness.
CLIA, which represents about 25 cruise lines that operate in North America, says the Environmental Protection Agency used flawed methods to calculate the health benefits of the zone.
