‘Black carbon’ threat to Arctic as sea routes open up with global heating
As the climate crisis enables the utilization of new maritime routes, sooty shipping emissions hasten ice melt and pose a threat to ecosystems.
-
‘Black carbon’ threat to the Arctic as sea routes open up with global heating.
Last February, a Russian gas tanker dubbed Christophe de Margerie made history by navigating the cold seas of the northern sea route in the dead of winter. The historic voyage from Jiangsu, China, to a remote Arctic port in Siberia was lauded as the beginning of a new era that might transform global shipping lines, slashing travel times between Europe and Asia by more than a third.
The climatic catastrophe has made it conceivable. Between 2013 and 2019, shrinking polar ice allowed shipping traffic in the Arctic to increase by 25%, and this trend is projected to continue.
However, Arctic shipping is not only made possible by the climate problem, but it also contributes to it. More ships mean more exhaust fumes, which is hastening glacier melt in this vulnerable region due to a complex phenomenon involving "black carbon," an atmospheric pollutant created by the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels.
When black carbon, or soot, falls on snow and ice, it hastens to melt. Dark snow and ice melt far faster than heat-reflecting white snow, creating a vicious spiral of accelerated warming.
Read more: Global warming drives killer whales north Arctic sea
Environmentalists warn that the Arctic, which is warming four times faster than the rest of the world, has experienced an 85 percent increase in black carbon emissions from ships between 2015 and 2019, owing primarily to an increase in oil tankers and bulk carriers.
The particles, which aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular sickness in cities, are short-term but potent climate agents: according to one estimate, they account for more than 20% of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions from ships.
However, unlike other modes of transportation, such as road, rail, and inland waterways, where air-quality standards limit emissions, there are no rules in place for shipping. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted a resolution in November on the use of cleaner fuels in the Arctic to reduce black carbon, but it was a voluntary step.
Read more: Giant iceberg released 152 billion tonnes of fresh water into the sea
The IMO was once again in the spotlight last week. A coalition of environmental groups told a meeting of the Arctic Council's pollution, prevention, and response subcommittee that its decision did not do enough to address the Arctic's climate problem. They presented a document urging governments to agree on mandatory measures to reduce black carbon emissions from shipping in the region.
“We’re hitting this cascading tipping point for the climate,” said Lucy Gilliam, senior shipping policy officer of Seas at Risk. “With the IPCC report, we are seeing again why we need to do something about black carbon urgently.”
Read more: The world is on the verge of irreversible climate consequences
Last Monday, scientists from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned that action to prevent climate breakdown was "now or never." They determined that the world community was failing to meet its climate promises, but they singled out the shipping industry and the IMO for special condemnation.
According to a forecast by shipbrokers Simpson Spence Young, worldwide shipping emissions would grow by 4.9 percent in 2021.
“IMO member states must agree on ambitious and urgent global action to dramatically reduce ship-source black carbon emissions this decade, to mitigate the climate crisis in the Arctic,” said Dr. Sian Prior, lead adviser to the Clean Arctic Alliance, a coalition of 21 non-profit groups lobbying governments to protect Arctic wildlife and people. She urged states and regions to do their part by acting immediately to cut black carbon from ships.
Read more: Greenland is Melting 3 Times Faster
According to the Alliance, switching all shipping in the Arctic that uses heavy fuel oil to cleaner distillate fuel would reduce black carbon emissions by 44 percent. Heavy fuel oil, often known as bunker fuel, is a viscous, low-grade, cheap oil polluted with nitrogen and sulfur, making it more polluting than distillate.
If all ships had diesel particle filters, which reduce emissions by trapping and storing soot, black carbon emissions may be reduced by an additional 90%.
Others, however, contend that the IMO's 2021 restriction on heavy fuel oils in the Arctic - a move aimed at minimizing spillage risk and set to take effect in 2029 – will result in a reduction in black carbon.
