2015:24. ZVT. Paul Topping, the Canadian Ministry of Transport. GotMoS.

Listen to the interview with Paul Topping, the Canadian Ministry of Transport or read the transcript below. . – Mr Paul Topping, thank you for participating at this Motorways of the Sea conference. Can you please introduce yourself? . – Thank you, I’d be delighted. My name is Paul Topping and I’m the manager of environmental protection at Transport Canada, Canada’s Ministry of Transport. I administer Canadian requirements for the North-American emission control area as well as all of the MARPOL Convention requirements in Canada as well as ballast water requirements. . – Thank you. Please give a short resume from your held presentation. . – I provided an overview of what we are doing in Canada to implement the North-American emission control area in partnership with the United States and France, and how we’re taking a monitoring and enforcement approach. I also provided a bit of background on as to why we are doing it and the benefit that Canada receives in excess of 1.1 billion dollars a year in savings of public health care costs that was the principal driver for us doing it. We noted that the industry now has an advantage of low fuel prices to affect the change-over, but we know that those prices aren’t going to be around forever, so we’ve also been looking on alternative technologies, particularly for the sectors that operate in the emission control area all the time, versus those that can come in and those that can go out. . – What is the next upcoming maritime issue that will be discussed in a global perspective and in a regional perspective? . – Globally, there are two issues. The biggest one I think will be, in the near term, will be the outcome of the Paris and climate change discussions at IMO. They will look at what future steps the IMO can possibly take. The next thing, both globally and somewhat regionally, is the 2020 or 2025 shift in sulphur content from 3.5% down to 0.5% for fuels used by the entire world’s fleet. Emission control area states are positioned to be competitive in that area as they’re already adopting the 0.1%, so the technology and approaches that are being adopted now are readying those companies for 2020. In Canada, we’re taking the view that this is likely to be confirmed in 2020. There is a study that is underway to look at fuel and look at the availability of compliant fuel, and I think what will happen at IMO is that will also coincide with fuel quality, that’s another issue that’s emerging at IMO. But in terms of compliant fuel, globally the fuel supply is present, but I think what the study will highlight is where challenges may be in certain local markets. . – And in a regional perspective? . – The regional perspective will be within emission control areas I believe, the adoption of the alternative approaches, the adoption of scrubbers and LNG, they’re still nascent technologies. It’s still new. There’s no type of proved systems out there in the conventional sense that’s off-the-shelf that can be fitted. It’s all new technology we’re adopting and with that there’s always risk of failure. There’s going to be failures and things that don’t work as expected, and there will be things that work as well, and it’s building on that to develop the information as how things then can work and again, we’re doing that now so I think ECA states are positioned well before 2020. . – To learn from other transport modes, what do you think is the primary issue, if any, that shipping as a transport mode should look further into? . – I think energy efficiency is probably one of the bigger issues when you’re looking at it collaboratively with other transport modes. The classic pollutant source, we’re grappling with sulphur and nitrogen oxide controls that are bringing shipping towards where other transport modes are already there, but when you look at energy efficiency I think we’re working at the same pace as the other transport modes. Shipping actually being already a very efficient mode, however still accountable for about 3% of global greenhouse gases and that’s coming out of the IMO study on greenhouse gases. To put that into perspective, and if you look at the top 20 emitters coming out of the United Nation’s conference on climate change, shipping would be within the top 20, if they were a country, so it’s still a significant number even though it’s just look like it’s only 3%. So there’s much further work to be done, and the IMO is working on that area, discussing what future measures could be adopted, using a phased approach which Canada does support. It’s a sensible way for where, there’s a data collection phase, to see what are the actual energy efficiencies that we’re seeing on ships and some of the supporting information as to what they’re carrying and patterns that they’re seeing. From that information IMO will derive a standard and from that theoretical work,then move into a practical application to actually pilot that standard, to continue to collect data, learn what we’re seeing and what’s working and not working and go back and revise if needed. Then IMO would come down on a final standard that you actually have piloted through. Those are the phases that are being envisioned, it is not something that will happen overnight, it will take time, but it’s something that we hope to have some success with. . – What are the success factors enabling us to take the technical leap? . – I think first and foremost it’s recognizing the technology as a function of the industry. It takes firms that are willing to take the capital risk at this time, so that involves things such like convincing shareholders and investors that this technology is the right way to go. They have to make a commercial case for it; they have to show that it’s going to position their company. A given technology is going to need to position their company well, with an advantage There has to be cost-savings or increased profitability down the road or over a long term, so there might be a cost up front but there’s a pay off towards the end as to company’s position in terms of the freight rates they can offer their clients. And when the investors see that, they will make those risks and adopt them. It’s up to government then to recognize the alternative ways the industry can come forth to reduce emissions and to focus on performance as opposed to prescribing how they should do a thing, but to look at the ultimate performance, that we’re seeing less emission coming out of the exhaust stack. . – So it takes action, just not talking. . – Exactly. . – What do you think is the most vital component to be able to make a full transition into a more safe, environmentally and energy-efficient, still profitable, transport at sea? . – So, the two most vital components are both in the industry and in the government. The industry has to have and bring forward their technologies, and they need to be having a predictable regulatory environment. Government needs to be responsive to new technologies, and the safety issues new technologies may bring forward, such as shifting from use of heavy fuel and petroleum fuel to which we already have regulatory and safety systems around, to the new things, such as the use of LNG, compressed natural gas and other fuels for which we need to develop regulatory frameworks. IMO has a code on liquid natural gas and other things as a start, but nations then need to implement those things in their own regulatory frameworks. And then that needs to flow into seafarers’ training to understand how they are to manage the risks of these new technologies, so that they’re executed safely. . – Exciting future! . –Indeed! . – Talking about the future, a year from now, what do you think will be the main topic that will be discussed within the shipping industry with routes inside ECAs? . – A year from now, within the two emission control areas that adopted standards controlling nitrogen oxides, it will be the adoption of engine technology that meets the IMO Tier III standards. A big feature there is the use of selective catalytic conversion technology or the use of liquid natural gas and other liquid gases such as methanol. It’s going to be interesting where we see different liquid gases being put forward, alternative fuels being put forward. And we’d like to see a range of choice available to the industries and it’s going to be what those choices are, that will be the interesting thing for the next five years in addition to just the next year. We’re going to see some changes coming forward I think. . – Thank you! . – Thank you!