The IMO does not have any straightforward mandate to solve the environmental problems caused by the recycling of ships. Nonetheless, IMO Secretary General William A. O’Neil is worried about the problems related to a ship’s last phase. ‘Our Organisation has influence, and this will be used to prevent marine pollution,’ he points out.
Several hundred large ships end up in scrapyards every year. The number of ships varies, but the tonnage has been stable at around 15 million dwt over the past decade. It is expected that in the next decade the tonnage will increase. The biggest scrap facilities are to be found in India and Bangladesh, where around two-thirds of the total tonnage is cut up and scrapped.
By Western standards of health and environment, conditions at the scrapyards fail to comply in almost every respect. Based on the same standards, the consequential negative impact on natural resources, and more generally the environment itself, is far from acceptable.
The rules and routines safeguarding the workers, and requirements protecting the natural environment surrounding the yards, are up to each individual country. The IMO cannot and should not be involved in these, emphasises Secretary General ONeil.
But he adds: On the other hand, the IMO, together with shipping companies, classification societies and the shipbuilding industry should show an interest and take initiatives to ensure that a ships path to its final end is better arranged. A ships death should be prepared for even before its birth. The ships design and construction must take into account how dismantling and recycling can be carried out. During the ships operational phase, too, choices and decisions must not only take short-term results into account, they must also have a long-term perspective that includes the recycling process.
Publishing the ships history
According to its objectives, IMO must ensure that ships maintain a high safety and environmental protection standard not only during their first years, but also, even more important, during their final years. No ship should sail without meeting the requirements stipulated to maintain a high standard, underlines ONeil.
Looking back at what IMO has achieved not least through SOLAS (the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended) and MARPOL (the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships 1973/78, as amended) the Organisation can demonstrate its influence and contribute to safer shipping and cleaner oceans. Looking to the future, IMO is determined to use its position to achieve further improvements. One intention is to ensure that the ship-recycling process does not put an unnecessary strain on the environment.
Sub-standard ships worry me, says ONeil. He is looking to the future and indicates that IMOs authority might be used against players that utilise sub-standard ships. We will demand that the ships history must follow the ship. In the same way that it is easy to find out about any encumbrances in the finance world, and an objects financial history, it should be equally easy to find out about a ships history. Irrespective of whether the ship has been transferred from one classification society to another and whatever owners the ship has had, its history should be readily accessible.
Circumventing the rules
Ships must not be able to move unless they meet the requirements stipulated in IMOs conventions and codes, he emphasises. By move, ONeil means much more than just the ship sailing from one port to another. Movement in the form of a ship being purchased and sold by shipowners during the ships final phase of life should also meet the requirements.
It is a poorly kept secret that some not-so-serious shipowners buy and sell old, rundown ships in order to exploit the ships market opportunities and to avoid meeting regulations. For example, attempts are made to circumvent the Basel Convention, which is intended to prevent environmentally hazardous waste from being exported to developing countries by countries that have ratified this convention, through ships being first sold to countries that have not ratified it.
ONeil does not comment on secrets or rumours, but emphasises his more general comments: Our goal is to have ships that are safe for seafarers and the environment throughout their entire lifetime. All shipowners to whom I have spoken support this goal. Between 9095 per cent of all vessels have a high standard and are maintained in accordance with the prevailing requirements. But its the rest those few owners and ships that worry me as secretary general. We must focus even more on these in order to resolve these problems, and we will take the initiative to have a greater degree of openness and collaboration between the IMO, Flag and Port States and classification societies.
ONeil does not agree with critics who say this work is going too slowly. He stresses the importance of avoiding too hasty conclusions, of involving those affected, and of revealing the core of the problem before deciding on solutions.
As an example of the fact that extensive changes can be implemented rapidly, ONeil points out the changes made to SOLAS as a result of the Estonia accident in the Baltic Sea. As an example of the fact that changes, and, not least, the consequences of changes, have to be assessed thoroughly, he points to the EU proposal to introduce unlimited liability as a result of the Erika shipwreck off the coast of France.
I dont want to go into detail about this here, but the IMO plays a major role in international shipping. On behalf of the UN, we have a responsibility in the field of international shipping that extends to cover all the phases of a ships life including its scrapping and recycling. Within the framework we have to relate to, however, there is room for flexibility a flexibility that we practise but for which we are not praised, he says.