Chittagong ship breaking yard. (Photo courtesy - Tridib Ghose - 2014) |
On 15 May 2014, The Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships (HKC) enjoyed its fifth anniversary of adoption by the IMO, and it is still on the shelf.
At the time of its
adoption, some speculated that it might take three, four or even five years to
push through the convention. Now, at the long end of that estimate, the
convention has since been ratified by just one of the 15 shipowning and ship
scrapping nations it needs to trigger the 24-month timer before it enters into
force. The solitary country to ratify is Norway, which it did in June 2013.
It might come as a
surprise then that of the 1,213 large ocean going ships sent to the beaches of
Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, 238 were beneficially owned by European
companies and five of those by Norwegian companies.
Few will be surprised to
learn the Greeks top the list with 84 ships, but generally green Germany comes
in second with 67 vessels. We are not talking bit-players sweeping rustbuckets
under the rug either, industry-leading listed companies with bold corporate
social responsibility statements still find their ships running aground on
beaches where oxyacetylene cutters await. A recent report by the NGO
Shipbreaking Platform said 15 workers had died in South Asian shipbreaking
yards this year.
As well as the obvious
commercial benefits, a look at the state of regulation within the industry
offers some insight into how what many consider one of shipping’s most shameful
activities it manages to continue.
After HKC was adopted in
May 2009 it become apparent that not only was the international community not
about to ratify it, but the convention itself might offer less protection than
the existing Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of
Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel).
Beaching is noted as a
method of recycling within HKC guidelines, although the practicalities of
chopping up steel behemoths on beaches with large tides renders it impossible
to abide by the convention's environmental and saftey rules.
Concise rules on ship
cleaning ahead of recycling are not to be found within the convention and its
reporting systems trail behind those of Basel.
Predicting that the HKC
would not come into force before 2020, The European Union took steps to address
ship scrapping by introducing its own legislation in late 2013 to speed up
adoption of HKC and improve on it. The rules build on HKC, adding a list of
approved recycling facilities for ships flying EU flags, adding to the list of
prohibited materials for newbuildings and introducing an attempt to tackle cash
buyers by imposing penalties on previous owners if a ship ends up in the wrong
facility.
Not only are the
European rules easy to sidestep by re-flagging the vessel to a non-EU flag, the
legislation is under heavy fire for itself being illegal as it contradicts
areas of Basel which are already of EU law.
Away from being seen by
some as a regulatory backwards step and clearly uninspiring to IMO members,
there has at last been some progress for HKC.
Within the EU the HKC
has seen a number of outbursts of support and even the Council of the European
Union has strongly encouraged that member states ratify it, but on 14 April
2014, four years and 11 months after the adoption of the HKC, the EU ruled in
Luxembourg that "Member States are hereby authorised to ratify or accede
to, for the parts falling under the exclusive competence of the Union, the Hong
Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling
of Ships, 2009."
Perhaps standard
procedure, or perhaps as a sign of confidence in the glacial-paced convention,
the European Council will review the ratification’s progress "by
2018."
Source:
seatrade global.
http://www.seatrade-global.com/news/asia/the-hong-kong-convention-on-ship-recycling-five-years-on.html
No comments:
Post a Comment