The emissions debate gets nasty at IMO meet

THE run-up to last week's important International Maritime Organization (IMO) meeting on combatting global warming was marked by a concerted effort to undermine that UN organisation and belittle the efforts of the shipping industry to tackle the issue.

As IMO's Intersessional Working Group on Reduction of Green House Gas (GHG) Emissions drew near, environmental campaign groups not only poured scorn on IMO's work in this field so far, including the mandatory Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), but also pushed out a report claiming that IMO was, in effect, in the pocket of the shipowners. That idea no doubt elicited a few wry smiles within an industry that has been struggling to cope with the bungled International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments (Ballast Water Convention) and is now still wondering how to respond to the 2020 global 0.5 per cent sulphur in fuel cap.

Meanwhile, one maritime public relations consultant, who appears to share the campaign groups' point of view, went completely over the top and even likened by association the shipping industry's alleged influence over IMO to current allegations of sexual abuse in the film industry.